The court will hand down a non-binding legal opinion in several months on whether a drafted federal bill to legalize same-sex marriage passes Constitutional muster. Most likely the Supreme Court will confirm what courts across the country have found. Gay marriage is a fact of life. Ontario, BC, Quebec, Manitoba, the Yukon and Nova Scotia all permit same-sex marriage. A survey released July 1 by the Center for Research and Information on Canada and Environics Research found that the number of Canadians agreeing that gays and lesbians should be allowed to marry has increased 9%. Currently, 57% agree. The number disagreeing currently stands at 38%.
Those opposed to homo-nuptials see an assault on the bedrock institution of the family. They point to the push for "special" gay rights , warn of hidden agenda and remind that God himself is on their side. Proponents claim the case is justice and equality.
There is no place for the state in the bedrooms of the nation?
In 1967, then Justice Minister Pierre Trudeau says "...there's no place for the state in the bedrooms of the nation..." and proposes amendments to the Criminal Code that would, among other things, relax the laws against homosexuality. Two year later Trudeau's amendments pass into the Criminal Code and homosexuality is de-criminalized in Canada. Today homosexual Canadians enjoy much more freedom and societal acceptance: not only are they not imprisoned for their lifestyle choices, openly gay or lesbian Canadians hold prominent positions in business, government and many churches. John Hunkin - one of Canada most influential business leaders - recently noted "the world is watching we as nation... move forward with... same-sex marriage and the rights of transgender individual.. This is a turning point in Human history"
In July 2003, the government of Prime Minister Jean Chretien unveiled draft legislation that would change the definition of marriage to include the unions of same-sex couples.The new liberal administration now with Paul Martin behind the prime minister's desk added the fourth question which had the effect of delaying hearings until this past week, October 6th.
Supreme Court's hearings are exceptional. In the case court cases initiated by gay couples in Ontario, Quebec and British Columbia in each of these provinces the court cases were challenged at the superior court level, and from the Supreme Court level it went to the Court of Appeal in Each of these provinces. 18 judges in a row ruled gay couples winning parties.
The government does what is called "the constitutional reference”. The Marriage Reference is about the Charter of rights and freedoms, Canadians overwhelmingly support Charter values like inclusion, human dignity, mutual respect and freedom from political or social prejudice. The Marriage Reference is about ensuring that these values apply to all Canadians
We have addressed Gilles Marchildon, executive director of the Egale-Canada, which is pan-Canadian//National organization which advocates on behalf of Canada's gay, lesbian, bisexual and trans-identified people to get his opinion on the issue:
- Poll released on the Canada’s day July the 1-st, 2004 showing that there'd been a nine per cent increase in support for same-sex marriage, what is the history behind growing public support for the same-sex marriage in Canada?
On an immediate level it is just about the right to marry. The actual legislation is to ensure that same-sex couples across the country have the right to get civilly married.
In the estimation of Egale it is much more than that. The whole idea of same-sex couple having access to civil marriage rests on the fundamental value that is found in our charter of our rights and freedoms, that each an every Canadian is equal before the law and should be protected from any discrimination that could be result of various factors as gender, religion, sex, race, political opinion. This list is not limited there are other grounds. In previous cases the SC read into this list to exclude sexual orientation.
All Canadians are equal and that should include homosexual Canadians. If homosexual Canadians are not equal before the law, what prevents Christians from being targeted, what prevents black people, Jewish people. To site reverend Martin Niemöller “First they came for the Communists, but I was not a Communist, so I said nothing…and then they came for the Jews, but I was not a Jew, so I did little. Then when they came for me, there was no one left to stand up for me”. That quote’s underlined idea is that we all are equal and if the rights of one minority group are compromised then no one is safe, because everyone is part of a minority of one sort or another.
Seeing same-sex couples kissing on prime-time television woke up people to this reality.Two years ago the general public wasn't even thinking about same-sex marriage.The first court case was launched in 2000 and though it got reported it wasn't at all grabbing headlines in way that the issue has been for the last two years, on the news cast, in headlines.
What happened is that last June same-sex marriages became legal and couples started to actually get married. There was television footage on six’ clock separate time news where people were seeing same-sex couples getting married some of them wearing traditional white dresses, the tuxedoes and having confetti’s and drinking Champaign and kissing each other. Same-sex couples kissing on prime-time television! , - that had not been seen very frequently. That woke up lots of people to this reality. Before they didn't even give a thought to a same-sex couple getting married, now all the sudden they have realized, : why , well why not? And that was a process that was evolutionary and may be revolutionary. As we are speaking there are over 3 thousand couples that have married in Canada, and you know the sky isn't falling, the society has not stopped functioning and 'Despite the predictions of disaster, there has been no harmful impact on opposite-sex marriage, it is still popular.
"all provinces and territories already allow adoption by qualified gay and lesbian Canadians"
-Apparently having 18 judges in row in support of same-sex marriages is a strong argument, but along the way the issue has strong opponents. What have they brought to Supreme court?
The opposition kept changing its major criticism, initially the attack was that opening marriage to people of the same gender would open way to polygamy - we responded to that..."The draft bill specially restricts the definition of marriage to two persons to the exclusion of all others. The practice of polygamy, bigamy and incest are criminal offences in Canada. This will not change"."It's not good enough to say this is the case before us and we don't have to wonder what's down the road," say opponents "You cannot come to a fork in the road ... and say we're going to go down this road but we don't know where it ends."
Second line of argument came through suggesting that if civil marriage was changed when religious marriage would be affected. The churches would be forced to perform same-sex marriages. If the definition of marriage is changed and constitutionalized as to include same-sex marriage it will be open season on religious institutions.
-What about a religious official who performs civil marriages?
The governments proposed legislation extending civil marriage to same-sex couples explicitly states that “nothing in this Act affects the freedom of officials of religious groups to refuse to perform marriages that are not in accordance with their religious beliefs”. Furthermore the mentioned Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms provides a constitutional protection for any religious officials who refused on religious grounds, to perform a same-sex marriage. It would be a violation for the state to coerce a minister, rabbi, priest … to perform a marriage that was contrary to his or her religious beliefs.
-Won't allowing same-sex couples to marry lead to adoption by some same-sex couples?
This is one of frequently asked question with regard to civil marriage and the Legal Recognition of Same-sex Unions. The other was about harming the children. .. Marriage is all about children, all about procreation. But to Supreme court justices To reduce the whole thing to procreation seems an oversimplification for Supreme Court Judges. Do we have facts before us to say one form of stable relationship is a better environment for children ... the psychological impact on children, for example?" asked Justice Rosalie Abella. The alleged social science evidence to be "all over the map on this." is no longer convincing. Adoption is a separate issue that falls under provincial law, and all provinces and territories already allow adoption by qualified gay and lesbian Canadians. The test is whether the adoptive parent or parents will provide a loving and stable household. Canadian children are already being raised in a wide variety of households - married parents, common law couples, lone parents, divorced parents, remarried parents, blended families, same-sex parents and so on. The Government has a duty to support all of these children and their families.
Now I think the opponents have exhausted their arguments. Imagine 18 judges in a row have ruled against them. Judging by the Supreme court justices. the opposition brought up the same arguments and from what i saw sitting in the court room the judges were extremely skeptical, they weren't buying them they weren't accepting that these arguments really value. I think that they're losing the battle, they have lost it in the courts, losing it in the public opinion, the support is growing and they are in the process of losing it on the political ground. So this is our next major focus. To make sure that when Sc expresses positive opinion what we expect it to do, the Parliament changes the Legislation.
« return.