"There is still a vocal and powerful social conservative bloc within the Conservative party in Ottawa and even more so within the rural and suburban rank-and-file. It was these people who enabled Scheer to defeat Maxime Bernier, just as they pushed Doug Ford past Christine Elliot in Ontario. They probably have a hold of 15 per cent of the membership, and punch well above their weight."

Conservative leader Andrew Scheer is in a very difficult position.

A genuinely decent man, considered by many to be far too timid for the cut and thrust of party politics, he’s a devout and orthodox Roman Catholic leading a party that is divided on socially conservative issues, hoping to govern a country that is largely progressive when it comes to life and sexuality. He treads a fine line on abortion, trying to disguise his personal and theological opposition to women’s choice with all sorts of obfuscating language, and struggles to justify his repeated refusal to march in Pride parades with the flimsy excuse that it’s not necessary because he and his party already support LGBTQ+ equality. In fact many in his party certainly do, but Scheer is being a little disingenuous when he allows MPs Lisa Raitt or Michelle Rempel to wave the rainbow flag. You’re the party leader and the gay community is well aware of your absence.

Now comes Scheer’s announcement that he wants to learn more details before he supports a federal proposal to ban what is known as gay conversion therapy. The Liberal government wrote last month to the provinces and territories asking them to stop the discredited and dangerous “therapy” and they want to use the Criminal Code to make it impossible or illegal. In that an international consensus of experts and doctors — as well as politicians from most stripes — agree with this approach, Scheer’s reluctance to support the government roared his ambivalence.

When I was writing my last book, “Epiphany,” I interviewed a number of men and women who had undergone various forms of conversion theory, and there are perhaps as many as 20,000 in Canada alone. All of those who I spoke to were still gay of course, some of them still suffering trauma because of what they had gone through. One tried to take his own life and almost succeeded.

“What you have to realize,” said Gerry, who is now happily married to his long-time partner, “is that they call this a therapy to give it a varnish of medical respectability. But there is nothing medical or scientific about it. The premise of it all is that you are broken, wrong, ill, need help, have to be fixed. Imagine being told that. Imagine what that does to you.”

There are various forms of this alleged therapy but they are all based on the premise that homosexuality is undesirable, a product of nurture rather than nature and that people can be “cured.” The implication is obvious, and runs against all that Canada embraces scientifically, morally and politically. Yet Andrew Scheer argues that he needs more time and more details before he comes to a decision. That simply doesn’t make sense.

The spin machine went into action only hours after the Leader of the Opposition’s position became clear last week. This had nothing to do with opposing equal marriage, this was not a product of homophobia, if elected the Conservatives would never dream of reopening the marriage debate and so on. Frankly I don’t think a Conservative government would reopen the discussion because the country has moved on, Toronto and Quebec in particular would be aghast and even a large part of Scheer’s party and caucus would be outraged. But that doesn’t mean that backbenchers wouldn’t be allowed to try to initiate a new debate.

There is still a vocal and powerful social conservative bloc within the Conservative party in Ottawa and even more so within the rural and suburban rank-and-file. It was these people who enabled Scheer to defeat Maxime Bernier, just as they pushed Doug Ford past Christine Elliot in Ontario. They probably have a hold of 15 per cent of the membership, and punch well above their weight.

Then there is Scheer himself. The son of a Roman Catholic deacon, he is a committed and conservative believer and like Jason Kenney is on the right of the Church. The catechism of that institution teaches that, “homosexual acts” are “intrinsically immoral and contrary to the natural law,” and that even such tendencies are “objectively disordered.” In other words, those in same-sex relationships are immoral and unnatural and even those who are gay but celibate are disordered. It’s an ugly and jarring language, and while Canada holds to an informal separation of church and state, if a politician’s faith is directly influencing his politics, surely the electorate has a right to know what he believes.

Justin Trudeau is also a Catholic of course, as was his father and several other prime ministers, but far more on the progressive wing of the Church and, in Justin Trudeau’s case, obviously a major supporter of the LGBTQ+ community. Andrew Scheer has been given several opportunities to silence his critics on these issues and to show that LGBTQ+ Canadians have nothing to fear from his becoming prime minister. Once again, however, he has failed the test, and in spite of his champions rushing to his defence, the repeated pattern is leaving a mark.

The views, opinions and positions expressed by all iPolitics columnists and contributors are the author’s alone. They do not inherently or expressly reflect the views, opinions and/or positions of iPolitics.