Posted on 02/28/2005 7:41:38 AM PST by DBeers
“Man and Woman”, “Wife”, “Husband”, “Widow”, “Widower” Banished From all Ontario Law
Terms, when referring to spouses, are banned from all government programs, services, documents
Toronto, February 25, 2005 (LifeSiteNews.com) – With the obscenely rapid, three-day introduction and passage of its same-sex “marriage” Bill 171, the Ontario government has advanced a revolutionary change in the way all laws and government programs and institutions refer to marriage and married persons. Everything referring to spouses must now be gender neutral.
No longer can a married couple be referred to as “husband and wife” or “man and woman”. The terms “Widow” and “widower” are also struck from government statutes. Attorney General Michael Bryant stated, on introducing the bill, "Currently, the statutes offend the Charter of Rights and Freedoms".
Bryant conitnued, "The bill removes references to gender and gender-specific language from Ontario definitions of spousal terms and uses one term, 'spouse', to include opposite-sex couples and same-sex couples who are married or who live together in conjugal relationships outside of marriage."
Considering the massive size and pervasiveness of government, this is certain to gradually lead to a general devaluation of marriage throughout the province – all for the purpose of imposing “equality” for that tiny number of same-sex couples that chooses to “marry”, taking advantage of activist judge imposed re-definition of marriage.
“Spouse” is redefined in the new law to concur with the re-definition of “marriage” imposed by activist judges, but not yet passed in the federal parliament, that now includes same-sex couples.
A perusal of the bill shows substitutions for previously used spousal terms in numerous places throughout 73 Ontario Statutes as follows:
“Widows”, widowers” replaced by “surviving spouses”
“A person of the opposite sex” replaced by “a person”
“Wives, husbands” replaced by “spouses”
“Two persons of the opposite sex” replaced by “two persons”
“The wife or husband” replaced by “spouse”
“A husband or wife” replaced by “spouse”
“The husband and wife” replaced by “the spouses”
“A man and a woman” replaced by “two persons”
“Husband and wife” replaced by “spouses”
“Cohabited as man and wife” replaced by “cohabited as a married couple”
“Same-sex partner” replaced by “spouse”
Following is the list of Statutes affected by the marriage redefinition language requirements:
Absentees Act
Accumulations Act
Assessment Act
Business Corporations Act
Change of Name Act
Charitable Institutions Act
Child and Family Services Act
Children's Law Reform Act
City of Toronto Act, 1997 (No. 2)
Commercial Tenancies Act
Compensation for Victims of Crime Act
Consumer Reporting Act
Conveyancing and Law of Property Act
Co-operative Corporations Act
Coroners Act
Corporations Act
Courts of Justice Act
Credit Unions and Caisses Populaires Act, 1994
Declarations of Death Act, 2002
Domestic Violence Protection Act, 2000
Education Act
Election Act
Employment Standards Act, 2000
Estates Act
Evidence Act
Execution Act
Family Law Act
Family Responsibility and Support Arrears Enforcement Act, 1996
Fuel Tax Act
Gasoline Tax Act
Homes for the Aged and Rest Homes Act
Human Rights Code
Solemnization of marriage by religious officials
Income Tax Act
Independent Health Facilities Act
Insurance Act
Land Transfer Tax Act
Legislative Assembly Act
Loan and Trust Corporations Act
Marriage Act
Members' Integrity Act, 1994
Mental Hospitals Act
Mortgages Act
MPPs Pension Act, 1996
Municipal Act, 2001
Municipal Conflict of Interest Act
Municipal Health Services Act
Northern Services Boards Act
Nursing Homes Act
Ontario Disability Support Program Act, 1997
Ontario Energy Board Act, 1998
Ontario Home Ownership Savings Plan Act
Ontario Municipal Employees Retirement System Act
Ontario Works Act, 1997
Partnerships Act
Pension Benefits Act
Perpetuities Act
Police Services Act
Prohibiting Profiting from Recounting Crimes Act, 2002
Public Libraries Act
Public Service Pension Act
Retail Sales Tax Act
SARS Assistance and Recovery Strategy Act, 2003
Securities Act
Substitute Decisions Act, 1992
Succession Law Reform Act
Tenant Protection Act, 1997
Tobacco Tax Act
Toronto Islands Residential Community Stewardship Act, 1993
Trillium Gift of Life Network Act
Trustee Act
Victims' Bill of Rights, 1995
Workplace Safety and Insurance Act, 1997
See Ontario Passes Same-Sex Marriage Bill - All Party Collusion to Avoid Accountability Succeeds http://www.lifesite.net/ldn/2005/feb/05022408.html
See the complete legislation http://www.ontla.on.ca/documents/Bills/38_Parliament/Session1/b171_e.htm
Romeo and Romiet?
Conehead.
It's time to invade Canada again, defeat them this time, and convert them to Christianity.
Ping!
Way to go Canada, we love to see you bending over for the homo high hard one. LOL
LOL.
One can only hope. Their life style is a sin and we can hate that, and only hope they repent.
Does the United States recognize Canadian licensed marriages? If so, is our Congress nullifying that standing?
He who controls the words controls the argument. This is nothing but communist style propaganda.
Funny how liberals hate bannings and censorship yet practice it to the extreme.
BTTT...
Canadians are subjects to the British Crown and I guess Noble, Princely, Royal, and Imperial Titles get a past so far to the gender neutral laws.
King, Queen
Prince, Princess
Grand Duke, Grand Duchess
Duke. Duchess
Marquess, Marchioness
Earl, Countess
Baron, Baronet
Baron, Baroness
Viscount, Viscountess
Sir,Lady
Can't sell these in Canada
The ID chip will be the next 'logical' solution to this self-created mess. It could track both medical and financial info. Some will complain, but the logic will be there. It won't really work in the end, just create an even larger mess, a giant nanny state like out of bad science fiction. And for now? Well, with their superior healthcare (not!), a quick, affordable dna scan will quickly rule out any illness or other issues. Barf. They are racing toward one giant quagmire. And since any 'person' can 'marry' whatever other 'person', why let the old-fashioned notion of close relative interfer, with the possible ensuing genetic issues? In this Canada rushing out of control, people will be urged to have just one or 2 kids for sake of the environment, with free abortions for those that are not perfect or are unplanned or unwanted. And any issues that should have been preventable? One downward spiral. I keep waiting for cooler heads to prevail on this, but...
Idiots Eh?
ROTFLMAO -I will have to employ that term into my homosexual opposition lexicon...
“Man and Woman”
Well, we could just say "human unit," but that would unfairly discriminate against non-human organisms.
I've thought the same thing -- that the Western World, at least, is heading towards Brave New World. In the book, marriage and family have disappeared, love is a dirty word, promiscuity is enouraged and expected, the population is doped up on soma and watches the virtual reality feelies, and the citizenry is taken care of. Aldous Huxley imagined promiscuity, but of the heterosexual variety -- I suppose even he didn't think that society would sink so low as to celebrate homosexuality. On the other hand, perhaps his publishers wouldn't permit it -- the book was originally published in the early 1930s. Society as a whole still had standards of decency.
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.