OUR VIEW: OPEN VOTE MAY OFFER A SOLUTION

Legalization of marijuana and broadening the legal definition of
marriage to include same-sex couples are two different issues with one
striking similar characteristic.

Solutions on how to address both issues won't be found in public
opinion polls, as evident by the divided camps on either side of both
issues.

Sixty or 70 years ago, both of these issues would be resolved with the
acceptance to make decisions for the good of our entire country,
naysayers be damned, that puts politicians in our history books today.

Forward thinking, a willingness to take a stand on social issues based
on a political gut instinct and a capacity for inner confidence that
can stand up to the opposition of others are not qualities our
politicians today share in great abundance.

As historians will no doubt relate 60 or 70 years from now, our
elected leaders today live and die today by which direction the public
opinion poll wind is blowing, a reflection of the fact that the
overriding priority of governments, federal and provincial today, is
being positioned for reelection.

But in the case of marijuana legalization and same-sex marriage
recognition, if a decision is to be made in either case it will
require genuine leadership.

On the question of what to do about pot, the longer a decision is
delayed, the more likely personal possession up to a certain amount
will be legalized as use of cannabis becomes more and more infiltrated
in everyday life of Canadian society with each new generation, as was
the case leading up to the prohibition of liquor in the 1930s.

The long-term pathway for same-sex marriage is not so clear as we as a
society struggle over this one both from personal and religious viewpoints.

But one solution for the Liberals to consider might be to submit
proposed legislation to an open vote in Parliament.

Then MPs will be given an opportunity to vote on their basis of their
own beliefs or represent the views of their own riding constituents
outside the shackles of party political demagoguery.