|
 
PEOPLE OF THE SAME GENDER CAN NOW LEGALLY GET MARRIED IN CANADA, THE NETHERLANDS, SPAIN AND BELGIUM. SHOULD PERSONS OF THE SAME GENDER BE ALLOWED TO MARRY? WHAT DO YOU THINK? VOTE IN OUR SURVEY AT THE BOTTOM OF THIS PAGE.
UPDATE - NOVEMBER 19,2003
Gays and lesbians in Massachusetts have won the right to marry after the highest court in that state decided to follow the lead of the Ontario Court of Appeal in coming to grips with "evolving" cultural standards.
The Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court delivered a long-awaited ruling on November 18th, a split decision that sent reverberations across the country and made it virtually certain that gay rights will become an issue in next year's presidential election.
The court ruled 4-3 that it would violate the state constitution to bar from marrying any of seven gay and lesbian couples, who took their case to the highest court, but it stopped short of ordering immediate issuing of marriage licences.
Instead, it gave the state legislature 180 days to deal with the decision, a move which was more of a courtesy, because there is no way for state representatives to overturn the court in such a tight timeframe.
Massachusetts Governor Mitt Romney, a Republican, said he would have no choice but to respect the high court ruling, but he added he would have the legislature go ahead and craft a constitutional amendment defining marriage as a union between a man and a woman.
In Hawaii and Alaska, courts also have ruled that states do not have a right to deny marriage to gay couples but the decisions were followed by the adoption of state constitutional amendments limiting marriage to a man and woman.
Under Massachusetts law, such a constitutional amendment could not be passed by voters until 2006.
In Britain, where he began a three-day state visit, President George W. Bush said the Massachusetts decision violated the principle that "marriage is a sacred institution between a man and a woman,"
Bush vowed to work with congressional leaders "to do what is legally necessary to defend the sanctity of marriage."
Those fighting for gay rights in this country were ecstatic.
"A court has finally had the courage to say this is an issue of human equality and human dignity and it is time the government treated these people fairly," said lawyer Mary Bonauto.
She represented Hillary and Julie Goodridge, a couple who had been together for 16 years and have a five-year-old daughter.
The couple launched their lawsuit after being denied a marriage licence in 2001. They said yesterday they would marry as soon as they could.
Massachusetts Chief Justice Margaret Marshall, writing for the majority, said: "Barring an individual from the protections, benefits, and obligations of civil marriage solely because that person would marry a person of the same sex violates the Massachusetts constitution."
She called marriage a "vital institution" which "nurtures love and mutual support (and) brings stability to our society."
Marshall also said it confers on marriage partners a litany of legal, financial and social benefits as well as heavy social and financial obligations.
Couples should be denied neither merely because they have chosen to wed someone of the same sex, she wrote.
The court also said it backed the Ontario Court of Appeal decision and felt the Canadian court had acted correctly when faced with an inherited civil law in a time of different cultural standards.
"We face a problem similar to one that recently confronted the Court of Appeal for Ontario, the highest court of that Canadian province, when it considered the constitutionality of the same-sex marriage ban under Canada's Federal Constitution, the Charter of Rights and Freedoms," it wrote.
*Tim Harper - Toronto Star
UPDATE - JULY 8,2003
British Columbia Appeal Court approves same-sex marriages:
The B.C. Court of Appeal lifted a one-year moratorium on same-sex marriages today, clearing the way for couples to tie the knot immediately.
The decision means British Columbia joins Ontario in clearing the way for marriages by gay and lesbian couples.
A gay couple took immediate advantage of the ruling, walking into a nearby B.C. government office to obtain a marriage licence.
The Appeal Court had earlier ruled in favour of same-sex marriages but imposed a ban until next July to permit the federal government to draft a new law redefining marriage.
But gay groups asked the court to revisit its moratorium after an Ontario Court of Appeal ruling opened the door to same-sex marriages in that province and Ottawa began drafting a new marriage law.
The three-member Appeal Court panel noted that neither the B.C. nor federal attorneys general were opposing a lifting of the ban.
"It is also apparent that any further delay in implementing the remedies will result in an unequal application of the law between Ontario and British Columbia," the decision said.
UPDATE - JULY 7,2003
Coalition to battle same-sex marriages:
Two conservative family and religious groups say they will attempt to appeal an Ontario court decision that legalized same-sex marriage, but a lawyer for a church that performs gay weddings, the Metropolitan Community Church, Doug Elliot, says the case is over and it is "none of their business". The Interfaith Coalition on Marriage and Family in Ontario announced they will seek leave to appeal the June 10 court ruling to the Supreme Court of Canada. The federal government had the option of appealing but declined to do so.
UPDATE - JUNE,10 2003, ONTARIO, CANADA:
Ontario will register gay marriages:
Telephones at the Toronto city hall marriage licence office were "ringing off the hook" officials said today (June 12,2003)as gay and lesbian couples across Canada tried to take advantage of an Ontario court ruling that legalized same-sex marriages in the province.
Ontario's attorney general promised the province will abide by the court ruling and acknowledge the marriages of gay and lesbian couples, the Toronto Star reports.
Asked if Ontario would register the marriages, Norm Sterling said: "Absolutely."
"We said during the appeal process that the province of Ontario would follow the court ruling. We made that clear during the process," he said.
Sterling said it would be "difficult" to take away the marriages if the Supreme Court of Canada reversed the decision.
Ontario's Appeal Court decision joins court rulings in British Columbia and Quebec that also back same-sex unions.
However, it differs in that it calls for the new definition to take place immediately, allowing gay and lesbian couples to marry now.
Couples from as far away as Nova Scotia and Orlando, Fla., have inquired about Ontario licences in the wake of the Appeal Court decision that pronounced Ottawa's definition of marriage unconstitutional, said employees fielding calls at Toronto City Hall.
"Our phones are ringing off the hook," said one worker. "After the news coverage and all, I guess they're all anxious to get in."
Those wishing to get a marriage licence in Ontario don't need to live in the province or even live in Canada, said Ross.
However, they must still travel to Ontario because the Appeal Court decision is not binding across the country, say law experts.
A same-sex couple outside of Ontario would have to go to court in their province to test the law and have it changed in their jurisdiction, said constitutional law expert Neil Finkelstein.
"Generally speaking, absent a good reason, a lower court in a different province will follow the court of appeal of another province unless there's a good reason not to," he said.
"My guess is you're going to find the authorities in the different provinces saying no until they find out how the land lies."
More optimistic observers suggested those seeking a marriage licence could do so anywhere in Canada, since the ruling redefines federal law.
"There's nothing preventing a same-sex couple in Saskatchewan, let's say, from going to their local (vital statistics office), filling out the licence application and their (province) choosing to issue that," said John Fisher, director of advocacy for the gay and lesbian group EGALE.
"That's subject to their willingness to act on the court's decision but the green light has been given by the Ontario Court of Appeal."
Of course, the greatest likelihood of a same-sex couple successfully getting a licence is Ontario where the law is crystal clear, he notes.
In the meantime, it's still to be determined whether couples who travel to Ontario for a legal wedding can be assured their marital status will remain intact when they return to their home province.
"A marriage is a marriage and it's legal across the country," Fisher said by cell phone from the city hall in Ottawa, where he watched two lesbian couples become the city's first to obtain same-sex marriage licences.
"They have marriages that are valid in law, that can't be taken away by anybody and the legality of those marriages is applicable across Canada. If in practice some decision-maker refuses to acknowledge the validity of them, then that person would be acting outside the law."
GAY HUWELIKE HET ONLANGS DIE EERSTE GROENVLAG IN KANADA GEKRY NA 'N EENPARIGE HOFUITSPRAAK DEUR DRIE REGTERS IN ONTARIO. HUIDIGLIK IS GAY HUWELIKE MET GELYKE STATUS AAN HETEROSEKSUELE HUWELIKE, REEDS MOONTLIK IN DUITSLAND EN NEDERLAND. DIE WEDLOOP IS AAN OM TE SIEN OF KANADA OF SUID-AFRIKA DIE DERDE LAND GAAN WORD OM SULKE VERBINTENISSE WETTIG TE VERKLAAR. Hoe voel jy hieroor? Epos jou mening aan LEKKERBEK dan publiseer ons dit SONDER enige veranderinge by die kommentaar vir- of teen gay huwelike.
"GEE ALMAL GELYKE REGTE"
*Ek stem beslis saam. Dis omtrent tyd dat gay mense gelyke regte het. Wat maak hetero's so spesiaal dat hulle spesiale regte bo ander mense moet geniet?
*In Duitsland en Nederland trou gays reeds wettiglik en daar is ook soortgelyk aan trou verbintenisse in Swede, Finland en Denemarke. Hierdie wetgewing het nie 'n vlieg skade gedoen nie, net mense gelukkig gemaak.
*Baie Bybelse wette wat gay-wees verdoem geld nie meer vandag nie. In Bybelse dae byvoorbeeld is vroue ook nie in die kerk toegelaat nie en is selfs verwagtend in die woestyn ingestuur om daar te gaan sterf.
*Christendabteering is sinneloos: Net 'n fraksie van die wêreld se bevolking is Christene. Buddisme bv wat baie magtiger is, keer nie homoseksueliteit af nie.
*As die Bybel ons iets leer, dan is dit om mekaar ONVOORWAARDELIK lief te hê en te aanvaar.
*Dis net reg dat elke mens met sy lewe kan maak net wat hy/sy wil.
*Die Bybel is verkeerd uit die oorspronklike Grieks vertaal. In Romeine word dit verkeerdelik vertaal dat God dit teen homoseksualiteit het. God het dit wel teen promiskuïteit maar nie homoseksualisme nie.
*Selfs die NGK wat apartheid vir 300 jaar goedgepraat het, begin dit nou besef dat hulle verkeerd was: ook wat homoseksualisme aanbetref.
*Gelukkig begin die susterskerke nou wakker te word. Hulle jare lange skynheilige beleid van "ons aanvaar jou as mens maar nie jou sonde nie", begin nou verdwyn nadat dominee na dominee uit die kas begin kruip.
|
|
"GEMEENSKAPPE GAAN VERKRUMMEL"
*Wanneer gays ook kan trou, gaan gemeenskappe verkrummel. Die groeikoers gaan agteruit beweeg. Hierdie mense kan tog nie voortplant nie.
*Dis teen die natuur van 'n mens om gay te wil wees - Adam en Eva is gemaak nie Adam en Steve nie.
*Die huwelik is 'n heilige instelling tussen man en vrou - dit moet so gehou word.
*Ek stem saam met Suid-Afrika se president - homoseksualisme is 'n Westerse uitvinding. Ek kan nie verstaan dat die wyse Mandela dit kan goedkeur nie?
*Presidente keur homo's af, bv Mugabe en Njoma - dit beletsel Afrika met sulke praatjies.
*Waarom sal 'n man en 'n man nou wou trou? Hulle kry klaar gelyke regte wat pensioen ens aanbetref in Suid-Afrika?
*Nee nee nee, wat gaan nou aan dat gay mense inbreek wil maak om ons leefwyse as normale mense. Ek gee nie om wat hulle privaat doen agter geslote deure nie, maar hoe kan sulke wetgewing toegelaat word. Nog erger is al die openlike gay mense - selfs in die Engelse parlement en twee ministers!
ADOPTION IN CANADA
Same-sex partners are using their new legal right to adopt. But one gay couple finds the road long and harrowing. Thomas Jones, a scrupulously disciplined man in a crisply ironed green-checked shirt, weeps in spite of himself, a normally stiff upper lip quivering. He recalls the sweet, simple words of a schoolteacher that altered the course of an awkward, unhappy boy's life. On the final day of Grade 6, she had asked each student to stand up, and she would pronounce the qualities she most admired. When Jones rose, she called him a leader hiding in the role of a follower with all the school's bad apples. If he were to flourish, she said, he had to learn to be himself. "That day, I gave myself a good shake. It was a day that has truly stayed with me, and given me more strength than she will ever know." Jones is recounting his rocky childhood to adoption worker Pat Baker in the room where social workers at the Children's Aid Society of Toronto have grilled thousands of would-be adoptive parents, gathering deeply personal histories and perspectives for the home study that all adoptions require. But only a handful of times has an adoption worker sat across from a gay man who wants to break the mold of the traditional Canadian family. The Toronto CAS has only placed 20 children with same-sex couples. For Baker, who has prepared hundreds of home studies, Jones and his partner, Robert Gibson, are her first gay prospective parents. Jones' teacher was right. The youngest child of a doomed marriage between a depressed mother and a violent, alcoholic father, Jones wasn't destined for the small-town machismo of Harley-Davidson motorcycles and tattoos of his older brothers and sisters, raised in foster care after the family broke apart. A high school debating team member who later won a spot on a national race-walking team, his would be a cosmopolitan life of management jobs in health institutions and renovating dilapidated rooming houses. It is a sign of the times that Jones is here, as submissive to the human urge to raise a child as the infertile married couples who usually visit the office.
While most children's aid societies have yet to place a child with a gay or lesbian couple, the Toronto agency advertises for prospective foster and adoptive couples in same-sex publications, fanning the flames of a thriving parenthood movement among gay men. "Lots and lots of gay men are starting to think about having kids," says Rachel Epstein, project co-ordinator of the Lesbian, Gay, Bi-sexual and Transgendered Parenting Network at the Family Service Association of Toronto, a job created last year to meet the demand among same-sex couples to become parents."There was a whole lesbian baby boom over the last 15 years, but gay men are just getting there," she says. "It's become more possible because of a combination of policy changes and technology and social recognition. People are seeing themselves as more entitled to becoming parents."
While single gays and lesbians have adopted children for years - their sexuality never at issue during the course of the home study - only in the last few years have couples been able to. In a 1995 case of a lesbian wanting to adopt her partner's child, an Ontario provincial court judge ruled that the definition of spouse in Ontario's adoption law as a person of the opposite sex was unconstitutional. It turned the sanctity of the traditional family on its ear. A year later, British Columbia became the first place in the world to pass an adoption law that treats same-sex couples as spouses, as eligible as any husband and wife to adopt. A year after that, in a case involving a lesbian suing her former lover for support, the Supreme Court of Canada ruled that Ontario's law limiting spousal support to couples of the opposite sex was unconstitutional. The legal fight for same-sex adoption became an open-and-shut case. "That case made it clear that same-sex couples are entitled to equal recognition at law and that it's discriminatory and not justifiable to engage in differential treatment," says Joanna Radbord, one of the lawyers who fought the case at the Supreme Court.
"That makes it clear across the board everywhere. Adoption legislation, where it hasn't been changed, should be changed." Several provinces and territories have since either drafted laws to grant same-sex couples the right to adopt, or lost battles in the courts to prevent gay and lesbian couples from adopting. Now, Prince Edward Island and New Brunswick are among the few provinces that continue to treat same-sex couples differently. Canada has become one of the world's most progressive nations in recognizing the rights of gay and lesbian couples to adopt. In the United States, where traditional family values dominate politics, only New Jersey allows gays and lesbians to adopt as couples. And the socially open-minded countries of northern Europe - other than the Netherlands where same-sex adoption is already legal - are only now reviewing their laws. "There has routinely been a treatment of adoption as the most difficult of the sexual diversity issues, even in legislation that trumpets its inclusiveness," says David Rayside, a political science professor at the University of Toronto. "It's children. The stereotype about homosexuals being predatory on children. The notion that same-sex relationships are unnatural and that children shouldn't be exposed to that. The notion that children are highly vulnerable and all questions of sexuality are dangerous, especially for children. The notion that adolescents are likely to experiment around things at the edge of morality and that they may well be recruited into homosexuality." *Article from the Toronto Star.
 
|
|
WWW.A1PHOTOLABS.COM ~ Vancouver