HOMOSEXUAL (SAME-SEX) MARRIAGES IN CANADA
2005-FEB-01 & 02
The SSM legislation is introduced to Parliament
Sponsored link.
Background:
On 2005-FEB-01, the federal Liberal party introduced amendments to various federal
laws, including the Marriage Act, to legalize same-sex marriage and divorce across the
country. At the time that the legislation was introduced in Parliament, 87% of Canadians lived
in a province or territory which has already made SSM available to same-sex
couples as a result of court decisions. Another court challenge is expected in
Alberta. If this authorizes SSM in that province, then only 3% of the Canadian population
will be without access to SSM in their province or territory. The proposed legislation
will have little impact on most Canadians; it will merely make SSM more
conveniently available to that minority of Canadians -- they won't have to
travel as far to get married. Still, the Liberal and Conservative
parties, the Roman Catholic church, and various conservative Protestant groups have escalated debate to a fever pitch.
Both sides regard SSM as a moral battle:
 | Religious liberals, social liberals and the federal Liberal Party view
marriage as a fundamental human right. |
| Religious conservatives, social conservatives and the federal Conservative Party
have asserted that SSM:
 | Is a danger to the
institution of marriage; some have said it will lead to the "destruction" of marriage),
|
| Is potentially damaging to the
culture of Canada, and |
| Will eventually limit the religious freedom of faith groups to
discriminate against same-sex couples. |
|
Some conservatives are willing to over-ride the Charter of Rights and Freedoms,
Canada's constitution, in order to preserve "traditional marriage"
-- i.e. in order to prevent committed same-sex couples from marrying. Members of
Parliament (MPs) are
faced with a major ethical challenge:
| They have taken an oath of office which commits them to support the Charter, and thus
support the right of same-sex couples to marry. |
| They are probably aware that national public opinion surveys have
consistently shown in the last few years that most Canadian adults favor
SSM. Many view their task as to implement the wishes of the majority of
Canadians. |
| They are undoubtedly aware of the very strong opposition to SSM
expressed by a highly motivated minority of Canadian adults. They might well
retaliate against MPs who vote in favor of the government legislation by
voting them out of office at the next election. |
Events:
| 2005-FEB-01: Bill introduced to Parliament: According to a senior
government source, the bill will rob Conservatives of any possible avenue to
argue that religious freedoms are not afforded full protection. She/he
said: "That protection is written in black and white, in the preamble and the
body of the bill." The Supreme Court of Canada has already ruled that
the freedom to discriminate against couples in marriage is protected by the
Charter of Rights and Freedoms. If passed, the legislation would make civil
marriage between all couples -- same-sex or opposite-sex -- available in the
provinces of Alberta, New Brunswick & Prince Edward Island, and the Nunavut
Territory and Northwest Territory, where the courts have not yet enforced the
Charter. The federal government emphasizes that the
bill only refers to "civil marriage" and not "religious marriage."
The government expects that 15 to 20 Liberal Members of Parliament will vote
against the bill. With the support of the New Democratic Party, the Bloc
Quebecois, and a handful of Conservative members, this would mean that the bill
will pass.
Tarek Fatah, spokesperson for the Muslim Canadian Congress, has said that
his group will support the bill. He said: "Our position is that this is not
about religion at all. We believe in the separation of church and state."
Justice Minister Irwin Cotler said: |
"I understand that Canadians are
struggling with this issue -- there are different perspectives and we have to
respect the pluralities of opinion. But we also have to understand that what
we're talking about is civil marriage -- ...extending civil marriage to gays and
lesbians...As the Supreme Court put it, this does not take away any rights of
others. This does not affect religious marriage nor does it affect the rights of
religious officials to refuse to solemnize a marriage because of their religious
belief....The courts have spoken clearly....If Canadians want to challenge [the
law] afterwards, that's up to them." 1
The text of the bill, C-38, is available online. The summary
reads:
"This enactment extends the legal capacity for marriage for civil
purposes to same-sex couples in order to reflect values of tolerance,
respect and equality, consistent with the Canadian Charter of Rights and
Freedoms. It also makes consequential amendments to other Acts to ensure
equal access for same-sex couples to the civil effects of marriage and
divorce." 2
For once, Liberal and Conservative leaders agreed on something
related to SSM:
| Justice Minister Irwin Cotler said about
the bill: "I don't really foresee how one can put amendments to this." |
| Conservative leader Stephen Harper said: "the
bill is written in a way that will make it difficult to amend." |
|
The government plans to debate the bill in
Parliament, starting in mid-February. A second reading (a.k.a. agreement in
principle vote) will then be taken. If the bill passes, then it will be
regarded as "approved in principle." The bill will be referred to committee.
It will then return to Parliament for the third reading or final approval.
It then goes to the Senate. Cotler hopes to have the entire process
completed by the end of June.
| 2005-FEB-01: About the bill itself -- First
reading version:
| The full title is: "An Act
respecting certain aspects of legal capacity for marriage for civil
purposes." |
| The short title is: "The Civil
Marriage Act." |
| The Preamble states:
 | WHEREAS the Parliament of Canada is
committed to upholding the Constitution of Canada, and section 15 of
the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms guarantees that every
individual is equal before and under the law and has the right to
equal protection and equal benefit of the law without
discrimination; |
| WHEREAS the courts in a majority of
the provinces and in one territory have recognized that the right to
equality without discrimination requires that couples of the same
sex and couples of the opposite sex have equal access to marriage
for civil purposes; |
| WHEREAS the Supreme Court of Canada
has recognized that many Canadian couples of the same sex have
married in reliance on those court decisions; |
| WHEREAS only equal access to marriage
for civil purposes would respect the right of couples of the same
sex to equality without discrimination, and civil union, as an
institution other than marriage, would not offer them that equal
access and would violate their human dignity, in breach of the
Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms; |
| WHEREAS the Supreme Court of Canada
has determined that the Parliament of Canada has legislative
jurisdiction over marriage but does not have the jurisdiction to
establish an institution other than marriage for couples of the same
sex; |
| WHEREAS everyone has the freedom of
conscience and religion under section 2 of the Canadian Charter of
Rights and Freedoms; |
| WHEREAS nothing in this Act affects
the guarantee of freedom of conscience and religion and, in
particular, the freedom of members of religious groups to hold and
declare their religious beliefs and the freedom of officials of
religious groups to refuse to perform marriages that are not in
accordance with their religious beliefs; |
| WHEREAS, in light of those
considerations, the Parliament of Canada’s commitment to uphold the
right to equality without discrimination precludes the use of
section 33 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms to deny
the right of couples of the same sex to equal access to marriage for
civil purposes; |
| WHEREAS marriage is a fundamental
institution in Canadian society and the Parliament of Canada has a
responsibility to support that institution because it strengthens
commitment in relationships and represents the foundation of family
life for many Canadians; |
| AND WHEREAS, in order to reflect
values of tolerance, respect and equality consistent with the
Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms, access to marriage for
civil purposes should be extended by legislation to couples of the
same sex; |
NOW, THEREFORE, Her Majesty, by and with
the advice and consent of the Senate and House of Commons of Canada,
enacts as follows:
- This Act may be cited as the Civil Marriage Act.
- Marriage, for civil purposes, is the
lawful union of two persons to the exclusion of all others.
- It is recognized that officials of
religious groups are free to refuse to perform marriages that are
not in accordance with their religious beliefs.
- For greater certainty, a marriage is
not void or voidable by reason only that the spouses are of the same
sex.
|
The bill will also amend the Marriage Act,
Canada Business Corporations Act, Canada Cooperatives Act, Civilian
War-related Benefits Act, Divorce Act, Federal Law and Civil Law of the
Province of Quebec Act, Income Tax Act, Marriage (Prohibited Degrees) Act,
and Modernization of Benefits and Obligations Act. These changes
would give all married couples -- whether same-sex or opposite-sex exactly
the same rights and obligations. 3 |
| 2005-FEB-01: Letters to the editor on SSM in the Toronto Star newspaper:
There were no letters to the editor on this topic in the 2005-JAN-31
newspaper. However, the FEB-01 newspaper contained two letters in response
to an earlier article "Same-sex marriage debate rages on:"
|
| 2005-FEB-01: Poll of members of Parliament:
The Globe and Mail newspaper polled members of Parliament about
the bill, and found:
| 139 favor equal marriage rights for all |
| 118 favor marriage limited to one man and one woman |
| 49 are undecided or would not state a
position. |
Parliament has 308 seats. One is vacant and the
Speaker does not vote except to break a tie. 154 votes are thus required to
pass the bill. Bev Desjarlais, a Manitoba MP and member of the New
Democratic Party has announced that she is opposed to the bill. The rest of
the NDP appears in favor. Two Bloc Quebecois have announced that they are
also opposed. The rest of the party will probably vote in favor. Essentially
all of the Conservative party will vote against the Bill. The Liberal party
is split. 5 |
| 2005-FEB-01: United Church of Canada
supports SSM bill: The United Church, Canada's largest Protestant
denomination, congratulated the government of Canada on its proposed SSM law
which the Church called a "win-win solution in the same-sex marriage
debate." Rev. Dr. Jim Sinclair, General Secretary of the General
Council, said: |
"Marriage will be enhanced, not diminished, religious
freedom will be protected, not threatened, and Canadian society will be
strengthened, not weakened, as a result of this legislation."
A report
on their web site stated:
"In August 2000, the 37th General
Council affirmed that human sexual orientations, whether heterosexual or
homosexual, are a gift from God and part of the marvellous diversity of
creation. The Council further resolved to advocate for the civil recognition
of same-sex partnerships. In August 2003, the 38th General Council decided
'to call upon the Government of Canada to recognize same-sex marriages in
marriage legislation'."
Jackie Harper, as
Church's program staff for Family Ministries, said:
"A significant,
unique contribution that the United Church brings to this debate is the
denomination's own experience of making same-sex marriage ceremonies
available to its members and, at the same time, respecting the right of
those within the denomination who are opposed to such services...Religious
marriage is not, and cannot be, affected by the proposed legislation. All
faith communities in Canada, whatever their views on same-sex marriage, have
the absolute right to determine for themselves who will be eligible for
religious marriage within their communities. This includes the right to
determine whether the community will offer religious marriages to interfaith
couples, to divorced couples, or to couples who are not members of the
community." 6
| 2005-FEB-02: Some reactions to the bill:
The fundamentalist Christian group, Focus on the Family Canada, reported
that:
| An unknown number of people sent over 1.6 million E-mails to
Parliament, using an online E-mail service of Focus on the Family
Canada. Their vice-president of family policy said: "We were
really taken aback at what the response was to that and I think it's
just a sign of more to come. I don't think I've seen them quite as
concerned about something and willing to act upon it as they are about
this." |
| Father Derek Ali at St. Justin Martyr Parish in Unionville,
ON asked his parishioners to work towards the exclusion of same-sex
couples from marriage, even if it brings hardship to themselves. He
asked: "What are you willing to sacrifice to defend the Church? Are
you willing to suffer humiliation? Are you willing to be put aside by
friends? Maybe even lose your job?" |
| Roman Catholic Archbishop Raymond Roussin of Vancouver BC wrote in
his pastoral letter stressing that marriage is not a human right. "As
a social institution, marriage is concerned with the common good, not
individual rights...[Its] natural purpose is the good of the couple and
the procreation and education of children." |
| Douglas Farrow, co-founder of Enshrine Marriage Canada -- a
group dedicated to preventing SSM -- said: "I think a good number of
churches either have their heads stuck in the sand, so to speak, or if
they're aware of these developments, as they ought to be, they're not
doing much more than grumbling about it perhaps." |
| Some Muslim and Sikh groups are also opposing SSM. David Hassan,
chairman of London Muslim Mosque, said: "Our community has become
more politically active in the last few years. The least we can do as
citizens is be heard." |
| Rallies to exclude same-sex couples from marriage will be held in
Calgary, AB and Stoney Creek, ON on 2005-FEB-05. 7 |
Campaign Life Coalition (CLC),
a pro-life group, stated:
| "The federal government has
introduced legislation today which is a knife thrust into the heart of
the family in Canada...With Bill C-38, Paul Martin’s campaign to change
the definition of marriage has commenced. He has proposed legislation
that will extend to same-sex couples the same privileged status enjoyed
by a man and woman in the institution of marriage". 10 |
Jim Hughes, President of CLC, said:
| "For millennia marriage has been
a foundational institution, one in which a mother and a father bring
children into the world. Because of that special responsibility,
marriage has been given special recognition and rights in law. We urge
Paul Martin to listen to opponents of same-sex marriage, especially
religious leaders who have spoken on the issue, before proceeding." |
Mary Ellen Douglas, National Organizer of CLC said:
| "Now is a crucial
time for the Members of Canada’s Parliament. In the weeks and months
ahead each MP must examine his or her conscience and decide if they will
vote in favor of this disastrous Bill or courageously defend the
definition of marriage as a union of one man and one woman."
11 |
The Toronto Star commented that:
| The United Church of Canada, Canada's largest Protestant
denomination, described the bill as a "win-win solution." Jim
Sinclair, head of the denomination's general council, said: "Marriage
will be enhanced, not diminished; religious freedom will be protected,
not threatened; and Canadian society will be strengthened, not weakened,
as a result of this legislation." |
Bruce Clemenger, president of the Evangelical Fellowship of
Canada, said:
| "The government is hurrying down an unknown
path...What will be the social effects of refashioning a fundamental
social institution -- to marriage itself, to spouses, children and
society." |
| Campaign Life Coalition, a Christian groups opposed to
abortion and physician assisted suicide, said that the religious
protections offered by the bill were "bland assertions."
|
Ref. Garth Bulmer, priest of St. John's parish in Ottawa, ON, said
that the extension of equality rights to gay and lesbian couples is "a
Godly thing to do." Commenting on the fears by conservative
religious groups that they might be prosecuted if they discriminate
against same-sex couples, he said: "I'll eat my clerical shirt if you
can show me one example in the last 50 years of a provincial
jurisdiction ever taking a clergyman t court because he refused to marry
somebody." 8
Other comments:
| Alex Munter, national coordinator of Canadians for Equal Marriage, a non-profit which promotes SSM, said: "This
bill symbolizes the best of Canada – it is a win-win for everyone,
regardless of their views on equal marriage. In invoking the Charter, it
protects lesbian and gay people from being excluded from civil marriage
while protecting the rights of religious organizations to continue to define
marriage as they choose....We have to match the determined, well-funded
efforts of those who want to deny lesbian and gay relationships equal
treatment under the law. Opponents like American religious-right leader
James Dobson of Focus on the Family are bound and determined. They know they
must stop this legislation so they can move on to their next goal – a
comprehensive same-sex marriage ban in Canada. We have the opportunity to
settle this once and for all. It is extremely vital that we urge MPs across
the country to do the right thing." |
| The Muslim Canadian Congress endorsed
the bill, stating that it protects both human rights and freedom of
religion. 9 |
| Janet Epp-Buckingham of the Evangelical
Fellowship of Canada said: "The Supreme Court of Canada said very
clearly that the federal government had no authority or jurisdiction to
protect religious freedoms, so it may be written in the bill, but it's
[outside] the federal government [jurisdiction]. They may say it's there
in black and white, but the Supreme Court of Canada opinion is there in
black and white too." 10 |
| The Toronto Star newspaper interviewed 10
men and women, apparently picked at random on the street. One had a
neutral view of SSM. The four persons interviewed who were over the age
of 45 were all opposed. The five persons under the age of 45 were all in
favor of SSM. This is a very clear demonstration of the great gulf
between young and old on this topic. 10 |
| Conservative MP and justice critic, Vic
Toews expressed concern about peripheral matters associated with SSM:
| He recalled a current charge before a
British Columbia human rights tribunal involving the Knights of Columbus
who allegedly cancelled a contract to rent their hall for a marriage
reception when the found out that the couple were lesbians. 10
|
| He discussed a Presbyterian Church which
wants to exclude same-sex couples from their marriage preparation
courses. They are frightened about being charged before a human rights
commission if they to put on the course. 10 |
| He also referred to a multi-denominational
youth camp in Manitoba who are being sued because they refused to allow
a gay support group to use the facilities. He said that the group was a
gay choir "whose object is to promote homosexuality." |
|
| Pat O'Brien, a liberal MP from London-Fanshawe,
ON, claims that MPs -- presumably those opposed to the bill -- are being
told to "take a walk" on the day of the vote. Liberal caucus whip
Karen Redman of Kitchener Centre, ON, denies the charge. 10 |
| Alex Munter of Canadians for Equal
Marriage -- a coalition of advocates for SSM -- said: "There is still
work to do...The finish line for marriage equality is within sight;
there are still hearts to change; there are still arguments to be
made...Now is no time to let up on what has been a very, very long
struggle to get to this point." 10 |
|
References used:
- "Same-sex marriage: Liberals aim to defuse religious opposition. Bill shields
right to refuse," The Toronto Star, 2005-FEB-01, Page A1 and A8.
- "C-38: An act respecting certain aspects of legal capacity for marriage for
civil purposes," LEGIS Info, Library of Parliament, at:
http://www.parl.gc.ca/
- Printed copies can be obtained from: Publishing and Depository Services, PWGSC,
Ottawa, ON K1A 0S5.
- "Letters," The Toronto Star, 2005-FEB-01, Page A15.
- Gloria Galloway & Brian Laghi, "MP poll shows same-sex vote still in doubt,"
The Globe and Mail, 2005-FEB-01, at:
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/
- "Same-Sex Marriage Legislation Offers a Win-Win Solution, Says The United
Church of Canada," 2005-FEB-01, United Church of Canada, at:
http://www.united-church.ca/
- "Decisive battle over marriage begins," Today's Family News, Focus on the
Family Canada, 2005-FEB-02.
- "Sean Gordon, "Churches, groups wade in. Strong reactions from both sides to
divisive bill," The Toronto Star, 2005-FEB-2, Page A7.
- "Historic day: Equal marriage bill gets first reading in the House of
Commons. Much work left to do as opponents gear up," Canadians for Equal
Marriage E-newsletter, 2005-FEB-01.
- Tonda MacCharles & Sean Gordon, "Liberals plan to fast-track debate
on gay-wedding bill," The Toronto Star, 2005-FEB-02, Page A6.
- "Parliament Introduces Legislation to Destroy Marriage Says National
Canadian Group," LifeSite, 2005-FEB-01, at:
http://www.lifesite.net/
Site navigation:
Copyright © 2005 & 2006 by Ontario
Consultants on Religious Tolerance
Latest update: 2006-DEC-02
Author: B.A. Robinson
|
Page Translator: