|
ARE THE BC LITIGANT
COUPLES GET MARRIED?
Several couples got hitched! First, Elizabeth
and Dawn Barbeau were married in Toronto
June 21 2003. Then Jane Eaton Hamilton and
Joy Masuhara wed in a double ceremony with
Tanya and Melinda Chambers Roy June 28 2003
in Toronto. Jane and Joy held their wedding
and reception August 9 2003, and Tanya and
Melinda held theirs September 6 2003. Tess
Healy and Wendy Young were married Aug 31,
2003, Pride weekend in Prince George, BC,
Lloyd Thornhill and
Bob Peacock; Robin Roberts and Diana Denny;
and Murray and Peter Corren all married
in the summer of 2004. Jane and Joy attended
all the weddings except Dawn and Elizabeth's
and Tess and Wendy's, and they were all
terrific. Stay tuned for pictures in the
wedding galleries at www.queermarriage.com.
I'M GAY AND LIVE IN ANOTHER COUNTRY.
CAN I GET MARRIED IN CANADA? WILL IT BE
LEGAL WHERE I LIVE?
Yes, you can get
married anywhere it's legal here-hopefully
before long, that will be everywhere. If
you have had a divorce in any other country
and want to marry in Ontario, there are
special foreign divorce requirements you
need to meet. There are no residency requirements
anywhere in Canada to marry, but there are
to divorce. It may be that you will have
a legal marriage, but no possibility of
divorce.
Your gay marriage
here is probably technically legal everywhere
else, but having it recognized as such is
another matter. Most countries have reciprocal
international treaties recognizing each
other's marriages, but many countries will
expressly restrict recognizing queer marriages.
People are marrying
here and taking their own governments to
court for that recognition.
For specifics on
marriage in Canada, google 'Vital Statistics'
for the province you want to marry in, which
will bring up the specific provincial requirements.
WHO IS IN CHARGE
OF MARRIAGE IN CANADA?
Responsibility for marriage is divided between
the federal and provincial governments.
The federal government determines the definition
of marriage, meaning who can marry whom,
while the provinces issue marriage licenses
and determine the requirements of the marriage
ceremony.
WHAT IS THE CURRENT
POLITICAL STATUS IN CANADA FOR SAME-SEX
MARRIAGE?
As of June 2004, the situation is mostly
good. In short, the Supreme Court of Canada
gave same-sex marriage the go-ahead, and
now the federal government has introduced
Bill C-38 into the House of Commons for
debate. If it passes, ssm will be legal
everywhere in the country; if not, only
the provinces with successful court cases
will continue.
Justices in 7 provinces and 1 territory
overturned the federal bar to same-sex marriage
and rewrote the judge-written law, which
once stated marriage as between “one
man and one woman” as now being between
“two persons”. This should have
applied across the country, being a federal
law changed as of June 10 2003. However,
some provinces and territories have balked.
It is probably illegal for couples to be
denied marriage licences anywhere across
the country. The federal government, after
fighting against us so hard, capitulated.
First they said they wouldn’t appeal
to the Supreme Court of Canada. Then they
sent the Supreme Court what’s called
a “reference”—essentially
asking their legal opinion on the legislation
the government has decided to draft, which
came back all positive for our side.
But they backtracked
a little by agreeing to let Members of Parliament
vote on C-38 not according to party lines
but according to their consciences. This
is called a “free vote.” Justice
Minister Irwin Cotler has been saying we
can’t have a country-wide referendum
on this issue because that amounts to the
majority deciding on minority rights, but
his party is still allowing a free vote
on minority rights.
CAN'T WE JUST
HAVE RDPs?
Registered Domestic
Partnerships are a provincial solution--and
not a very good one--to a federal jurisdictional
question. The only provinces in Canada which
currently have RDPs are Nova Scotia and
Quebec. Under RDPs, couples-- gay, but preferably
also straight--may go to City Hall to register
their unions. But they still won’t
have all the benefits of marriage--in fact,
in Nova Scotia they still don’t have
as many rights as common-law queer couples
already have in BC without RDPs.
Although RDPs may have their place as a
choice for straight and gay couples who
want to avoid marriage, and though they
may increase same-sex couple benefits in
jurisdictions where there are none or few,
overall they are bad news. They are being
used as a method to stifle same-sex couples
who want equal marriage rights. These "marriage
lites" entrench differences between
heterosexual and homosexual unions. In these
regimes, hets have their choice: RDP or
marriage. Queers do not. Queers can't marry.
Except some churches do marry queers, so
there would still be married queers if the
government goes that route, and a lot of
pissed off atheists.
Think of all the times that communities
have said, Well, we'll stop all proclamations
rather than proclaim Gay Pride, or that
libraries have said, Well, we'll get rid
of all our community newspapers so we don't
have to carry gay ones.
U nlike federal marriages, RDPs or civil
unions wouldn't be portable from one jurisdiction
to another. (A couple registering their
union in Nova Scotia couldn't move that
registration to Saskatchewan, for instance.)
They would never be recognized in the US
or abroad.
They are very limited in what rights they
confer--they may, for instance and most
glaringly, leave out the right to adopt.
Additionally, they are not considered by
anyone to be of equal merit:
They will not redress the problems we have
taking our partners home to holiday dinners
and having them accepted on the same footing
as our straight siblings' spouses.
As well, I could register my union in Nova
Scotia in the afternoon, and that night--without
dissolving it, mind you--marry a man. (It
goes without saying that this goes only
one way. I could not marry a man then register
my lesbian partnership without first getting
a divorce.)
Rosa Parks didn’t refuse to move to
the back of the bus because she thought
it was more comfortable at the front, or
because she’d get to her destination
sooner. She moved up because she knew being
relegated to the ack was discriminatory
and unjust.
Even if we have RDPs, we still need full
and equal marriage rights for all Canadian
citizens.
WHEN CAN GAYS IN OTHER PROVINCES MARRY?
Soon, soon. Bill C-38 must pass, or cases
must go forward in recalcitrant places.
I THINK MARRIAGE
IS A CORRUPT HETEROSEXUAL INSTITUTION.
Thirty percent of heterosexual marriages
fall apart in this country, but that means
seventy percent don’t. Though marriage
between heterosexuals has historically been
used to keep women oppressed, that won't
be as true among same-sex couples since
there is no gender disparity. A woman and
a woman or a man and a man get to make up
their own sex roles. There aren't any heterosexuals
in our beds just because we’re married.
If queers can get married, marriage is a
queer institution and we can make of it
what we want. It'll become part of our culture,
not outside our culture.
ISN'T REAL QUEER LIFE ABOUT SEXUAL FREEDOM?
People who practice same-sex sexual alternatives
will continue to practice them if there’s
queer marriage, just as they do in heterosexual
culture. People have always thought the
sky would fall if society changed. This
is exactly what was said about giving Canadian
women the vote, or allowing divorce, or
allowing different races to marry, or about
the advent of birth control. The sky never
did fell. The sky won’t fall when queer
marriage is allowed, either. It will be
pretty anti-climactic.
BUT I JUST DON'T WANT TO GET MARRIED.
Well, lucky you, because you now have the
right not to get married. The decision is
no longer imposed on you by the federal
government.
Whether or not you want to get married,
you should support full equality for all
Canadians. Equality means the same rules
and rights and obligations for every citizen.
Right now queers are marginalized and our
relationships are not considered good enough
for marriage. In the court case, various
religious leaders said that we would ruin
marriage if we were allowed to join. Is
this the kind of message you want to have
perpetuated about gay people? We are good
enough to be married and we should have
the choice, one way or the other. For us,
marriage is a kind of affirmative action
program. It is our visibility that erodes
hatred against us, and marriage makes us
visible.
Lots of gays and lesbians have had miserable
times with heterosexual marriage. Our partners
have not been invited to family weddings,
or, if allowed to attend, have not been
introduced as equivalent to a daughter or
son-in-law. We have sometimes been told
we have to shave our armpits or legs, or
wear puffy-sleeved dresses. We have sometimes
been forbidden to dance with each other.
We have sometimes danced with each other
anyhow and have set tongues to wagging.
WON’T I JUST BE APING STRAIGHTS
BY MARRYING?
Think how long it took you to come out.
We’re not about to turn straight. Every
queer we’ve talked to who is married
or about to marry loves being gay. Being
gay is great. The only thing wrong with
it is still, as always, heterosexual reactions
to it. We’ll bring our gay traditions
and creativity to marriage. We’ll be
married queers, not straight-pretenders.
RELIGIOUS VERSUS
CIVIL MARRIAGE
Civil marriage is a marriage recognized
by the state. All the rights and responsibilities
accorded to those who are married are based
on civil marriage. Religious institutions
have the right to regulate who is married
under the rules of their particular religion.
This has no bearing on the recognition of
civil marriages by the government and is
a right enshrined in Canada's Charter of
Rights and Freedoms.
Couples may obtain both a religious marriage
and a civil marriage in one ceremony. The
cases before the courts sought to enable
those churches which support same-sex marriage
to issue marriage licences, but did not
seek to require churches who oppose equal
marriage rights to marry same-sex couples.
WON'T THE SKY FALL?
Hello, Kitty. It's been nearly two years
as I write this and it's still holding up
there nicely.
WHY MARRIAGE?
Marriage is the most prominent way in which
two peoples' romantic love and commitment
to each other are recognized and affirmed.
Excluding gays and lesbians from the institution
of marriage sends a clear message that same-sex
couples are somehow not worthy of such recognition
and affirmation. On the other hand, including
same-sex couples in civil marriage sends
a positive message to all Canadians, one
that says that regardless of whether you
love a man or a woman, that love will be
valued, honoured and affirmed.
in the past, when young Canadians discovered
that they were gay or lesbian, they also
realized that the choice of whether to marry
or not was one they could not contemplate.
A strong sense of exclusion flowed from
this realization. Gays and lesbians felt
stressed when asked to celebrate marriages
of friends or family members, as they knew
that society would not permit them to celebrate
in the same way --not for any good reason,
but simply because they were gay or lesbian.
HOW WILL MARRIAGE FOR SAME-SEX COUPLES AFFECT
ME?
The biggest impact such a change would have
will be for gay and lesbian people, who
can choose whether they will marry, and
for their children who won't feel so outcast.
This would have little effect on heterosexuals,
as heterosexuals already have the choice
to marry. Most people have a gay or lesbian
person in their life, either a friend, co-worker
or even a family member. You may even have
a son, daughter or grandchild who is gay
or lesbian. Be kind to them.
WHAT IS MARRIAGE REALLY ABOUT?
Marriage is about love and commitment. Since
gay and lesbian couples can have the same
level of love and commitment as heterosexual
couples, denying them the right to a legal
marriage is discriminatory. This is a principle
that violates our Constitution, which guarantees
equality for all Canadians.
Some members of society justify discrimination
against gay and lesbians, arguing that it
is different then discrimination based on
race or gender. The rhetoric now being used
against gay and lesbian marriage (including
that it destroys the institution of marriage)
has been used in the past against allowing
married women to own property, legalizing
contraception, inter-racial marriage, and
making women the legal equals of their husband.
Discrimination was not fair then and it
should not be allowed now.
ISN'T MARRIAGE ABOUT CHILDREN?
It is true that many people choose to marry
at least in part for the benefit of their
children. However, many married couples
cannot or choose not to have children and
they are not prevented from marrying. Many
lesbian and gay couples do have children
and allowing them to marry only strengthens
these families and better protect these
children. Allowing gay and lesbian couples
to marry will also be good for families,
as it will increase acceptance of gay and
lesbian family members.
--updated Feb. 17,
2005
|
