|
Home / Contact / Stories, News & Reports / Photos
Worldwide Gay Life,
Sites and Insights Gay Canada
News & Reports 2000-02 Also see: Also see: Note: some of these stories focus on the historic debate about legitimizing gay marriage in Canada. The debate virtually ended on June 17, 2003 when the Canadian cabinet approved national policy for marriage to gay and lesbian couples. See #0 below. 0 Canadian cabinet approves national policy for marriage to gay and lesbian couples 6/03 1 Government says gay marriage is invalid --even if licenses are not required 12/00 2 Fight for the right to wed 1/01 3 Canada To Get Gay TV Channel 8/01 4 Government amends laws relating to gay couples adoption ?/01 5 Increase gay rights in line with 1999 Supreme Court ruling 5/01 6 Same-sex bill tabled --Legislation fails to extend adoption rights 5/01 7 Mexican gays get asylum--Canada's 1st lesbian refugees 8/01 8 Nova Scotia leads way on same-sex couples 6/01 9 Quebec to Be Second Province to Recognize Same-Sex Unions After Nova Scotia 12/01 10 PrideVision pricing 'half-way to pay-TV' 11/01 11 New rights for singles, same-sex couples in Newfoundland adoption laws 4/02 12 Why Quebec's gay marriage case is a big deal 4/02 13 Canadian Court ruling sets stage for gay union 8/02 14 Quebec: Gay 'Widows' Win Back Pensions 3/02 15 Feds may leave marriages to the church 7/02 16 Canadians court same-sex marriage 8/02 18
A celebration of diversity 55,000 join Ottowa Pride festivities
7/02
20 Ontario Superior Court rules gay marriages are valid 7/02 21 Gay Pride Week ends in St. John's 7/02 22
Quebec adopts same-sex union and parental rights with supporters
looking
on 6/02 24
Vancouver, B.C. -Crisp,
Chic and A Little Crazy (A Tourist's View) 7/02 26 Gays, lesbians included in 2001 census 10/03 27 Ottawa ties Vancouver as gay capital says census 10/02 28 Being gay in Orangeville; support is there for youth 10/02 29 Two dads & a family Same-sex partners are using their new legal right to adopt 11/02 31
School board wrong to ban same-sex books:
Supreme Court in Ottawa 12/02 New York Times, New York, NY, 10036 ( http://www.nytimes.com ) http://www.nytimes.com/2003/06/18/international/americas/18CANA.html June 18, 2003 0 By Clifford Krauss, Toronto The Canadian cabinet approved a new national policy today to open marriage to gay couples, paving the way for Canada to become the third country to allow same-sex unions. "You have to look at history as an evolution of society," Prime Minister Jean Chrétien told reporters after a meeting of his cabinet. "According to the interpretation of the courts these unions should be legal in Canada. We will ensure that our legislation includes and legally recognizes the union of same-sex couples." The decision to redefine marriage in Canada to include unions between men and between women will immediately take effect in Ontario, Canada's most populous province. Last week, the province's highest court ruled that current federal marriage laws are discriminatory and therefore unconstitutional. Once aides to Mr. Chrétien draft the necessary legislation, the House of Commons is expected to pass it into law in the next few months. Although leaders of the two conservative parties and some Liberals have expressed reservations, there is little organized opposition to such legislation, and public opinion polls show a solid majority in favor of the change. The policy opens the way for same-sex couples from the United States and around the world to travel here to marry, since Canada has no marriage residency requirements. In addition, gay-rights advocates in the United States are already declaring that Canada will serve as a vivid example to Americans that same-sex marriage is workable and offers no challenge to traditional heterosexual family life. No American state allows same-sex marriage, but Vermont has enacted a law providing for civil unions, which allow gay couples many of the benefits of marriage. Canadian marriage licenses have always been accepted in the United States, but now that the definition of marriage in the two countries appears likely to diverge, legal challenges to same-sex couples claiming rights and privileges deriving from their Canadian marriages seem certain to arise in at least some states. Issues including adoption rights, inheritance, insurance benefits and matters as mundane as sharing health club memberships are likely to arise in courts and state legislatures. Canada's new marriage policy comes at a time when the government is also pushing for legislation that would decriminalize the possession of small amounts of marijuana, another policy that diverges sharply from American federal practices. Polling experts and social scientists note that conservative religious views are much less influential here than in the United States, with regular church attendance far lower and with fundamentalist Protestant groups attracting far less support. Mr. Chrétien said the government would also ask the Supreme Court for advice to make the new legislation invulnerable to appeals by provincial governments seeking to invalidate it in their jurisdictions. However, the conservative premier of Alberta, Ralph Klein, has threatened a legal fight to exclude his province from the new rules. Gay-rights advocates celebrated the decision as a civil-rights milestone. "June 17 of 2003 is going to be a day gay and lesbian people remember for a long, long time to come," said Svend Robinson, a gay member of the House of Commons from the left-of-center New Democratic Party, in a television interview immediately after the announcement. Canada's action follows in the steps of the Netherlands and Belgium, but it is likely to have a much larger impact on the United States. Only a few American same-sex couples have taken advantage of expanded marriage laws in the Netherlands because of its long residency requirement, and Belgium will only allow marriages of foreign couples from countries that already allow such unions. But Canada is nearby and has no such restrictions. "What this presents for American couples is an opportunity to easily enter into a legal marriage and come back to the United States with a powerful tool to break down the remaining discrimination here," said Lavi Soloway, a Canadian-born lawyer and founder of the Lesbian and Gay Immigration Rights Task Force in New York. Mr. Soloway said Canada's marriage reform would go a long way to changing public perceptions and attitudes in the United States, although he added that the march to full acceptance would be slow. "What we are in for is a long gradual struggle to win full equal recognition of these marriages," he said. Since the Ontario appeals court ruled last Tuesday in favor of same-sex unions, only a few minor hurdles stand in the way of legalizing them throughout Canada. Since the court decision last week, Ontario has already issued 131 marriage licenses to same-sex couples, including four from the United States. The most important remaining step is a vote in the House of Commons sometime in the next few months, one in which Mr. Chrétien said he will allow Liberal members to vote their consciences. Leaders of the Bloc Quebécois and the New Democratic Party have said their members are solidly behind the change, and with a majority of Liberals they should be able to enact the legislation easily despite opposition from two conservative parties. The Supreme Court, which has ruled repeatedly in favor of extending gay rights, appears to support the efforts of the government to extend marital rights. "Every movement has its human rights milestones," said John Fisher, director of advocacy for Égale Canada, a group that has been working for same-sex marriage in the courts. "Just as the day women acquired the right to vote, when racial segregation was ruled as unconstitutional, so too, same-sex couples have finally acquired the right to marry." To protect religious freedom, the cabinet decided that the planned federal legislation would allow religious institutions to refuse to conduct same-sex marriages. A three-member panel of the Ontario Court of Appeal declared unanimously last week that the definition of marriage as currently set by federal government - as a union between a man and a woman - was invalid and must be changed immediately to include same-sex couples. It ruled that under the Charter of Rights and Freedoms, roughly the Canadian equivalent of the Bill of Rights, "the existing common-law definition of marriage violates the couple's equality rights on the basis of sexual orientation." It added, "In doing so, it offends the dignity of persons in same-sex relationships." The ruling was similar in argument but more immediate in impact to two previous decisions by provincial courts in Quebec and British Columbia. Last year, the Quebec Superior Court ruled that the prohibition of same-sex marriage was unconstitutional, and the British Columbia Court of Appeal did likewise last month. They gave the federal government until mid-2004 to change its marriage rules. Since then legislative panels have been studying ways to put the rulings into effect. Members of the Liberal federal cabinet overwhelmingly supported granting same-sex couples marriage rights, but members were divided over whether to legislate an immediate change or first to request guidance from the federal Supreme Court. After hours of debate, the cabinet decided to do both, hoping for the imprimatur of both government bodies to assure maximum popular acceptance of the new law. "I think on balance people recognize that the decisions of the courts are really pointing in a direction from which it would be difficult - if we wanted to - to turn back," said Deputy Prime Minister John Manley, who is also a candidate to replace Prime Minister Chrétien as Liberal Party leader later this year.
December 5, 2000 1
TORONTO
January 14, 2001 2 By MICHELE MANDEL Toronto Sun They want to have and to hold each other, from this day forward, if only the law will allow. This afternoon, in a beautiful 100-year-old church of oak and stained glass, two same-sex couples will make history when they are joined in holy matrimony. With more than 74 local and international media organizations looking on, Rev. Brent Hawkes, no doubt fighting back the tears that have plagued him all week, will announce them "partners in life, duly married in the eyes of God in accordance with the laws of our land." The pastor of the Metropolitan Community Church of Toronto will then, to the sounds of thunderous applause, give each couple -- Joe Varnell and Kevin Bourassa, and Anne and Elaine Vautour -- their marriage licence, the first ever issued in the world to homosexual couples. Varnell and Bourassa will duly kiss for the cameras, just like any other wedded couple, but there are no plans yet for the newlyweds to jet off on their honeymoon. "There is nothing to celebrate until that marriage licence is registered," insists Bourassa, 42. "Until then, we're being denied our rights to practise our religion and our basic human right to love who we wish without the government saying no." For as much as this is a personal ceremony of love, it is much more a bold testing of political waters. The right to marry is the last legal obstacle left for gays and lesbians and the Metropolitan Community Church of Toronto -- whose congregation is 85% homosexual -- believes it has found the legal loophole that allows them to marry same-sex couples. But there is much that stands in the way of their living happily ever after. Ontario Consumer Minister Bob Runciman has already warned that his department will not register their marriages. Security concerns from anti-gay groups are so great that the pastor may wear a bulletproof vest and the wedded couples have decided against a traditional appearance on the church steps. And you thought you had pre-wedding stress. It's a few days before the ceremony and Varnell and Bourassa are graciously enduring yet another media interview in their tasteful, art-filled home near the Danforth. "We didn't completely comprehend what would happen," says Bourassa, putting his arm around Varnell, 31. "We're not activists. We don't entirely understand the media thing." "We have strived as much as possible," Varnell adds, "to keep a personal element to what is becoming a very public and political event." Gentle classical music plays in the background of the corporate couple's home. Varnell is a Web co-ordinator for Sony, but Bourassa, a director of process management at CIBC, quips that he had the Sony stereo even before they met. Candles flicker on the coffee table. Daphne and Chloe, their two tortoiseshell cats named after characters in a Ravel ballet, watch unamused as their masters finish each other's sentences and banter like any loving couple. They have been together for 3 1/2 years. "We're still young enough in our relationship to count the halves," smiles Bourassa. Getting married is both a right and the ultimate expression of their love. "It started from in the heart and in the soul," he says earnestly. "We didn't go out to change the world. We want to have our love celebrated like any other couple." "It will be just Kevin and I, Elaine and Anne -- and 700 of our closest friends," laughs Varnell. The media spectacle, with everyone from The New York Times to Fox TV in attendance, will be far different from their first commitment ceremony -- a "holy union" officiated by Rev. Hawkes on Aug. 29, 1999, in their garden filled with family and friends. They exchanged their commitment rings of gold and sapphires, they pledged to be together forever, they went off on a wild honeymoon to London where they saw 11 plays in 15 days. But even then, it wasn't enough. At the back of their invitation, they had printed a photo of Justice Minister Anne McLennan and asked guests to petition her to legalize the commitment they truly wanted -- gay marriage. In Bill C-23, the law extending benefits and obligations to same-sex couples, the federal government caved in to conservative pressure and added a preamble that defined marriage as the union between one man and one woman. Several months ago, though, the church's lawyers presented an apparent loophole in the Ontario Marriage Act that would allow the pastor to marry same-sex couples. In Ontario, marriages can be performed in one of two ways. The most common involves a licence obtained at your local city hall and signed by your clergyman or justice of the peace. Less well known is through the ancient Christian tradition of marriage banns, in which the names of the two people wishing to be married are read out to the congregation of their church three Sundays in a row without legal challenge. The grounds for objection are narrow: a previous marriage, mental incompetence or an incestuous relationship. And under section 5 of the act, it doesn't specify that the couple must be a man and a woman, but instead "any person." NO OBJECTIONS
"It means so much to us that they are the couple who would be sharing this day with us," adds Varnell. For three Sundays last month, Hawkes announced the couples' intentions to marry. That first Sunday saw no objections and riotous applause from the congregation. Hawkes still winces at the memory of the succeeding Sundays, when two objectors rose on each day. One of the first was Rev. Ken Campbell. "What you are doing is in violation of the law of God," the conservative evangelist declared. "It was a pretty awful experience to have those objectors stand up in the middle of our worship," Hawkes recalls as he pauses in his church office between wedding preparations. "Every single one opposed based on religious reasons, not legal ones. We don't allow one segment of the population's religious interpretation to impede [impinge?] on the religion of another." Hawkes, 50, has been a pastor of the predominately gay Metropolitan Community Church for 23 years. He's been a gay activist almost as long, going on a hunger strike back in 1981 to protest the bathhouse raids. As he contemplates officiating at today's double wedding, he grows emotional at how far gay rights have come. But he knows only too well that it's been a battle that often involves some risk. When debate raged in 1994 on Bill 167, which would have given spousal benefits to same-sex couples, he was threatened that "blood will flow" if he went ahead with a pride prayer service at Maple Leaf Gardens. He wore a bulletproof vest that day. He won't say if he will today. "We're taking a variety of precautions," the pastor says sadly. "We are fully expecting protests, hopefully peaceful ones. But we have security measures in place and the police have been wonderful." For his part, Rev. Ken Campbell insists there will be no protests from him today. "It is patently illegal and I would never have given it that much attention except for the concern that by default they were suggesting legitimacy," says the leader of the Civilized Majority group. But, he warned, "there is an unhinged element out there in society that cannot respond in a civilized way to what they perceive as barbaric and may respond with a barbaric act." While opponents insist it's all illegal, Hawkes maintains these will be the world's first legal gay marriages -- the Netherlands has yet to enact its new law allowing same-sex marriages and in Vermont, same-sex couples can obtain a "civil union" but it is not recognized federally or outside the state. As for Ontario's threat not to register the licences, Hawkes confidently believes they will fight them in court -- and win. Varnell and Bourassa, though, have been dealing with more immediate concerns -- such as planning a very public wedding and juggling dozens of interviews in just four weeks. "Not to mention with Christmas in between," Bourassa says. "And work," laughs Varnell. In fact, he was supposed to launch a new Web site tomorrow, but it was delayed by his understanding employers. SUPPORT
NETWORK "We're only asking that people not interfere with our right as people and right as a church, that's all," Bourassa sighs. In the meantime, they giddily concentrate on the distracting details. They will all wear red roses in honour of Pierre Trudeau, the prime minister credited with decriminalizing homosexuality. Varnell and Bourassa will exchange the white gold and sapphire rings made for their holy union two years ago. "They're out being polished right now," Varnell laughs. Neither is wearing white. Varnell will don his black tuxedo from the holy union, Bourassa is splurging on a new suit from Spiro's of the Danforth. "I don't know what I'm wearing as a tie until that morning," he jokes. "I choose according to my mood." Varnell chuckles. "Do we have a tie that says panic-stricken?"
23 August 2001 3 The founders of sports cable channel The Score are launching. Canada's first channel catering to the gay, lesbian, bisexual and transgendered communities. Toronto-based Headline Media Group will debut the channel dubbed PrideVision TV on September 7. Viewers can watch Dyke TV, made by a group of Manhattan lesbians, 'Got 2B There, about circuit parties, a gay current affairs show and the comedy show "Gimme, Gimme, Gimme''. "The gay market is becoming very visible and what we hope to do is to alleviate some of the negativity that might arise simply from not being aware about the gay, lesbian, bisexual and transgendered community,'' said Anna McCusker, vice president of marketing at Headline Media told Reuters. Headline Media's McCusker said research has shown that about one in 10 people are homosexual and the number is much higher in urban areas like Toronto, Vancouver and Montreal.
4 REGINA The Saskatchewan government is amending 24 different laws that will allow gay and lesbian couples to adopt stepchildren and give them easy access to public pensions. The changes come two years after a Supreme Court decision requiring provincial governments to give unmarried, oppositeand same-sex couples the same legal rights as married couples. The Saskatchewan government is changing laws ranging from the Pension Benefit Act to the Adoption Act to ensure they comply with the court ruling. "What we have here is our assessment of what is needed in Saskatchewan to comply with the Supreme Court of Canada and other courts,'' said Justice Minister Chris Axworthy before introducing the omnibus amending bill Wednesday. Manitoba also introduced similar changes Wednesday. The changes were cheered by the members of Saskatchewan's gay and lesbian community and even received endorsements from various churches and even the Saskatchewan Party Opposition. "It would be my view, and a lot of Anglicans would share this view, as a justice issue,'' said Bishop Duncan Wallace, of the Diocese of Qu'Appelle. "I don't regard it as any more (than a justice issue) but quite frankly, I welcome it as such.'' Wallace noted there has been an amazing transformation in public opinion on gay and lesbian rights in the last five to 10 years. And even the Sask. Party was generally supportive of the changes -- this from an Opposition that was incensed when the government funded a gay film festival that included at least one pornographic film. Sask. Party justice critic Ben Heppner said that some in his party and his riding will be troubled by an extension of gay rights related to adoption -- an area he says may require further examination. Saskatchewan was one of the first provinces in Canada to allow gay couples to adopt, but the changes in 1990 did not extend to gay couples applying for parental status of stepchildren. However, Heppner said governments and courts have little choice other than to comply with the Supreme Court issue. Axworthy said he isn't completely surprised to see a softening of opinion because opinion polls and focus groups on the issue conducted by the provincial government reflect that people are sensitive to the issue. "There's significant support across the province to protect vulnerable people when relationships break down,'' said Axworthy. "And in particular, when people make commitments to each other, whether they be a man and a woman, two men, two women, whether they be in a marriage situation or whether they be in a common-law situation or in a same-sex relationship, obligations are made. "The population at large is of the view that the vulnerable person in the breakup of a relationship in which obligations are made should be protected.'' Nevertheless, Axworthy stressed the province would not be breaking new ground in the 24 bill amendments, only doing what the court decision required. Saskatchewan is the seventh province to comply, with Alberta, Manitoba and P.E.I. still to act. Late or not, members of the province's gay and lesbian community welcomed the Saskatchewan government move to amend the laws. "It's a good first step,'' said Kathleen Hewitt, executive director of the Regina Gay and Lesbian Association. "It's nice that the government has recognized that we are equal. "Really, all we're asking for is to be treated the same as everyone else.''
30 May 2001 5 By Scott Edmonds WINNIPEG (CP) - Manitoba is proposing to change a long list of legislation to give gay couples the same benefits as heterosexual couples but it has balked at including adoption. The legislation, which would change 10 provincial acts primarily dealing with pension and survivor benefits, was introduced in the Manitoba legislature Wednesday by Attorney General Gord Mackintosh. The Saskatchewan government also announced Wednesday it is amending 24 acts to give unmarried, opposite and same-sex couples the same legal rights as married couples. The changes are required to bring provincial laws in line with a 1999 Supreme Court of Canada ruling. Karen Busby, a law professor at the University of Manitoba who says she is a lesbian, was disappointed not to see adoption in the Manitoba amendments. "All of the jurisdictions so far that have amended legislation in response to M and H have included in the omnibus bill amendments to the adoption legislation and I'm surprised, even dismayed, that Manitoba has not changed adoption legislation,'' Busby said. She said the list even includes Tory Ontario, the province where the Supreme Court case first originated. A 50-year-old woman known only as M sued her lesbian partner for alimony after the couple's long-term relationship ended. The pair settled their financial dispute last year, but their case was appealed by the Ontario government as a test. The Supreme Court ruled same-sex common-law couples deserved the same entitlements under family law, specifically alimony payments, as heterosexual common-law couples. When asked why adoption wasn't included in the Manitoba legislation, Mackintosh said adoption wasn't part of the Supreme Court decision which dealt primarily with financial issues. "We're doing this because it's the right thing to do both in terms of the law of the land and out of respect for the dignity and security of the rights of all Manitobans,'' he said. "I suspect that they didn't include it because there was opposition from some government MLAs and the Opposition,'' said Busby. In Saskatchewan, same-sex couples have been allowed to apply to adopt children unrelated to them since 1990. As a result of the changes introduced Wednesday, same-sex and common-law couples in Saskatchewan will be able to apply to adopt the children of their partners, a Justice Department spokesman said. Ontario and Quebec changed their laws in 1999 to comply with the Supreme Court ruling. British Columbia has allowed gay couples to adopt since 1996 but has also made other changes to legislation in the wake of the high court decision.
May 31, 2001 6 The province says it will comply with a two-year-old Supreme Court ruling on benefits for same-sex couples. Bill 41, tabled in the legislature yesterday by Justice Minister Gord Mackintosh, proposes to change 10 provincial acts, ranging from the Family Maintenance Act to the Fatal Accidents Act. But U of M law professor Karen Busby, an advocate for gay and lesbian rights, said the legislation falls short by not extending adoption rights to same-sex couples. "That has very real consequences for many, many children in this province," said Busby, who attended the legislature yesterday for the unveiling of the bill. In Manitoba, a gay or lesbian single parent is eligible to adopt a child, but couples can not. That means a child with gay or lesbian parents is eligible only for the benefits from one caregiver. "Without the ability for those parents to adopt those children, those children have less stability in their lives. And we owe more to our children and to the parents of our children," Busby said. Mackintosh said the bill deals with matters regarding financial support for people who are in common-law relationships. "We are amending 10 statutes that deal with spousal support, death benefits and pension benefits, which are very important issues," the justice minister said. 'NOT JUST A COURT DECISION' "These issues are not just about a court decision. They're also about the dignity and the rights and the security of all Manitobans." Busby applauded the government for its inclusion of new laws that will provide legal obligations to same-sex partners, and will extend the right of surviving partners to claim pension benefits. But she said she expected Manitoba's NDP government to include adoption provisions, as three other provinces already have. "Even a Conservative government in Ontario did," Busby said. Jim Rondeau, Manitoba's first openly gay MLA, thought the legislation was a good leap ahead. "You can't change everything all at once. You keep making steps to end discrimination and then, hopefully, you'll move forward," he said.
August 8, 2001 7 By Tom Godfrey, A lesbian
couple from Mexico has been granted refugee status by an immigration
board that determined they'll be persecuted in their homeland because
they're gay.
June 9, 2001 8 By LYN COCKBURN WINNIPEG Among my good friends I am privileged to count a lesbian couple -- we'll call them Barb and Sally -- who have been together longer than I was married. Well, maybe not ... if you put both my marriages together ... oh, never mind. They own a house, a 37-kg lap dog, two vehicles, a barbecue, two computers and a vast collection of CDs; they love to cook, play golf, and they read extensively. All of those qualities pale in comparison beside their most sterling attribute which is that they rarely get mad at me. They also feed me salmon, laugh at my jokes and share their books with me. They have been known to lend me 20 loonies, cheer me up when I'm depressed and tell me how talented I am. Who could not love them? It is, therefore, with considerable interest that I note Nova Scotia has become the first province in Canada to permit same-sex couples to legally register their relationship. On June 4, Kimberley Vance and Samantha Meehin duly filled out the necessary papers and presented them at the Nova Scotia Department of Vital Statistics in Halifax, after which they received a certificate. All of this because of Bill 75, passed on June 1, which allows gays (and common-law couples) a number of the rights that were previously reserved for heterosexual married couples. Bill 75 does not allow gays in Nova Scotia to marry, nor does it permit them to adopt children. Too bad. I trust that too will come about, in Nova Scotia, in Manitoba, in all of Canada. Federally, all that has really happened in the area of gay rights is that in 1999 a Supreme Court of Canada decision gave same-sex couples the right to pension benefits. Also, some private companies have quietly extended health benefits to employees whose partners are of the same sex. It's a start. And that, of course, is exactly what scares hell out of those who abhor homosexuality, who believe gay relationships are of the devil, that the closet door should remain closed and preferably locked, that any acknowledgment of homophobia somehow gives "special" rights to gays. Above all, to those who wish homosexuality would go away, any recognition of gay coupledom detracts from the sanctity of marriage. Piffle. We heteros are doing quite well all by ourselves in stomping all over the sanctity of marriage -- any help from gays is superfluous. Divorce stats are alarming, if not embarrassing. What is the most recent statistic? One in three marriages ends in divorce? Or am I being far too optimistic? The number of second, third and fourth marriages is skyrocketing and the vast number of kids living in poverty-stricken-single parent situations is sad. And, funny thing, none of this has come about because some gays want to get married -- and as yet, at least in Canada, are not permitted to do so. Meanwhile, my friends have been together 14 years. So, rather than condemning gay relationships, we might want to ask Barb and Sally how come their relationship has lasted so long and works so well. Maybe there's something to learn. By the way, the last time I wrote a column espousing gay rights, a number of our more erudite citizens wrote me vituperative missives in which they quoted a couple of those lovely verses in Leviticus, Chapter 18 which say: Thou shall not lie with a male as with a woman; it is an abomination, blah blah blah. This time, please don't bother, unless you're willing to go along with at least some of the other strictures in Leviticus which would have us kill off those who perpetrate adultery, blasphemy, or think they can get away with being non-virginal-type brides. Oh, and there's one about doing in those who eat animal fat -- not a bad idea that last one, since it would scare hell out of those of us whose cholesterol is too high.
November
14, 2001
"We need a great variety of potential families and I think taking applications from anyone who is interested is the best way to find those families," said Grove. She says Newfoundland's revised law could have an effect on adoption in other provinces. "That's something a lot of us have been talking about but nobody's ever actually put into legislation, so this is a first. We'll be watching it very closely I think." But some adoptees say they hoped the revisions would go further. Kim Snook of St. John's was adopted. She says children and parents still face barriers in the search for birth families. Snook says she thinks adoptive parents should receive a letter when their child reaches legal age, providing information on the location of the birth family. Barb McGrath is searching for the child she gave up for adoption when she was 17. She says the new laws apply only to people who adopt after it's been passed. "I don't think that's fair. From the beginning, the government has always said it's protecting the mothers. I am a mother, and I don't need protecting." The revised adoption law should be in place by June.
April 18, 2002 12 Story by Richard Burnett Canadians living in what many Quebecers call the ROC - the rest of Canada - can be forgiven for thinking that a same-sex marriage lawsuit currently winding its way through the Quebec court system will have little effect on the ROC. Montreal couple Michael Hendricks and René LeBoeuf, together 29 years, are suing both the federal and Quebec governments for the right to marry in what many observers say is shaping up to be the most important gay- rights case in the history of Canada. That's because similar cases in the rest of Canada will not affect Quebec and its Civil Code whereas the Quebec case will affect the entire country because it is also challenging federal and common law. "I suspect the reason there hasn't been much coverage about our case in the rest of Canada is just the social differences between the two societies," Hendricks says. "What happens in Quebec isn't reported elsewhere unless it involves language laws. I don't even think we're even getting significant coverage on same-sex civil unions. I don't think people understand the cases in Ontario and British Columbia will have minimal impact in Quebec and our case will have maximum impact outside Quebec." The most recent news report outside Quebec covering Hendricks and LeBoeuf's Mar 22 Quebec Superior Court hearings over the impact of the Quebec government's recent "civil union" proposal was by the Canadian Press on March 22. "A gay couple that wants to get married rejected Quebec's proposed legislation on same-sex civil unions as an alternative to marriage," CP reported. But Hendricks says the Canadian Press got it wrong. "We think civil unions are a good first step and we will get one if the law passes," he says. Hendricks also says Quebec Superior Court Justice Louise Lemelin scheduled the hearings so "we could testify why a civil union is not enough. Marriage is social recognition and as Canadian citizens we have the right to a conjugal regime that is recognized throughout Canada. The same is true of registered civil unions in Nova Scotia - they're not transportable and as Canadians we have the right to travel sea to sea to sea and have the same rights as every other Canadian." Veteran gay activist Hendricks and LeBoeuf have mortgaged their home to cover legal fees that have already topped $160,000. Montreal's gay community raised an additional $7,500 at a Feb 6 dinner benefit. "The biggest support outside Quebec is from Ontario couples visiting [Articles reader] Kevin Bourassa and Joe Varnell's www.equalmarriage.ca website," Hendricks says. "Some have also donated money. Egale [the national lobby group], on the other hand, has donated $1,000 to the Quebec Coalition For Same-Sex Marriage but they haven't donated a penny directly to our case." Hendricks admits he is surprised over the widespread support for gay marriage in Quebec. "When we filed our lawsuit in 1998 there was little support within the gay community for gay marriage. But now it's universally accepted that we should have the right to be married. That's an enormous change," he says. "We've also seen support among heterosexuals in Quebec grow from 52 percent in January 1998 to 76 percent in a June 2001 poll by Leger Marketing." Despite widespread public support, Hendricks expects Quebec and Ottawa will appeal a pro-gay marriage ruling by the Quebec Superior Court that is expected by June. "The government is trailing behind the wishes of the population and opposes gay marriage," Hendricks says, echoing pundits who say Quebec's proposed civil-unions law is simply a ploy by the Parti Québecois to boost its sagging popularity before it calls an election. But if the law passes before the Quebec National Assembly's summer recess, it will enshrine both same-sex and opposite-sex civil unions (thus ridding the government of that pesky "separate but equal" argument) and give same-sex couples full parental rights. It would also make Quebec, after the Netherlands, the most progressive jurisdiction on the planet for same-sex couples and non-traditional families. The law will also likely include a sunset clause which will further pressure the feds to legalize gay marriage. "Parti Québecois minister Andre Boisclair, who is openly gay, told us it isn't a political ploy," Hendricks says. "I think they will pass the law by Jun 24. I think the Parti Québecois is trying to cut a new image for their party. They want a glowing human-rights legacy because they could have done this a long time ago - during the 1994 provincial election and then again in the 1995 referendum - and now they face defeat in the courts." Even if Quebec passes its civil unions law, the province and Ottawa will likely appeal any pro-gay marriage ruling by the Quebec Superior Court. "We expect our case will be appealed by either side to the Supreme Court Of Canada where we will likely only get a final legal ruling in 2006, hopefully before Montreal hosts the 2006 Gay Games," Hendricks says. "Civil unions are, of course, a big advance and will eventually pave the way for gay marriage. Right now our rights are increasingly recognized but governments won't give us the whole package. They are willing to give us the contents but not the container. And it's the container - marriage itself - that is important to René and myself because it is the gold standard of acceptance in our society." . Richard Burnett is Editor-at-large of Montreal's Hour magazine.
August 12, 2002 13 By Mark Blanchard, The Washington Times TORONTO - The Canadian government is considering whether to legalize same-sex "marriage" after a court ruled that the traditional definition of marriage - one man, one woman - violates the country's Charter of Rights and Freedoms. "The restriction against same-sex marriage is an offense to the dignity of lesbians and gays because it limits the range of relationship options available to them," wrote Justice Harry LaForme of the Ontario Superior Court. Homosexual- and lesbian-rights activists across the country were delighted by the ruling. Couples kissed each other for the news cameras, held hands and lined up for marriage licenses. "The genie's out of the bottle," said Michael Leshner, a government lawyer who wants to marry his longtime male lover. "The old marriage process is dead. It can't be resurrected." But the wedding plans were soon put on hold. The federal government has decided to appeal the ruling, which gives it two years to change the law. The government has also appointed a parliamentary committee to study the issue. It could release a discussion paper as early as next month. Among the government's options are changing the definition of marriage to cover same-sex couples or creating a form of civil union for homosexuals and lesbians. It could even get out of the marriage business altogether and leave it up to the churches to decide what constitutes marriage. Prime Minister Jean Chretien's Liberal Party is torn by the issue. Both Industry Minister Allan Rock and Foreign Minister Bill Graham have voiced their support for same-sex "marriage." "It's an important step along the road to equality," Mr. Rock said before marching in a homosexual pride parade. "I respect those who believe in the integrity of marriage," Mr. Graham said. "It's equally important that gay and lesbian people who are in an affectionate relationship over time want to commit themselves to that relationship." But some Liberal backbenchers are incensed by the idea and have called on Mr. Rock to resign. When he served as Canada's justice minister, they say, he promised that same-sex "marriages" would not be allowed. "Mr. Rock's position breaks caucus solidarity, which is forged by consensus, so perhaps he should consider a career as a backbencher," said Dan McTeague, an outspoken member of Parliament representing suburban voters in southern Ontario. In Toronto, Canada's largest city, councilors voted 28-6 in favor of same-sex "marriages" by asking the federal government to drop its appeal of the Ontario court ruling. Gay.com U.K. 8 March 2002 14 Four gay 'Widows' from Quebec, have won back their pension rights from the government in a case that could benefit many others in the community. Quebec and Canada have separate pension plans for their citizens, although the two plans are pretty much the same. In 1998 both amended their laws covering pensions to include surviving partners in same-sex relationships. The pensions are worth about $400 Canadian (around £280) a month. The money is in addition to the survivor's own government pension. Both governments, however, said they would only pay gay survivors whose partners died after the law went into effect in 1998. Four gay men whose partners died before 1998 took Quebec to court, arguing that the benefits should be effective from the date gays and lesbians were given civil rights rights in the Canadian Constitution, 1977, reports Canadian gay site, 365Gay.com. A Quebec Court of Appeal this week ruled that the four men had been discriminated against. July 28, 2002 15 Janice Tibbetts, The Ottawa Citizen The federal government, faced with a court ruling that allows gays and lesbians to tie the knot, is considering withdrawing from the marriage business and leaving it to the church. A government source confirmed Friday that the radical proposal is one of four options that the Justice Department is contemplating, regardless of whether it appeals an Ontario court decision that sanctioned gay marriage for the first time in Canadian law. The possibility of making marriage solely a religious institution is on the table as the Justice Department struggles with revamping its laws following the Ontario Divisional Court ruling July 12 that gave the federal government two years to conform to the equality guarantees in the Charter of Rights and Freedoms by recognizing gays and lesbian unions. The prospect of abandoning regulation of marriage, however, is still in its infancy and many issues have yet to be examined, including the impact it would have on divorce. The federal government currently regulates who can marry in Canada and provinces handle the particulars of the ceremony, including licences. One of three judges on the Ontario Divisional Court panel that sanctioned same-sex marriage raised the idea of the federal government withdrawing from marriage, as he pointed out that including gays and lesbians in traditional marriage is not the only option. Detroit News ( http://detnews.com/ ) August 5, 2002 16 By Deb Price, The Detroit News Life for gay Canadians is likely to be wonderfully transformed because of one simple question posed in a phone call last year: "Would you and Joe like to get married?" The question was asked by the Rev. Brent Hawkes, pastor of the gay-friendly Metropolitan Community Church in Toronto. A resounding "yes" came back from Kevin Bourassa and his partner Joe Varnell, both members of the church. The pastor was looking for two same-sex couples wanting to marry and willing to sue if the province of Ontario balked at registering their church-issued marriage license. Marriage in Ontario can take place two ways: Since the 1950s, couples have been able to directly get a license from a government clerk. Or they can wed in an ancient Christian tradition known as "the reading of the banns." As Hawkes explained to Kevin, after a church publicly announces a proposed marriage three times, a minister issues the couple a marriage license that the provincial government is required by law to register. The banns, an attorney had told Hawkes, offered a promising new way to challenge Canada's heterosexual-only marriage restriction. In January 2001, in a packed sanctuary, Hawkes united Kevin and Joe as well as active parishioners Anne and Elaine Vautour. When Ontario refused to register the marriages, the couples and church sued. Joined by eight couples denied licenses by a Toronto clerk, the resulting lawsuit led to a recent landmark decision that will reverberate far beyond Canada: A unanimous three-judge court ruled July 12 that denying gay couples marriage licenses violates that country's 1982 Charter of Rights and Freedoms, essentially a modern equivalent of the U.S. Bill of Rights. The 129-page decision demolishes arguments against gay marriage. Quoting Martin Luther King Jr. in declaring "the time is always ripe to do right," Judge H.S. LaForme wrote, "The restriction against same-sex marriage is an offense to the dignity of lesbians and gays. ... I can find no benefit whatsoever to the exclusion." The court gave Parliament just two years to end the discrimination, though LaForme wanted to open marriage immediately. (See www.samesexmarriage.ca) The forceful decision now under appeal will add wind to the sails propelling same-sex marriage toward reality in the United States. The Netherlands became the first country to legalize gay marriage in 2001, but the strides being taken by the United States' neighbor to the north will resonate much more loudly in American legal, political, and religious circles. In a significant development in the Ontario case, a popular Toronto church - which had 3,300 attend its Christmas Eve service - is fighting alongside gay couples to open marriage. The recent Canadian ruling's detailed analysis should bolster U.S. judges and politicians wanting to act wisely and boldly. Currently, same-sex marriage lawsuits are under way in New Jersey and Massachusetts. Canada has moved much more quickly than the United States in protecting gay citizens. Since the 1980s, gay Canadians have gained sweeping rights from their Supreme Court and Parliament. Gay Canadians serve openly in the military. And long-term gay couples have access to most of the same rights and benefits as heterosexual couples. Unlike in the United States, religious fundamentalists have little clout. The Canadian public increasingly supports same-sex marriage: After the ruling, Canadians favored gay marriage 48 percent to 43 percent, a Pollara survey found. And hinting at the future, 65 percent of 25- to 34-year-olds favor it. Joe and Kevin look forward to Parliament embracing same-sex marriage or having Canada's highest court strike down the restriction now written into law. As Joe points out, "there's a sense of inevitability among Canadians" that gay couples will marry. . Deb Price's column is published on Monday. You can contact her at (202) 662-7370 or dprice@detnews.com.
August 8, 2002 17 Bill Curry, National Post, with files from Southam News OTTAWA - Jean Chrétien announced yesterday that Canadians will be asked for their views on same-sex marriages, but refused to reveal his own feelings on the subject. The Prime Minister and Martin Cauchon, the Justice Minister, said a public consultation will begin next month with the aim of coming to a speedy conclusion. A parliamentary committee will hold public hearings and the Justice Department will release a public discussion paper in September, Mr. Cauchon said. He said he wants the committee to reach a "rapid" conclusion so that the government can quickly decide what to do. Mr. Chrétien described the debate over gay and lesbian marriage as a "social problem" while keeping his personal thoughts under wraps. "I want you to tell me yours and after that I will tell you [mine]. Because my views are one thing, but I'm the Prime Minister of Canada," he told reporters after a Cabinet meeting in Ottawa yesterday. "I could decide tomorrow, but that's not the process." Sources say possibilities under consideration by the government include: broadening the definition of marriage to cover same-sex couples, taking the government out of the marriage business and leaving it to the churches, or affirming marriage as an opposite-sex union while creating a parallel civil union for gays and lesbians. One choice to be presented to the public is rejecting gay and lesbian marriage by continuing the legal battle against an Ontario court ruling last month that recognized same-sex marriage for the first time in Canadian law. The Prime Minister defended the government's decision to appeal the ruling, which found the federal definition of marriage violates the Charter of Rights and Freedoms by denying same-sex couples the right to marry. The ruling gave the federal government two years to change its definition. Mr. Chrétien said the government often appeals court decisions and also rewrites laws after rulings by tribunals. "When you look at the situation in France, they didn't change the definition of marriage, but they made the social contract that other provinces are making in Canada. So it's an extremely complex problem that needs study. So we're studying," he said. In the past week, three senior Cabinet ministers, Sheila Copps, the Heritage Minister; Bill Graham, the Foreign Affairs Minister and Allan Rock, the Industry Minister, have come out in favour of same-sex marriage. Equality for Gays and Lesbians Everywhere (EGALE), a gay-rights lobby group, said it expects the support of at least seven Cabinet ministers, including Jane Stewart, the Human Resources Minister; Paul DeVillers, the Amateur Sport Minister and Jean Augustine, Secretary of State for the Status of Women. Yesterday was the first Cabinet meeting since the government's decision to appeal the ruling, but Mr. Cauchon brushed off suggestions his colleagues are divided. The government is appealing the decision because it believes the court "wasn't right in law." "There is major legal concern and we have to keep going on that side, but also at the same time, as Justice Minister, I wanted to keep all options open," Mr. Cauchon said. "I do believe it's a question of law, but it's a very important question of social issue." Taking the issue to the Supreme Court is not a priority for the government, he said, because it is a decision that must be made by the government and Parliament. He also pointed out that the same Ontario tribunal that ruled against the federal definition of marriage had in fact supported the definition in a 1993 decision. Both the Canadian Alliance and EGALE said they support the government's decision to study the issue further. The Alliance maintains its support for the current definition of marriage, however, while EGALE sees the study as a first step toward recognizing same-sex marriage. "They're showing what I would call cautious leadership," said John Fisher, EGALE's executive director. "Leadership in our view involves actually taking action rather than just talking about taking action. This is the opening of a dialogue and it's a dialogue that we feel leads down an inevitable path toward one conclusion, which is the equal treatment of same-sex couples within marriage. "We hope that this will not become a prolonged and endless circular debate." The government has yet to decide which committee will study the issue, but Andy Scott, the Liberal MP who chairs the House Justice committee, said he has already told Mr. Cauchon his committee can handle the job. "I would anticipate a great deal of interest in this," he said.
July 15, 2002 18 By Nelly Elayoubi, Ottawa Sun Some bared their chests, some bared their butts, but for one day of the year, gays, lesbians, bisexuals and transgendered people could be open about their practices and preferences. Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual and Transgendered Pride Week celebrations wrapped up yesterday with the Pride Parade. Forty colourful floats made their way blowing whistles, honking horns and spraying water guns, from Gatineau through Ottawa and ending at Gladstone Ave. and Bank St. A crowd estimated at 55,000 came out and the numbers climbed as people arrived at the Bank St. party, surpassing last year's 32,000 overall attendance. "This is significant because it has become a major city event not just for the gay, lesbian, bisexual, transgendered community but for the entire region," said Jarmila Dokladalova, Pride Committee Ottawa-Gatineau chairwoman. Councillors Alex Munter and Elisabeth Arnold had their own float. "The growth of Pride festivities reflects the growth of our city," Munter said. "An Ottawa summer is a summer of festivals and it's great to see this record turnout." "I'm thrilled to be part of a parade that celebrates our city's diversity," Arnold said. For honorary parade marshals Dennis and Diana Stimson, being in the parade was a way to show gays that parents can be accepting. The couple's two sons, aged 32 and 37, are gay. Diana has been participating in the parade for nine years and Dennis for eight years. "It was euphoric. It was great because there were so many people in the city and wonderful to have people wave to you," Diana said. The couple was proud and humbled by their roles. This was the first year the street party was held on Bank St. and Dokladalova said this gave the event an urban feel. "The importance of Pride is it's an organized event that brings people together," Dokladalova said. May 7, 2002 19 John Cotter EDMONTON (CP) Same-sex couples in Alberta will enjoy some of the same legal rights as married couples under two bills introduced Tuesday by Premier Ralph Klein's government. The legislation has angered social conservatives but Justice Minister David Hancock said he believes most Albertans will support the change. "We need to make Alberta's laws applicable to all Albertans and available to all Albertans on a fair basis," Hancock said. "That is a fundamental that has to be met." Bill 30 will not recognize gay marriages but it will extend some of the legal rights and obligations of marriage to same-sex couples and people in other adult interdependent relationships. The law would apply to people who have either lived together for three years, have signed a relationship contract or have a child. It would require partners to be liable for support payments in the event of breakups. It would not extend pension benefits to partners in such relationships or apply to the division of property acquired during a relationship due to breakups. The government plans to hold the bill over until the fall to gauge public reaction to it. However, the government must pass another bill this spring to comply with a court ruling last year that said Alberta's inheritance law is unconstitutional. Bill 29 would give people in same-sex relationships the same rights as married couples when it comes to inheriting property when a partner dies without a will. Hancock said the bills recognize that the right to equality prohibits discrimination while still protecting the institution of marriage. "Marriage has meaning. The institution of marriage as a social, religious and cultural institution must be maintained," Hancock said. "But there is also the value of fairness before the law." Last month Quebec introduced legislation to recognize civil unions for gays and lesbians, though not marriage. Nova Scotia already has such a law. Gay and lesbian couples can adopt children in Nova Scotia, British Columbia, Ontario and Alberta. Robert Smith, a gay community activist from Edmonton, had mixed feelings about Alberta's legislation. He said while it is important gays and lesbians are treated fairly, he doesn't like the Klein government's reluctance to formally recognize same-sex unions. "Every step forward is a tiny success but I don't favour anything that hides same-sex relationships in a category that conveniently recognizes interdependence without an emotional attachment," he said. "They are looking for a way to hide it so the voters don't protest too loudly." Social conservatives in the province reacted with anger to the legislation and vowed to lobby against it. Government recognition of such relationships will only undermine traditional values, said Maureen Heron, spokeswoman for the Alberta Federation of Women United for Families. "Homosexuality is not a normal condition. It is a physical disorder, it a social disorder and it is a spiritual disorder," Heron said. "Why are we forced to go down this path of accepting that what they do is equivalent to being married with children? "All we can do is let our government know that our minister has betrayed the families of Alberta." The 5,000-member federation is a vocal proponent of "family values and Judeo-Christian ethics" and is staunchly anti-abortion. Under Bill 30 an adult interdependent relationship is described as any two adults living together in a long-term, committed relationship of economic and emotional interdependence. This would include conjugal and platonic relationships. Bill 29 stems from the case of Brent Johnson, an Edmonton man who claimed a share of $160,000 in life insurance left behind when his same-sex partner died. Under the old law, only legally married spouses could inherit if there is no will. Johnson said he hopes the legislation will mean gays and lesbians will be treated more fairly in the future. "I was getting pessimistic so I am quite pleased that this is being introduced," Johnson said. "We are treated the same in every other way like paying taxes. We should have the same rights otherwise." July 12, 2002 20 TORONTO A court in the powerful province of Ontario made Canadian history Friday by ruling that the provincial government must register gay and lesbian marriages. In the first such decision by any court in the country, the Ontario Superior Court said it would give the provincial government two years to afford same-sex unions the same rights as a marriage between a man and a woman. "The status and incidence inherent in the foundational institution of marriage must be open to same sex couples," said the unanimous ruling by a three-judge panel. Gay activists hailed the decision as a major victory. But their battle may not be over yet, since the definition of who can get married in Canada is solely a federal jurisdiction. The federal justice ministry in Ottawa, which insists a marriage must be between a man and a woman, has 15 days to decide whether to appeal. A ministry spokesman said the ruling was "very interesting" but declined to comment further. The Ontario government also has the right to appeal. The Ontario ruling came in response to a lawsuit launched by gay couple Joe Varnell and Kevin Bourassa after the Ontario government refused to register their marriage last year. "The government can no longer continue to treat gays and lesbians as second-class citizens," Varnell told CBC television from the Toronto church where he and Bourassa were married. "I'm confident that this ruling will resonate for people across Canada and indeed around the world." Canadian gay activists now want Ottawa to follow the lead of the Netherlands, which last year became the first country to allow same-sex couples to marry and adopt children. The Canadian Parliament overhauled 68 federal statutes in 2000 to erase most legal differences between heterosexual and homosexual couples. But lawmakers drew the line at changing the definition of marriage. A spokesman for the Ontario provincial government said it was up to Ottawa to take the next step but he did not rule out an Ontario appeal. "They (the judges) have really put the government on the spot. In two years they are asking them to look at their definition of marriage and make changes to that," Ben Hamilton told Reuters. Gay activists said the ruling in Ontario - where more than a third of Canada's 30 million people live - would have major repercussions in the provinces of British Columbia and Quebec, where similar cases are before the courts. "This ruling in Ontario, as strongly worded as it is, makes it very, very difficult for judges in Quebec...and British Columbia to ignore the reasoning that was taken here," said Varnell. Douglas Elliott, one of the lawyers involved in the Ontario case, said the ruling was not just a victory for the country's gays and lesbians. "Canada has a rich culture of human rights. Our respect for diversity and our religious tolerance is what makes Canada a great society. Today's victory is a victory for our entire country," he told a Toronto news conference. FEEDBACK: The following URLs are related to the Ontario court's same-sex marriage decision: For the decision text: http://www.sgmlaw.com/userfiles/filesevent/file_1413620_halpern.PDF For video of a news conference on the decision: http://www.pulse24.com/In_The_Raw/Raw_Video/page.asp#gay The Telegram, St. John's, Newfoundland ( http://www.thetelegram.com ) July 22, 2002 21 By Will Hilliard, The Telegram There were no feathers and fishnets to be seen during the annual Gay Pride parade in downtown St. John's Sunday, and less than 80 people turned out. But organizer Derrick Bishop blamed it on the weather, not a lack of support for the gay and lesbian, bisexual and transgender community. "I don't know why this always happens but you can almost be sure that every time we have this it's going to be a cold day," said Bishop, before the noon-day parade which began at City Hall after a short ceremony to close a local weeklong celebration of the gay rights movement. But he said the turnout was no reflection on the celebrations. "We had quite a large turnout," said Bishop, who is chairman of Newfoundland Gays and Lesbians for Equality. A buzz He said the buzz during the celebrations revolved around two recent decisions that could lead to the recognition of same-sex marriages in both civil and church weddings. In a decision that was harshly condemned by some as an attack on religious freedom, an Ontario court ruled that prohibiting gay couples from marrying in civil unions is unconstitutional and violates the Charter of Rights and Freedoms. Waiting on word The question now is whether Ottawa will say, "I do" to same-sex marriages, said Bishop. The Supreme Court of Ontario has suspended its decision for two years to give Parliament time to adopt a new definition of marriage. If Ottawa doesn't act within that period, the legal definition of civil marriage would become the union of "two persons." ]The decision stems from a case in which a gay couple who were married in the tolerant Metropolitan Community Church in Toronto could not get the union registered by the province. Same-sex relationships are recognized under the same category as common-law marriages by the federal government. Alberta Premier Ralph Klein has said his province won't recognize same-sex marriages and he has urged Ottawa to appeal the decision. Authorities in other provinces, meanwhile, will watch carefully over the next two years. Bishop said a decision of the Vancouver-area Diocese of New Westminster - amid fractious debate within the diocese to sanction the blessing of same-sex marriages - has also made many same-sex couples here hopeful they too will get to walk down the aisle with their partners. No city representation No city officials were present at Sunday's ceremony and parade. This week's event marked the 33rd anniversary of the international gay-rights movement and the 10th anniversary of local Pride Week. The roots of Gay Pride Week date back to June 28, 1969 in New York City, when the gay, lesbian and bisexual community stood up against constant police harassment. The clash resulted in three days of violence known as the Stonewall Riots, named after a gay bar that was picked on by police. 'Come a long way' "Some of the things we also have to look at now is that in Canada we have come a long way, but in other countries - particularly in the Middle East and in some Asian countries - gays and lesbians can suffer the death penalty because of their sexual orientation," said Bishop. "I believe that Canadian immigration should be looking at bringing some of these people here." June 7, 2002 22 Alexander Panetta QUEBEC (CP) Surely unaware of how the moment would change their lives, a group of toddlers decked out in their fanciest duds watched Friday as the Quebec legislature gave them each a second parent. Every politician present in the legislature voted to approve Bill 84, which recognizes same-sex couples' rights to adopt, raise children, and to share a marriage-like status called a civil union. While their parents cried and cheered from the gallery as the law was passed, the children seemed unimpressed. One little boy plopped his head on a wooden banister and prepared to take a nap. "This is the first of its kind in the world," said a beaming Irene Demczuk, a gay-rights activist. "There is no other jurisdiction in the world where equality was offered unanimously to same-sex couples and their children. "Quebec has taken a historic step." Same-sex adoptions are now legal in more than half of Canadian provinces, including Nova Scotia, British Columbia, Ontario, Alberta and Saskatchewan. Gay and lesbian couples were already allowed to adopt children in Quebec, but only one partner could have parental status. Quebec is also the second province to grant marriage-style rights, after Nova Scotia. Mona Greenbaum says her partner will now be able to perform parental duties such as signing report cards and approving vaccines for their sons, Leo, 3, and Simon, 2. "We've always felt like we were a family," said Greenbaum, her eyes welling with tears. "But in terms of the rest of society recognizing us, we didn't have that before. "It's such a supreme showing of acceptance for our type of family." The couple snapped photos to help their sons one day appreciate the significance of the moment. "They know that they've been to a meeting in a big fancy room and that they had to be quiet. They don't really understand, but I'll be very happy to tell them what happened when they get older." When the law comes into effect this July, Greenbaum can have a civil-union ceremony. She will also change the boys' family name to Paquette-Greenbaum, adding the last name of her partner Nicole Paquette. In the legislature, Premier Bernard Landry thanked the audience of parents and children for their contribution to Quebec society. "It is with immense pride that we are taking this historic step that will place Quebec at the forefront of modern nations on the question of civil union and family laws," said Landry. "We owe this major step to the citizens of Quebec who campaigned to help such a thing happen, and many of them are in the gallery right here." One smartly dressed little boy wearing a tie began clapping when Liberal Leader Jean Charest congratulated the dozen families in attendance. "A good question was asked about this legislation and it was the following: What should we do in the interests of the children?" Charest said. "I'm pleased that today, we can provide the right answer for these children, who deserve one thing, the one thing that all the children in the world deserve. That thing is love, the love of the people around them regardless of their sexual orientation." Justice Minister Paul Begin had planned to introduce more cautious civil-union legislation, but quickly moved to include parental rights after legislative hearings earlier this year. He said Quebec has evolved and the legislation was simply a question of reflecting current values. It was unfair that gays and lesbians could adopt children but not share parental status with a partner, he added. "People will continue to live and be together, but now they'll be able to do it in all legality, with all the love they share between them, and especially with their children," Begin told reporters. April 27, 2002 23 QUEBEC
CITY, Quebec "It will be a civil union for gays and lesbians, just like marriage for heterosexuals," Begin told Reuters in Quebec City, the capital of the predominantly French-speaking province, whose politics were strongly influenced by the Roman Catholic church until the late 1960s. Gays and lesbians will get most of the benefits of married couples, including health and insurance benefits, tax status and rights to benefits after divorce or death. The minimum age for civil unions of both same-sex and heterosexual couples is set at 18. However the minimum age for traditional heterosexual marriages will be 16. Couples who opt for civil unions may divorce simply by signing an agreement before a notary public, provided there are no children involved. Couples who opt for traditional marriages must still go to court to divorce. "We followed the evolution of Quebec society. People are favorable to this. Gay civil unions are accepted socially," Begin said in the interview. Begin said public opinion in the liberal-minded province led the government to move forward on the legislation. "What we heard in public hearings was very moving. I saw people crying after testimony by gays, lesbians and their children," he said. He pointed out that 20 percent of all couples living in Quebec had common law status, while 3 percent were gays or lesbians. More than three out of four Quebecers support civil unions for homosexuals, polls show. July 10, 2002
24 Dan Dawson, BluWay Guest Contributor Vancouver, B.C. I had seen many marvelous sights during this trip, from the spectacular imperial architecture of Victoria`s Parliament Houses to a hot strip show in a Vancouver hot spot. But, it was at the moment our group observed two friendly seals frolicking in the presence of three scuba divers at English Bay that I stopped to catch my breath. I realized that this part of the world is one of the most spectacular and unique places to be inspired by nature and awed by history while experiencing a completely modern gay-friendly city. Here is a mix of majestic mountains, deep fjords, thousands of islands and rugged coastlines. There are enormous rock cliffs that rise from the sea with large carvings cut into their faces by the land`s first people (what Canadians call the Native Americans). These Petroglyphs are believed to be especially powerful. After a few days traveling through British Columbia, it is easy to understand why these symbols have been placed here. The beauty of the mountains, the towering fir trees, and moss covered rocks all converge to create a landscape that inspires a spiritual feeling that refreshes the soul. The Tourism Board of British Columbia had invited several gay and lesbian writers to sample the wonders that make up this Canadian province and to see just how gay friendly a place it is. Being openly gay here seems to be as natural as the landscape. Canada overall is much more laid-back and accepting than the United States. Gays serve in the military (asking and telling are not an issue), there are many important laws protecting gay and lesbian rights, and there are several openly gay Members of Parliament. I personally found British Columbia`s people to be very tolerant and accepting. Walking down Davie or Robson holding hands with your partner turns very few heads. </ |
