| About this site |
| About us |
| Our beliefs |
| Your first visit? |
| Contact us |
| External links |
| Good books |
| Visitor essays |
| Our forum |
| New essays |
| Other site features |
| Buy a CD |
| Vital notes |
| Spiritual/ethics |
| Spirituality |
| Morality/ethics |
| Absolute truth |
| Peace/conflict |
| Attaining peace |
| Religious tolerance |
| Religious hatred |
| Religious conflict |
| Religious violence |
| Laws and news |
| Religious laws |
| Religious news |
|
|
 | 2001-JUL-06: Omnibus legislation becomes law: A bill passed by the Saskatchewan legislature was given Royal Assent and became law on JUL-06. It is called "The Miscellaneous Statutes (Domestic Relations) Amendment Act." It changed the definition of "spouse" in 24 provincial statutes to treat same-sex couples on a par with married couples, in areas such as adoption, spousal support, inheritance rights, pensions, survivor benefits and matrimonial property. However, SSM was still prohibited. Almost any opposite-sex couple who met age restrictions could marry in the province; no same-sex couple -- no matter what the nature of their relationship -- were allowed to marry. 3 | ||||||||||||||||||
| 2003-APR-03: Green Alliance party supports SSM: The Saskatchewan New Green Alliance sent a brief to Parliament's Standing Committee on Justice and Human Rights. They wrote, in part: "Giving same sex couples the same range of choices as opposite sex couples is a simple question of fairness and human dignity. Either this government supports equality or it does not. For this committee to recommend that same sex couples be barred from civil marriage or be forced to accept some alternative registration scheme is to recommend the continuation of discrimination, unfairness, and inequality… hardly the values of a free and just society." 7 | ||||||||||||||||||
| 2003-APR: CUPE supports same-sex marriage: The Canadian Union of Public Employees, Saskatchewan Division, submitted a brief to Parliament's Standing Committee on Justice and Human Rights. It said, in part: "It is the intention of CUPE Saskatchewan to firmly convey to this standing committee that, of the four options put forward by the Department of Justice as detailed in its discussion paper on marriage in the context of Canadian law, released November 2002, the only valid option is 'legislating equal marriage rights for Lesbian and Gay Canadians.' We strongly urge this committee to put forward this option as its recommendation to the Government of Canada. To choose any of the remaining three options (retain the opposite-sex definition of marriage; create an 'equivalent' to marriage for same-sex couples; or, create a registration system for all conjugal relationships in which marriage would be a strictly religious ceremony) would serve only to maintain the discrimination which resonates in the current legal definition of marriage. CUPE Saskatchewan supports legislating equal or same-sex marriage and contends that there have been no substantiated reports claiming that the people of Canada would be done harm in any way by such legislation." 10 | ||||||||||||||||||
| 2004-MAY-25: Opinion poll: Leger Marketing conducted a public opinion poll which revealed that 43% of all Canadians were in favor of SSM; 47% were opposed. Leger reported that only 38% of adults in the Prairie provinces of Saskatchewan and Manitoba favored SSM; 50% were opposed; 12% were undecided or refused to answer. These data probably reflect the larger number of religious conservatives in the Prairie provinces compared to the rest of Canada. 4 | ||||||||||||||||||
| 2004-SEP-24: Status of SSM: On this date,
a court in Nova Scotia ruled that the
province's marriage legislation was unconstitutional because it
prohibited same-sex couples from marrying. The Canadian Broadcasting
Corporation interviewed a lesbian couple in Saskatchewan: Danielle
Lanouette and Francois Hetu. They live in Saskatoon and have been a
committed couple for more than two years. They feel that gay and lesbian
couples who want to get married should have the legal right to do so.
Lanouette said: "It's a recognition of our relationships and this is
probably the most important thing to me. We are often seen as
marginalized people...and to be able to access the institution of
marriage, for a lot of gay and lesbian people, it's ending the state of
marginalization. She said that if the law is changed to allow SSM,
then same-sex couples "...will feel 'I'm part of this Canadian family
and I'm accepted' and one way to show this acceptance is to say you can
get married just like anyone else in Canada."
5 To date, no province or territory in Canada has pro-actively granted marriage rights to same-sex couples. All have waited until a court took the initiative and ordered them to start issuing marriage licenses. However, Frank Quennell, the Justice Minister of Saskatchewan, has indicated that he would not resist if a same-sex couple steps forward with a case in that province. He said: "It is clearly federal jurisdiction. In the absence of a court decision, we are reluctant to enter into it unilaterally...we want to respect the certainty of marriages. We don't want a situation we see in the States where we see one thing and the federal government says something else and people who were married are no longer married." 5 | ||||||||||||||||||
| 2004-SEP-30: Lawsuit initiated: CFRA radio stated that: "Two
same-sex couples are going to court to challenge Saskatchewan's marriage
laws. Lawyers will ask that the province's Marriage Act and the
common-law definition of marriage are unconstitutional because they deny
same-sex couples a marriage license or a civil marriage ceremony. Three
other same-sex couples may also enter the challenge."
6 The
Evangelical Fellowship of Canada mentioned on their web site that "A
lesbian couple has challenged the definition of marriage in Saskatchewan." Nichole White and Julie Richards are one of the couples who have launched the lawsuit. They recently applied for and were denied a marriage license. White said: "Julie and I are in love. We want to commit our lives to one another and we want that to be recognized by the government. Like so many other queer couples across the country, we think it should be legalized....."We do have an NDP government (so) I'm knocking on wood and crossing my fingers that it won't be that hard a struggle. I do believe we've got the justice minister's support." She referred to the New Democratic Party, a socialist group. Greg Walen is the lawyer who represents the couple. He will seek a declaratory judgment ordering that the common-law definition of marriage be changed to include "two people to the exclusion of others," rather than "two people of the opposite sex." He said: "We're hoping that when the declaratory judgment comes down, the marriage commissioner will be directed to issue marriage licenses to same-sex couples. Recently, the [Saskatchewan] minister of justice indicated that he's waiting for a same-sex couple to actually bring an application before the court. He says the province won't stand in their way but he wants the court to rule. So somebody has to start the application. We anticipate that there will be little if any opposition to the application." 9 According to CNN: "The Saskatchewan court is expected to rule this month." i.e. by the end of 2004-OCT. | ||||||||||||||||||
| 2004-NOV-05: Ruling handed down: Madam Justice Donna
Wilson of the Family Law Division of the Court of Queen's
Bench sided with courts in five other provinces and one Canadian
territory. She ruled that existing provincial laws discriminated against
same-sex couples. She wrote: "The common-law definition of marriage
for civil purposes is declared to be 'the lawful union of two persons to
the exclusion of all others'." This was not much of a surprise,
because neither the provincial nor the federal government intervened in
the case. The federal government declined to intervene because the
matter is before the Supreme Court of Canada. The
Saskatchewan government decided to not be involved because they regard
the specification of who can marry in Canada is a federal
responsibility.
$10,000 in court costs were awarded against the provincial and federal governments. Each government will pay $1,000 to each of the five couples. 13 The plaintiffs' lawyer, Greg Walen of the Saskatoon law firm Scharfstein Gibbings Walen & Fisher, said: "We've turned the corner. We only have several other provinces to go." -- four to be exact. On another occasion, he said: "The judge found that it is unconstitutional to exclude same-sex couples from civil marriage and changed the law to include them. The judge agreed with the Ontario Court of Appeal that 'the dignity of persons in same-sex relationships is violated by the exclusion of same-sex couples from the institution of marriage'....The judge agreed with the Yukon court that the province had a choice whether or not to issue marriage licenses to same-sex couples, and it chose not to. As a result, costs were awarded on an increased scale against both the province and the federal government." Some comments by the plaintiffs:
Some comments by various non-profit groups:
Saskatchewan Justice Minister Frank Quennell has said the provincial government will not contest the challenge. As of 2004-NOV-06, we have been unable to find any news releases from groups opposed to same-sex marriage. |
References used:
The following information sources were used to prepare and update the above essay. The hyperlinks are not necessarily still active today.
- "Montana," World Atlas, at" http://www.worldatlas.com/
- "Population, provinces and territories," Statistics Canada, 2003 estimates. See: http://www.statcan.ca/
- "Saskatchewan," Equal Marriage, at: http://www.samesexmarriage.ca/
- "Canadians and their Tolerance towards Homosexuality," Leger Marketing, 2004-MAY-25, at: http://www.legermarketing.com/
- "Same-sex marriage could soon be legal in Sask.," CBC, 2004-SEP-24, at: http://sask.cbc.ca/
- Josh Pringle, "Same-sex marriage challenge in Saskatchewan," CFRA, 2004-SEP-30, at: http://www.cfra.com/
- "A question of fairness and dignity: Saskatchewan New Green Alliance Party," Same Sex Marriage, 2003-APR-03, at: http://www.samesexmarriage.ca/
- "Canadian Court to consider same-sex marriage," CNN.com, 2004-OCT-6, at: http://edition.cnn.com/
- Betty Ann Adam, "Same-sex couple seeks right to wed. Saskatoon couple taking provincial, federal gov'ts to court," The Star Phoenix, Saskatoon, 2004-OCT-1, at: http://64.233.161.104/
- Sinda Cathcart, "Same-sex marriage: Positive change toward equality," CUPE, Saskatchewan, 2003-APR, at: http://www.cupe.sk.ca/br-apr03.htm
- Tim Cook, "Court okays gay marriage. Saskatchewan is 7th jurisdiction," The Toronto Star, 2004-NOV-6, Page A17.
- "Court extends equal marriage to Saskatchewan. Increased Costs Awarded Against Both Province and Feds," Canadians for Equal Marriage, 2004-NOV-05. at: http://www.equal-marriage.ca/
- Darren Yourk, "Saskatchewan to allow same-sex marriages," The Globe and Mail, 2004-NOV-05, at: http://www.theglobeandmail.com/
|
Home page > Homosexuality > Same-sex marriage > Canada > here |
Copyright © 2004 & 2005 by Ontario
Consultants on Religious Tolerance
Originally written: 2004-OCT-11
Latest update: 2005-NOV-20
Author: B.A. Robinson
|
|
