Double standard applied to Andrew Scheer's social conservative views sends wrong message

Conservative leader Andrew Scheer, seen here during a news conference in Regina on Oct. 22, has attracted criticism throughout the election campaign and in the weeks since for his social conservative views on issues such as abortion and same-sex marriage. (Adrian Wyld/Canadian Press)

According to observers, Andrew Scheer’s messages about abortion cost votes on both sides of the debate. In fact, it has been indicated that Scheer is indeed pro-abortionist.

Even so, people have also incorrectly inferred that because Scheer does not personally support abortion, he would take away women’s rights.

What is true is that Scheer clearly stated that he would not reopen the debate.

Likewise, it has caused annoyance in some people who have in fact criticized Scheer enough for his lack of clarity and strength to respond to inquiries about his personal views. He did not directly address the concern about whether or not he would discourage backbenchers from submitting motions about abortion, for example. In this way, one could say that it could have been handled better and even used the attacks of its opponents as opportunities to talk about conservative and democratic values that unite Canadians, such as individual freedom.

A possible obstacle to leading a nation?

It should be noted that this could apply a double standard to Scheer’s social conservative opinions. And it is certainly assumed that because he has or had certain personal views on abortion and same-sex marriage, these views would hamper his ability to govern the country.

However, something that is truly fundamental to free societies and democracy is the notion that individuals are free to think as they wish, as long as their views are not forced on others. Even so, the other candidates for the elections were not supposed to impose their personal or religious beliefs on the Canadian public, or that those beliefs would have an undue influence on their decision making.

Clearly people see the world differently based on their philosophical and religious beliefs, but that’s fine, as long as each person does not try to impose their beliefs on others and in a democratic society, it is simply wrong to indirectly send a message to Future political candidates that their personal views should be aligned with a particular dogma if they want to receive a serious opportunity in Parliament.

Read more.

Source: Maria Harrison | CBC News