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

	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

	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

	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