Posted on 11/05/2004 8:27:17 AM PST by Michael Goldsberry
SASKATOON (CP) - Saskatchewan became the seventh Canadian jurisdiction to allow same-sex marriages Friday after a judge ruled the current federal law on the subject unconstitutional.
In a five-page ruling, Justice Donna Wilson sided with courts in five other provinces and one territory, saying existing marriage laws discriminate against gay couples.
"The common-law definition of marriage for civil purposes is declared to be 'the lawful union of two persons to the exclusion of all others,' " Wilson wrote.
The Saskatchewan ruling came after five gay couples went to court seeking the right to wed.
At least one couple have said they plan to say their vows as early as this weekend.
Courts in Quebec, British Columbia, Ontario, the Yukon, Manitoba and Nova Scotia have already ruled in the same way. In fact, every recent challenge of marriage laws made has ended up winning, either at the introductory or appeal court level.
There are currently two couples challenging the law in Newfoundland and Labrador, and the Supreme Court of Canada is in the process of evaluating a draft federal law that could make gay weddings legal from coast to coast.
In many ways, Friday's ruling was a foregone conclusion.
With the six other decisions already on the books, the Saskatchewan challenge was not contested by either the province or the federal government.
Lawyers for both told Wilson that they did not oppose the application, but were not in a position to support it either.
The federal government maintained it could not back the change because of the matter currently before the Supreme Court, while the NDP provincial government sidestepped the issue by saying marriage is a federal jurisdiction.
The challenge was spearheaded by Nicole White and Julie Richards of Saskatoon. Both have said that they went ahead with the action, in part because they felt that provincial justice officials were trying to skirt the issue.
They plan to get married next Labour Day.
Wilson ordered that a total of $10,000 in legal costs be paid to the five couples making the application. The tab was split evenly between the two levels of government.
The Supreme Court heard two days of arguments on the issue last month and is expected to rule some time next year.
A lawyer representing Quebec argued that the law would infringe on provincial jurisdiction. Alberta was the only province to argue against changing the traditional definition of marriage.
Lawyer Robert Leurer argued on behalf of Alberta that the bill would, in effect, change the Constitution and that would require a formal constitutional amendment.
He said the word "marriage" in the Constitution must be read in the traditional sense, meaning a union between one man and one woman.
Canadians have been a lot quicker to embrace the idea of gay marriage than their counterparts south of the border.
In Tuesday's United States elections, voters in 11 states overwhelmingly rejected same-sex marriage, favouring constitutional amendments that deny the legal status to homosexual couples.
The amendments won, often by huge margins, in Arkansas, Georgia, Kentucky, Michigan, Mississippi, Montana, North Dakota, Oklahoma, Ohio, Utah and Oregon - the one state where gay-rights activists had hoped to prevail.
Can the people up there petition to get gay marriage on the ballot?
Saskatchewan is a NDP stronghold. They won't use the "notwithstanding" clause.
I don't see the people of Canada embracing gay marriage. I see the COURTS of Canada embracing gay marriage. Consent of the governed is a foreign concept in Canada apparently.
Unfortunately direct-democracy isn't as valued in Canada. And unfortunately, if there was a referendum on the subject, most people, with the exception of the province of Alberta, would vote in favor of gay marriage anyway.
Woe Canada! I wonder ifr thet filing in NewFoundland was in Goose Bay.
The court is expected to reject the self-marriage petition, but will rule in favor of bikers after adding an amendment requiring momas to simichrome the 'scoot' once a week.
All of you guys in Alberta are welcome to come on down! :D
We must stay strong in our faith and stand against the Heathens and Sodomites
What do you get when you cross a Donkey with a green onion (Spring Onion)??
V
V
V
V
V
V
V
V
V
V
Most of the time you an Onion with long green floppy ears,
but everyonce is a while, when you really get lucky
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
You get a piece of A$$ that brings tears to your eyes!
no. Republic of Alberta is much better idea. All those american dems are in for a shock. Alberta is a one-party rule by conservative. It's a "tribal" politic ther.
I reckon you're right. I wouldn't leave my homeland, they oughtn't have to leave theirs.
More power to em!
O Canada (with apologies to Calixa Lavallee)
O Canada!
Our multi-culti land!
True sodomite love in all thy sons command.
With swishing gait we see thee rise,
The perverts strong and free!
With a “Queer Eye”,
O Canada, we mince and prance for thee.
God’s been kicked out, so we are “free”!
O Canada, we stand for sodomy.
O Canada, we stand for sodomy.
well, you should check out some Alberta political history. You'll be shock that there is such a thing as a one-party rule conservative canada. Liberals and NDP don't a chance here.
I think we need them as our 51st state.
"Bring it on!"
Have any Canadian provinces or territories refused to "go along"?
the dems would shutdown the oil.
And so proceeds the Lemming parade.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.