|
Home / Contact / Stories, News & Reports / Photos
Worldwide Gay Life,
Sites and Insights Gay Canada
News & Reports 2003-05 Also
see: Also see: 1*** Canadian cabinet approves national policy for marriage to gay and lesbian couples 6/03 3 Toronto Sees Pink Gold In Gay Weddings As Americans Look North To Tie The Knot 6/03 4 Fifty-four Newlyweds lead Toronto's Pride Parade 6/03 5 Canada gives gays hope for change 6/03 6 Toronto--North America's gay-pride capital 6/03 7 Landmark marriage in Whitehorse hailed as 'so healing' 10/03 8 Why same-sex debate drags on1/04 9 Gay Marriage In The Balance As Canada Prepares For Election 5/04 11 Battle lines drawn over gay marriage - Opponents, supporters launch campaigns 4/04 12 Welcome to Canada's gay high school-Toronto's Triangle program offers an educational refuge 5/04 13 Canadian prime minister accused of packing court with pro-gay judges 9/04 14 Canada Supreme Court Approves Gay Marriage 12/04 15 Canada Canada's military to allow gay weddings on bases 1/05 16 Once Again, Equality Wins: Juan Camacho is Allowed to Remain in Canada 4/05 17 Former gay contestants on CBS-TV's Amazing Race 7 planning to marry in Ottawa in June 5/05 18 Canadian
military hosts first gay wedding 6/05
June 18, 2003 1 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.
June 11, 2003 2 Janice Tibbetts, Gay and lesbian couples raced to obtain marriage licences yesterday in a bid to pre-empt any attempt by the federal government to continue its flagging legal fight against same-sex marriage. The rush to legal matrimony followed a ruling by the Ontario Court of Appeal, which yesterday went farther than any court in Canada by changing the definition of who can marry, effective immediately. Previous court decisions in Ontario and British Columbia had given the federal government until July 2004 to change its law. The first gay couple to legally become newlyweds were Crown prosecutor Michael Leshner and his partner Michael Stark, in a civil ceremony before a judge at a downtown Toronto courthouse. "Today is the death of homophobia in the courtroom as we know it," declared Mr. Leshner, as he embraced and kissed his legal spouse. As Mr. Leshner and Mr. Stark exchanged rings and sipped champagne, several other couples picked up marriage licences, after the court ordered Toronto city hall to issue them. In Ottawa, longtime partners Lisa Lachance and Heather Gass said that were hoping to obtain a licence this morning and possibly "do the deed" tonight. The federal government, which until yesterday had had more than a year's grace period to recraft its law, scrambled to decide what to do next. Justice Minister Martin Cauchon met with senior cabinet ministers to discuss his plans, which he will announce today after presenting them to the Liberal caucus. Mr. Cauchon, however, hinted that the government's fight is not over yet. "We really need a national solution," he said, stressing that Parliament should also have a role to play instead of leaving the "important social issue" entirely up to the courts. "Having said that, we see the direction that the courts are taking now," Mr. Cauchon said. The government could move as early as today to seek a stay of the court decision, pending a Supreme Court decision. An appeal would buy time for the Justice Department, but even the Liberals' own research bureau has warned that the government will ultimately lose the fight. If the high court agrees to hear the case, it could take another two years before making a decision. The case could become moot in the meantime, considering Paul Martin, the frontrunner to replace retiring Prime Minister Jean Chrétien, has said that it's time for the government to stop appealing. The court, instead of telling the federal government to change its law, struck down the existing definition of marriage in Canada - "the voluntary union for life of one man and one woman to the exclusion of all others. The new definition is "the voluntary union for life of two persons to the exclusion of all others," the court said. "Exclusion perpetuates the view that same-sex relationships are less worthy of recognition than opposite sex relationships," the court said in a unanimous, 61-page written ruling. "In doing so, it offends the dignity of persons in same-sex relationships." The federal government is responsible for the definition of marriage and the provinces oversee the solemnization, including the marriage registration. The decision, which dealt with seven Ontario couples, ordered the provincial government to register marriages. Ontario Attorney General Norm Sterling said he would not stand in the way of the court's ruling. "If the decision today says that two people of the same sex can get married, that is the law of the land, then we will register," he said. But Alberta Premier Ralph Klein promised to do everything in his power to block the decision and his officials urged the federal government to ask the Supreme Court of Canada to be the final arbiter in the case. Gay and lesbians activists, along with several MPs, urged the federal government to stop the legal fight. "I am calling on Jean Chrétien, the prime minister, as part of his legacy, to leave a legacy of respect," said New Democrat MP Svend Robinson, who is gay. "Stop the appeals, stop the obstruction, stop the waste of taxpayers' money." The ruling orders the Ontario government to register the January 2001 marriages of Joe Varnell and Kevin Bourassa and Elaine and Anne Vautour. The couples married in ceremonies in January 2001 at the Metropolitan Community Church of Toronto, using an ancient Christian tradition that allowed them to avoid having to get city-issued marriage licences. The court decision dismisses every argument from the federal Justice Department, including its contention that the purpose of marriage is procreation. The court also rejects the fear of churches that gay marriage infringes on religious freedom because it would force them to conduct ceremonies against their will. "This case is about the legal institution of marriage," the court said. "We do not view this case as, in any way, dealing or interfering with the religious institution of marriage." As Mr. Cauchon considered his options, an all-party parliamentary committee met behind closed doors yesterday to put the finishing touches on a report, crafted from months of public hearings on whether gays and lesbians should be permitted to wed. Mr. Cauchon said he wants to consider the report's recommendations. But there were complaints among committee members that the political process has been usurped by the courts. "We apparently have judge-made law in this country and we're just here for decoration," said John McKay, a Liberal MP who opposes same-sex marriage. Vic Toews, justice critic for the Canadian Alliance, called on the federal government to appeal the ruling to the Supreme Court of Canada. Mr. Toews also says that the government should not be shy about using the Constitution's notwithstanding clause, a safety valve that allows politicians to override unpopular court decisions.
June 12, 2003 3 by Jan Prout, 365Gay.com Newscenter, Toronto Bureau Toronto, Ontario - Toronto's city clerk has been deluged with calls from gay and lesbian couples across the US and Canada inquiring about marriage. Although the marriages likely would not be recognized in the US, American gays are able to obtain a marriage license from the clerk of any municipality in Ontario. The province has no residency requirement. The procedure is relatively easy. All that is required is both parties going to the local city or town hall, filling out an application and paying the $110 (Cdn), fee, about $85 (US). You must be at least 18 years of age, have photo ID such as a drivers license, along with identification like a birth certificate or passport. There is no waiting period. You can get your license in the morning and get hitched in the afternoon. Some cities in Ontario even have wedding chapels. But, if you want to wait, the license is valid for 90 days before you have to get married. Otherwise it will expire and the process must be started all over. A marriage can be performed by a judge, a justice of the peace or by a minister. Following the wedding the couple fills out a marriage registry form and the person who performed the service forwards it to the Office of the Registrar General for registration. It usually takes about 3 months for the government to officially register the marriage. The simplicity of the system is expected to make gay marriage a huge summer business in Toronto. "Gay Toronto is already a major tourist destination and gay marriage is just one more reason for people to come here," said Ric Tremaine, the President of the Gay Tourism Guild of Toronto an organization that promotes LGBT tourism to Canada's largest city. An outbreak of SARS which has been widely reported in the press has seen tourism in general drop by as much as 40 percent this summer. But, Tremaine tells 365Gay.com that so far there has been little effect on gay tourism. With Pride celebrations coming at the end of the month, Tremaine predicts the city will see a huge influx of visitors. Last year, Pride, the third largest in North America, attracted a million people to the parade which wraps up the weeklong festival. Tremaine, who owns Gloucester Square Inns two five star heritage inns in the city's gay village, says his phones have been ringing off the hook with people enquiring about marriage. The company has two wedding suits and offers packages including organizing the wedding itself from the limousines to the location and the reception.
June 29, 2003 4 The threat of rain and the stigma of SARS didn't keep crowds away from the Gay Pride Parade today, the showcase event of Gay Pride Week that drew hundreds of thousands of revellers, and was led by limos carrying newlywed gay couples. The parade route was lined a half-dozen people deep with faces reflecting just about every facet of the city's multicultural makeup. Elderly couples stood alongside punks with Mohawks, shameless men wearing only leather codpieces, and women completely comfortable hanging out topless in the hot sun. Forecasts had called for rain but the sun was shining as the parade kicked off, and although ominous clouds drifted overhead, the weather was perfect, hovering around 28C. The only thing raining down from the sky was the traditional streams and sprays from water guns. The snipers were on floats, in the crowd, and on the rooftops, shooting anyone looking too dry. Around 12,000 people and dozens of floats slowly made their way from Church Street, in Toronto's gay neighbourhood, into the downtown core along Yonge Street. Leading the way near the front of the pack were a bunch of white limousines, carrying newlywed gay couples who tied the knot earlier this month, after an Ontario court ruled homosexuals deserve the same rights to wed as heterosexuals. Michael Leshner and Michael Stark, who won the court victory at the Ontario Court of Appeal, had their faces painted in rainbow colours, and rode in a blue convertible. "I feel very honoured to be here, to just share the outpouring of love we've had," Stark said. "Everyone have a great day today," was his message for the crowd, "it's a great day for Canada." More than 250 gay couples have been married at Toronto City Hall and at local non-demoninational churches in the past weeks, including around 30 American couples. Each slow-moving float provided a different mood, some blasting a thumping beat that got the crowd dancing, others leading impromptu karaoke sessions with songs like 'It's Raining Men', 'YMCA', and 'Shake Your Bootie'. They were followed by a marching troop of bagpipers who wore their traditional kilts and caps, but adorned with raindow-coloured ribbons. "There's probably more for everybody here, as opposed to (being) focused on one party, or group of people," said a man who only gave his name as Anthony. He recently moved to Toronto from Sydney, Australia - where there's also a huge gay parade - and said he was impressed by Sunday's show. But not everything in the parade was greeted by cheers of support. Groans sprang from the crowd as a group from Totally Naked Toronto Men walked past. They were a few men - of varying weights and physiques - who had nothing to hide, despite being arrested for public nudity in previous years. As of early Sunday evening, no arrests had been made. Organizers say the Toronto parade is among the biggest in the world, comparable to festivities in New York and Sydney. Although it was feared that SARS might keep the crowds away, attendance was good along the entire route, even if it was a slightly down from previous years. Like other celebrations, the timing of the march marks the anniversary of the Stonewall riots in 1969, when New York police clashed with the city's gays and lesbians. Other weekend parades taking place around the world included celebrations in Madrid, Berlin, San Francisco and New York.
June 29, 2003 5 By John Ritter, USA TODAY TORONTO - In their hearts, Marc and Barry Chametzky have been married 13 years. Marc even took Barry's name when they adopted Nicholas four years ago. But not until now did matrimony become more than an impossible dream for the California couple. The Chametzkys flew here to tie the knot over Gay Pride weekend in the only place in North America where marriage between same-sex couples is legal. Two weeks ago, Ontario's highest court struck down Canada's ban on same-sex marriages. Days later, Canada's ruling Liberal government gave its blessing to legislation that would extend the ruling to every province. A majority here approve of the actions - yet another fissure with the United States, after Canada's snub of the Iraq invasion and its move to decriminalize marijuana. This country's historic shift is expected to embolden efforts in the USA to legalize same-sex marriage and provide a basis for lawsuits if Canadian marriages by gay Americans are rejected at home. "It is the beginning of a true debate in this country on what marriage itself really is," said Patrick Fagan, a research fellow at the Heritage Foundation, a conservative think tank. The U.S. Supreme Court's rebuff last week of a Texas sodomy law, barring states from prosecuting private sex acts between consenting adults, also bodes well for change, experts say. "There's real ammunition for future challenges," said Nathaniel Persily, a University of Pennsylvania law professor. "If we apply heightened scrutiny because of sexual orientation like we do for race and gender, it's very difficult to see a compelling state interest in denying same-sex marriages." Exhilaration and dread The shift up north hasn't set off a marital rush across the border by gays and lesbians in the USA. Through Sunday, a relatively small number of American couples had plunked down $85 for marriage licenses in Canada's largest city. Those who did, many repeating their vows soon after in a City Hall chapel, found exhilaration in their new status - and dread about returning home. "To finally have the legal standing, at least for a few days, is just unimaginable," Barry Chametzky, 42, said. "And it's a bit daunting because of the legal issues that will be involved." When the Chametzkys arrive in Los Angeles today to start a weeklong honeymoon cruise, legally they'll be the same two single men who left last week. Not only does no state recognize marriage between gay couples, 37 explicitly reserve it for heterosexuals. Vermont offers status close to marriage, "civil union." Lawsuits in Massachusetts and New Jersey, if successful, could crack the wall against same-sex marriage. But for now, even in a few states like California that give gay couples a measure of legal rights and protections, marriage remains taboo. Foes of same-sex marriage aim to keep it that way. "The homosexual lobby is intent on re-engineering our society and a major goal is to deconstruct marriage," said Ken Connor, president of the Family Research Council, a conservative family values group. "We will speak up when our leaders fail to rise to the defense of marriage. We will exert pressure." Connor said pro-family groups will try to advance a House-initiated constitutional amendment to define marriage exclusively as a union between a man and a woman. Though it's given little chance of passage, Connor predicts "polarization" over same-sex marriage. Many conservatives see gay lifestyles as deviant, unhealthy and anti-family. But 2000 Census data for California found gay-couple households and married heterosexuals similar. Gay couples raised an average 2.01 children, compared with 2.08 for married couples. Virtually the same proportions owned homes, with the same $225,000 median value. The 1996 Defense of Marriage Act permits a state to disregard a gay couple's marriage in another state. But gay advocates say that clashes with a long-standing tradition of "comity," under which states and foreign countries accept marriages performed outside their borders. States that ban first cousins from marrying honor those unions from other states. When heterosexual married couples move, they don't register or have to prove they're married. "Same-sex couples will do exactly the same thing," said Evan Wolfson, executive director of Freedom to Marry, a group that promotes marriage equality. "Only they will encounter, at least for a time, a mix of respect, discrimination and uncertainty." Rights and benefits When they apply for jobs and mortgages, buy insurance, pay taxes, seek Social Security benefits and settle estates, gay married couples can be legally discriminated against in most states. The IRS already has said same-sex couples married in Canada can't file married returns. Many states extend some spouse benefits to same-sex partners, but gay wage-earners have to pay federal taxes on health coverage their partners use. Straight filers don't. Same-sex partners in most states can't share health insurance and can be denied inheritance if a partner dies. California set up a domestic partnership registry in 1999 and grants same-sex couples some marriage rights. A pending bill would give them almost all those they don't have, including the ability to file joint state tax returns and ask courts for child support and alimony. Hawaii and Connecticut also offer same-sex couples some partner benefits. Sixty local jurisdictions have registries. Cook County, Ill., which includes Chicago, is considering one. "There were many predictions about what civil unions would do to marriage and values in Vermont," said Richard McCoy, state public health statistics chief. "But people see it hasn't changed our society in a negative fashion." In three years, Vermont has approved 5,693 unions, 85% to out-of-staters. A Gallup Poll in May found public approval of civil unions at 49% nationally, up from 42% in 2000. States may try to avoid lawsuits over same-sex marriage by recognizing gay partners as "family members" instead of spouses," said Lynne Gold-Bikin, a Philadelphia divorce lawyer. "We're such a Bible Belt country, so moralistic, I don't see legal status happening that quickly," she said. "We're more progressive," said Fiona Jeffries, 31, a Brandon, Manitoba, health promotions worker here for Gay Pride revelry with her partner, psychologist Karen Narduzzi, 36. They decided to apply for a marriage license while they're here. "You Americans don't have enough church-state separation. Most of your politicians are pushing a Christian values agenda." Canadian media speculate that a surge of gay tourists coming to marry could boost tourism battered by the SARS outbreak here. At least one tour operator plans to market gay and lesbian wedding packages, including air fare, lodging and limo service. But bookings in hotels that typically fill up for Gay Pride's dyke march, leather ball, downtown parade and other amusements had declined, The Globe and Mail reported
June 29, 2003 6 By Colin McClelland, Associated Press Toronto A huge street parade Sunday celebrating gay pride included newly married homosexual couples who traveled to Toronto to get hitched legally in what has become North America's new gay capital. The event was one of many around the world this weekend celebrating tolerance, even in places that have traditionally been hostile to homosexuality. In India, where homosexuality is a crime, dozens of people marched in Calcutta carrying a huge rainbow flag in a rare public demonstration to demand rights for gays and lesbians. Revelers also turned out in Venezuela and in Brazil. More than 200,000 revelers celebrated Rio de Janeiro's eighth annual gay pride parade, which featured floats and loud music along Copacabana beach. "Intolerance is the original form of violence," the government's national public safety adviser, Luiz Eduardo Soares, said from one of the floats. "Any form of love is worthwhile," he added. On Saturday, hundreds of thousands of revelers gathered on the main Kurfuerstendamm shopping street in Berlin - a city that in 2001 elected Germany's first openly gay mayor. Organizers called on the government to strengthen anti-discrimination laws and recognize persecution because of a person's sexuality as a ground for granting asylum. Marchers in Canada's largest city cheered recent court rulings that expanded homosexual rights in North America. In Toronto, the crowd included Michael Leshner and Michael Stark, who have become symbols of homosexual rights in Canada. The two were married on June 10, hours after an Ontario appeals court ruled as unconstitutional Canada's definition of marriage as only between a man and a woman - paving the way for legalized gay unions. The gay marriage ruling prompted Prime Minister Jean Chrétien's government to promise a new law that legalized same-sex marriage while allowing churches to decide whether to sanctify them. Mr. Leshner and Mr. Stark, their faces painted in rainbow colors, rode in a blue Mitsubishi convertible in the parade, exchanging kisses to cheers from the crowd. Until the new law takes effect, perhaps by winter, the court ruling stands. City Hall was open Sunday to marry visiting couples. Canada is only the third nation to legalize same-sex marriage, along with The Netherlands and Belgium. Canadian Andy Cahyono, 25, and his American partner Shawn Harrington 27, exchanged vows in a civil ceremony at the City Hall marriage chapel, witnessed by two members of a gay rights group. "We thought it would be a great idea to get married during the whole Pride weekend," said Harrington, student union food services manager at the University of Arizona in Tucson. With the United States only legalizing gay sex last week, Mr. Harrington knew his conservative home state was unlikely to consider same-sex marriage any time soon. Since the Canadian court ruling, scores of homosexual couples have come to Ontario from across Canada and the United States for the same reason. Teresa Tedesco, director of legislative services at Toronto City Hall, said the city has issued 255 licences for same-sex marriages in recent weeks, including 30 to U.S. couples. An anticipated rush "hasn't really materialized because a lot of people have said they didn't have time to prepare or plan," Ms. Tedesco said. Still, the increase is a lot compared to the zero figure of before. The parade along Church Street, the downtown epicenter of the city's gay and lesbian community, is an annual event that usually draws more than 500,000 people. This year's crowd was slightly smaller, due to the SARS outbreak. Signs showed the marriage issue was on people's minds, with one saying "Queer liberation does not end at the altar" and another featuring U.S. and Canadian flags proclaiming: "Just married. Thank you Canada." City wedding co-ordinator Jeanne Bowkett said five officials were on duty to perform weddings until the evening in case couples turn up after the parade. All ceremonies are non-denominational, she said, but they can retain vestiges of tradition. "Sometimes they walk down the aisle to music," Ms. Bowkett said, "not necessarily Here Comes the Bride. October 14, 2003 7 by Sarah Elizabeth Brown Two Whitehorse residents stood before their God and community and exchanged wedding vows over the weekend. But in doing what so many other couples have been doing for centuries, Will Petricko and Russ Haggerty made history in the Yukon through what is being hailed as the territory's first legal same-sex marriage. Being able - legally - to say they're married and have the community accept them as such makes all the difference, the two men said. "It was just so healing to me - for all the abuse I suffered in high school, being bullied because I was the queer kid," said Petricko, 52. Being recognized as a married couple as much as heterosexual couples goes a long way to heal the hurts created from being considered a second-class citizen in terms of legal rights, he said. "We really wanted to bring it to the community," said Haggerty, 53. "That's really what it was all about ... full community celebration." Couples have been celebrating their marriages in the "ghettoized" gay community for years, he said, but haven't been accepted by the community as a whole, until now. He said mentors who helped him come to terms with his sexuality were on his mind last Friday. Some of them didn't survive the AIDS epidemic and couldn't live to see a day when their marriages were recognized legally. "They never had the opportunity to celebrate their love, their courageous love ... in the full community," said Haggerty. Last Friday morning, Haggerty and Petricko drove with a Vancouver pastor to the B.C. side of the Yukon-B.C. border to perform the legal ceremony at a spot overlooking Windy Arm. Both men were so choked up with tears they couldn't speak properly. That evening, they reiterated their vows before 200 to 250 people in a packed United Church ceremony in Whitehorse, a service that didn't leave a dry eye in the place, said Haggerty. The evening ceremony started with two of the couple's first nations friends calling the community from the four directions, and continued with Petricko and Haggerty walking in together to a traditional hymn. One of the songs Petricko has written, entitled Humanity Family, was also sung as part of the service. "It was wonderful to see the affirmation from so many people from such a broad spectrum of the community," said Petricko. While the court cases, legal challenges and political wrangling this past summer have meant the couple's marriage is now recognized in law, it's been hurtful to follow the issue in the news, said Petricko, "to see your rights as a human being held out there as a political issue." After court challenges in B.C. and Ontario, those two provinces began accepting same-sex unions during the summer. The federal government has sent its draft legislation making same-sex marriage legal to the Supreme Court of Canada for its opinion, a move that's expected to make the bill virtually indestructible. The nation's top court has set aside time next spring to hear arguments. Originally, Petricko and Haggerty had planned to marry legally in August in Vancouver, but they changed their minds because they thought it was important to take that step in their own community. Because of the conflict between those for and against same-sex marriages, they decided to get married in Whitehorse to put familiar faces to the national issue, so that the community "realizes that these are real flesh and blood people." It feels different to be married and not simply living together, Petricko said. "It's a very solid commitment - it makes commitment real. It's not just saying how you feel, it's something you articulate - you make it reality. "It was a very sacred moment," he said of being wed. "We felt the power of God's love uniting us." The choice of presiding pastor had significant meaning for Petricko and Haggerty. The couple knew they were meant to be together for the rest of their lives about a year and a half ago when they were participating in a Good Friday walk with other parishioners from the First United Church in the heart of Vancouver's Downtown Eastside, one of the poorest and most drug-ridden sections in Canada. Rev. Brian Burke, who led them on that walk, married the two last Friday. They'd been taking a large cross to the police station, courthouse, soup kitchen and other such places when they saw a pair of junkies shooting up down an alley from where they were standing. It was a powerful moment for them both, said Petricko, because it was then that they realized they were kindred spirits with the same purpose. Burke was in that alley with them and realized what it meant to them, said Petricko. "We feel very united in our purpose," he said. "We're on this planet to help other people." January 30, 2004 8 Chantal Hébert The biggest hurdle standing between marriage and same-sex couples in Canada has been Parliament, not the courts. While the body of recent legal opinion on the issue is virtually unanimous in its support of granting gay and heterosexual couples the same marriage rights, there has never been an equivalent level of consensus at the political level. Indeed, if Ottawa had responded to an Ontario Court of Appeal ruling last spring by bringing forward same-sex marriage legislation, the risk would not have been that the bill could have been successfully challenged in the courts at a later date. Rather, the risk was that it might have died an early death on the floor of one of the two houses of Parliament, never making it into law. Last fall, the House of Commons only narrowly voted against retaining the man-woman definition of marriage, demonstrating that the government could not, even if it wanted to, speak with one voice on the issue. Even so-called progressive parties such as the NDP and the Bloc Québécois have to contend with some internal dissent on same-sex marriage. As for the Conservative caucus, its opposition to the move is unlikely to mellow, given that the few former Tory members who did support same-sex marriage happen to be those who decided to abandon ship rather than cohabit with the Canadian Alliance. The government went to the Supreme Court with a reference last summer exclusively to temper the political opposition to same-sex marriage by getting the highest court in the land to bolster the case for it. It is largely in the same spirit that Prime Minister Paul Martin has added a fourth question to the federal government's reference this week. The government is now specifically asking the Court to say whether the current heterosexual definition of marriage is constitutional. As an extra obstacle in the way of same-sex marriage, the question does not amount to much. The widespread sense of the legal community is that those who assume the Court will find the current definition of marriage to be unduly restrictive are on fairly safe ground at present. Nor did Martin - in amending the reference - temper the support of the government for same-sex marriage. If he had decided to change course on the issue - as many in his caucus hoped he would - he could have done so by withdrawing the original reference and scrapping the draft bill on same-sex marriage. He could have endeavoured to defend the current definition of marriage in court. Government lawyers could have argued the case of offering same-sex couples the substitute of civil unions so as to retain the exclusive heterosexual nature of marriage. A government change of heart on same-sex marriage would likely have enraged a lot of socially progressive Canadians. And none of the alternative approaches available to the Prime Minister would likely have changed the end result. But Martin would have been shown to have been dragged to the altar of same-sex marriage under judicial duress. The decision to expand the reference will almost certainly postpone matters. Rather than hear arguments on the matter in April, the Court may do so only in the fall. But those who claim this means Canadians will not get a chance to debate same-sex marriage in the upcoming election are overstating their case. The election is not about how a court should or would interpret the Charter - judges do not make their rulings based on partisan outcomes - but rather on what the policy of the government of the day on the issue is. On that score, Martin has never been clearer than this week. After much public soul-searching, he has decided his lawyers will not stand up in court for the man-woman restrictions on marriage. Nor will they flirt with legally improbable substitute solutions to full-fledged marriage for gay couples. In the unlikely event the courts uphold the current definition of marriage, Martin claims it is still the view of his government that access to the institution should be extended to gay couples. On that basis, any Liberal candidate who portrayed his government in the election as anything other than supportive of same-sex marriage would be distorting reality. More important, looking beyond the campaign to the day when Parliament will inevitably be asked to adopt same-sex legislation in line with the Charter, would a Liberal government really need a Supreme Court ruling against the current definition of marriage to carry the day for gay marriage? The Prime Minister, for one, seems to think so. And given the strong feelings against same-sex marriage running through his cabinet and caucus - feelings he himself cultivated by sitting on the fence on an equality issue for so long - he may, regretfully, have a point. . Chantal Hébert's national affairs column appears Monday, Wednesday and Friday. chebert@thestar.ca.
May 24, 2004 9 by Ben Thompson, 365Gay.com Newscenter, Ottawa Bureau Ottawa –Canadian Prime Minister Paul Martin called a general election Sunday that will pit his creaking Liberal Party against the newly formed Conservatives the result of which could have an impact on same-sex marriage. The election call was widely anticipated even though Martin has a year left in his mandate and the party's standing in the polls has dropped significantly the result of a series of scandals involving millions of dollars paid to ad agencies with ties to the Liberal Party. The election will be held June 28. The most recent polls show Martin will be returned but with a minority government. If that is what happens Martin will be forced to depend on the New Democratic Party to stay in power. For the opposition Conservatives the campaign will revolve around the Liberal Party scandals and same-sex marriage. Martin's predecessor as Liberal leader and Prime Minister, Jean Chretien, refused to appeal court rulings in Ontario and Quebec that overturned the country's ban on same-sex marriage opting instead to rewrite Canadian law to legalize gay marriage. The draft legislation was sent to the Supreme Court of Canada for a constitutional opinion. Martin's government recalled the constitutional questions put to the court and added the possibility of civil unions, although Martin maintains he supports gay marriage. The maneuver has delayed the date when the high Court was to hear the case from spring to late fall, and avoided the issue being front and center during an election campaign. In the meantime, a third province, Quebec, also overturned the federal ban on gay marriage. The Conservatives, a melding of the old Progressive Conservative Party and the right wing Canadian Alliance, under former Alliance leader Stephen Harper oppose gay marriage. The Tories, like Republicans in the US, blame "activist judges" for striking down laws that "protect traditional families". The party wants all appointees to the Supreme Court of Canada to be approved by Parliament. Currently high court judges are appointed by the Prime Minister. If the Conservatives were to win, the party has already said it would invoke an opt out clause in the Constitution to void any Supreme Court decision on gay marriage. The party's campaign will portray the Liberals as too left of center and not representative of Canadian "values". But a minority Liberal government, propped up by the NDP, could have enough votes to push through same-sex marriage legislation. The New Democrats are long time supporters of gay marriage. Same-sex marriage has divided the country for the past two years, polls indicate. The most recent, by Leger Marketing and taken between April 6 and 11, shows that forty-three per cent of respondents support gay marriage, while 47 per cent are opposed. The poll also shows that gay bashing by the Conservatives could backfire on the party. Almost 60 per cent of Canadians surveyed indicated they believe being homophobic is as bad as being racist or anti-Semitic. The campaign officially gets underway today and political observers predict it will be the nastiest in modern history.
May 20, 2004 10 By Marina Jimenez When the family of Al-Hussein, son of a wealthy Jordanian politician, found out he was gay, they threw him down the stairs. While he was recovering in hospital from a broken leg and smashed jaw, his younger brother shot him in the ankle. A bureaucrat in the Jordanian government, his brother was never prosecuted for this act of public violence because it was considered a "family matter." Mr. Hussein knew that under Islamic law, he had got off lightly: He could be stoned to death for committing homosexual acts, or murdered by his family in an honour killing. In 2000, Mr. Hussein's father agreed to send him to Canada to "straighten out." Instead, the wayward and talented son, the "artistic" one with the flamboyant wardrobe, founded a gay support group for Muslims. He made a successful refugee claim and is now starring in a documentary by Filmblanc production company on Canada's gay refugee claimants titled 'Gloriously Free', after words in the Canadian national anthem. "I am doing the film because I want people to know what homosexuals go through in the Middle East," said Mr. Hussein, a youthful 47-year-old in cut-off shorts and a sleeveless red T-shirt, his fingers and ears adorned with silver jewellery. "I have lost everything, but I don't regret coming here. Now I can walk down the street without having to watch my back, wondering if I will be killed." When he left Amman, he gave up a 20-year career as a set designer for Jordan Television, and signed over all his assets – a BMW and Suzuki Jeep, a home and interior design business and his inheritance – to his brother, the one who had tried to kill him. "I don't approve of what my brother did, but I understand why he did it. It was about preserving the family's honour," he says, pulling down his sock to reveal several white scars and tapping his false teeth. The documentary, to be aired on OMNI Television this fall, will also have testimonials from four more gay refugees: a Jamaican man who was beaten; a Brazilian singer whose father forced him to have an operation on his vocal cords to cure his "effeminate" voice; a former U.S. oil-drilling-company manager who is HIV-positive, and a Mexican man. "Canada has become a haven for gay refugees and we are tapping into why this is," said Noemi Weis, president of Toronto-based Filmblanc. Mr. Hussein's life story is one of wealth and privilege, as well as secrecy and shame, as he struggled to fit into a traditional Arab culture that considers homosexuality the greatest sin. The family moved in the same social and political circles as the royal family. His father, who served both as deputy defence minister and as an adviser to the royal family, received special permission from the late King Hussein I for his son to have the same name. Mr. Hussein was educated at the best private schools and grew up in a five-bedroom house, surrounded by servants. There were weekends at Dead Sea resorts, and summer vacations at five-star hotels in Paris. While still a teenager, Mr. Hussein began a clandestine affair with a family "slave" named Amber, a gift to the family from King Hussein's uncle. "Because of the strict segregation of genders in Arab culture, there is a lot of closeted homosexuality," he says. "Most men at some stage have sex with a man because they all have needs. Women are supposed to stay virgins until they marry." Rumours about his homosexuality began to spread, and his father forced him to marry in 1986 when he was 29. He told his fiancée the truth, but she accepted the match because of the Hussein family's social cachet. The couple had three children through artificial insemination. Mr. Hussein tried to conduct his gay affairs discreetly, but in 1996, he fell in love with the head of Jordan's national judo team. He separated from his wife and built a house on the outskirts of Amman where the lovers could meet in secret. One night, his brother caught the two men kissing, and, enraged, threw Mr. Hussein down the stairs, breaking his leg. He underwent surgery, and spent three months in the hospital recovering, with an armed bodyguard posted outside his room. His brother later shot him in the hospital lobby after Mr. Hussein's lover came to visit him. When he was released, it was not to his own home, but to a tiny servant's room with bars on the window in his brother's home. He had become his family's prisoner. A sympathetic aunt in Toronto persuaded his father that Canada could save him. And so Mr. Hussein gave up his pampered life and came to Toronto with $300 (U.S.). He went on to form Salaam, a gay rights organization for Muslims, as well as Wattan, an organization that helps gay refugees. Recently, he summoned the courage to tell his 15-year-old daughter in an e-mail why he left the country. "She wrote me back and said, 'You're still my father and I love you and accept you,'" he said.
April
29, 2004 The federal
government's controversial bill to legalize gay marriage will
be the target of a fierce campaign
between the religious right
and gay-rights groups during the forthcoming election. The public-relations
blitz over same-sex marriage started in earnest yesterday with news
conferences on both sides of the debate. The Globe & Mail, Toronto, Ontario, Canada ( http://www.globeandmail.com ) http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/ArticleNews/TPStory/LAC/20040529/GAYSCHOOL29/TPComment/TopStories May 29,
2004 September 2004 13 Less than a month before the Canadian Supreme Court will consider the legality of same-sex marriage, opposition parties accuse Prime Minister Paul Martin of loading the high court with gay-rights supporters, the conservative Washington Times reported. New on the nine-member court are two judges from the Ontario Court of Appeal, which made controversial rulings extending spousal rights to same-sex couples, the Times reported. “The prime minister, I think, chose those individuals to advance his political agenda in that respect,” Vic Toews, a Conservative Party member of Parliament, told the newspaper. “Most analysts have come to that conclusion.” In the last year, three of Canada’s 10 provinces have included gays in marriage laws, according to the Times. The Supreme Court soon will decide whether the expanded definition of marriage should be extended to the entire nation, the newspaper reported. December 9, 2004 14 TORONTO,
Ontario (AP) The ruling by the court in Ottawa brings to the final stages a long, bitter fight over whether gays and lesbians should be allowed to marry in Canada. Judges in six provinces and one territory have already overturned the traditional definition, allowing thousands of same-sex weddings. Canada would join Belgium and the Netherlands in allowing gay marriage if the government acts to make it legal nationwide. To pass in the House of Commons, the legislation needs the approval of about 44 of the 95 Liberal backbench members of Parliament to obtain a 155-vote majority. One top Liberal predicted the legislation should pass easily after its introduction, likely early next year. It already has the support of the 38-member Liberal cabinet and virtually all the 54 Bloc Quebecois and 19 New Democrat MPs.
15
"Certainly we have our own military regulations but all of them work together in concert and we have a very socially accepting armed forces." The new interim guidelines allow military chaplains to marry gay couples in the Canadian armed forces. A permanent policy will not be in place until the federal government passes a law redefining marriage. Col. Johnstone says the guidelines reflect the primary role of ministering to all armed forces members and their families, adding that they're "essentially a statement of the way the law is going." Ceremonies will be permitted on military bases across the country, but chaplains will not have to perform the service if it conflicts with their religious beliefs. They
would, however, have to find a colleague to conduct the ceremony. "Each
denomination has its own theological and social perspective on that,
no chaplain is required to go against the teachings
of their church," Col.
Johnstone said. The policy is reflective of a changing Canada, he said. "I
think our people understand that the country has changed a lot and
it will continue to change, and the armed forces will reflect that," Col.
Johnstone said.
April
23, 2005
May 28,
2005 18
July 20,
2005 |