
|
|
Legal - Canada - Ontario
Queen's Park sends message to Parliament
February 25, 2021
Queen's
Park sends message to Parliament
Ontario's
multiparty support for gay marriage
"I very proudly rise to speak in
support of this bill. This bill breathes equality into dozens of statutes
where discrimination lay dormant, but I want to be clear what this bill
isn't and what this bill is. If this bill were somehow a vote on same-sex
marriage, I would very proudly vote yes -- I would vote yes to same-sex
marriage -- but that is not what this bill is about. The bill is primarily
concerned with bringing our statutes in line with the Charter of Rights
and Freedoms. The bill seeks to update our statutes to reflect a new reality
in Ontario. In a sense, as NDP leader Howard Hampton said yesterday, it
is a housekeeping bill. It is. It is born out of a judicial decision,
yes. I say to this House, it is also the right thing to do."
Hon. Michael Bryant (Attorney General, Ontario), Feb. 23, 2004
While
Parliament is in a delayed debate about same-sex marriage, Ontario has
got on with updating its legislation to be in compliance with the ruling
from the Court of Appeal for Ontario, while also taking into consideration
the religious protection issues raised in the Supreme Court of Canada
Reference.
Until
now, gay and lesbian couples were segregated in legislation, apart from
the definition of spouse that had, until the June 10, 2021 ruling, been
reserved for
married opposite-sex couples. No more. Gender-specific terms have been
removed from Ontario legislation and gays are now included in the definition
of spouse.
The
Ontario government has, with multiparty support, amended more than
70
Ontario statutes to bring them in line with court decisions
that found same-sex marriage to be constitutional, Attorney General
Michael Bryant announced in a release on February 22. "We are committed
to ensuring that same-sex couples are treated with the same respect
and dignity as opposite-sex couples," said Bryant. "By changing
the definition of spouse in these statutes, our government is helping
to ensure that Ontario laws don't discriminate against same-sex
couples, including those who choose to marry."
The
bill includes provisions to clarify that religious officials cannot
be compelled to perform marriages or use their sacred places for
the celebration of marriages that are inconsistent with their religious
beliefs.
The
legislation follows a June
2003 decision by the Ontario Court of Appeal upholding a Divisional
Court ruling that the common law definition of marriage, which excluded
same-sex couples, is contrary to the
Charter of Rights and Freedoms.
On
July 17, 2021 the federal government
asked the Supreme Court of Canada to provide an opinion on whether
Parliament could change the legislative definition of marriage to
include same-sex couples.
|
Effect
of bill on religious groups
"What
is the effect of this bill on religious organizations, and in particular,
will religious groups affiliated with religious organizations, such
as the Knights of Columbus, be protected from having to rent their
facilities to same-sex couples in the proposed legislation? The
answer to that question is that the proposed legislation protects
religious officials and sacred places in relation to the solemnization
and celebration of same-sex marriage. This means that only religious
officials registered to perform marriages under the Marriage Act
are protected. It does not contain protections for non-religious
officials or non-sacred places. But section 18 of the Human Rights
Code protects certain organizations that are formed to serve the
interests of a particular group of people, including members of
a particular religion. If a group falls within section 18 of the
code, the organization may be allowed to restrict access to the
services or facilities to members of their group. This protection
existed before the Supreme Court decision, and it continues to exist
today. However, where an organization makes its services or premises
commercially available to others outside its recognized group, it
must do so without discrimination."
Ontario
Member of Provincial Parliament, Mr. David Zimmer (Willowdale),
Feb 23, 2021
|
On
December 9, 2020 the Supreme Court confirmed that same-sex marriage
is constitutional and that the Charter guarantees the freedom of religious
officials to perform marriages and use their sacred places in accordance
with their religious beliefs.
"Our
government believes this is the right thing to do," said Bryant.
"With this proposed legislation, we are ensuring Ontario's laws
comply with the Charter, so that all citizens have a chance to live
a life free of discrimination."
The
Ontario Confederation of Catholic Bishops agree (see sidebar).
The
federal Members of Parliament in Ottawa are still trying to catch
up, as victory after victory in the courts have brought gay marriage
to 8 regions across Canada.
Ontario
is once again showing Ottawa how to defend the rights of its citizens.
With support from the NDP and Conservative parties, the governing
Liberals are getting on with the task of updating legislation and
passing the bill.
All
parties are looking ahead to other important tasks of governance.
|
Ontario
Catholic Bishops
support Bill 171
The Ontario
Confederation of Catholic Bishops yesterday commended the Ontario
government for protecting the rights of religious officials by not
compelling them to perform same-sex marriages. One area of particular
concern to the Catholic bishops is the use of church property, said
Tom Reilly, the group's general secretary.
"The
bishops wanted to be sure that religious bodies could not be compelled
to allow their properties to be used for purposes associated with
same-sex unions if such are contrary to their teachings, as is true
for the Catholic church," Mr. Reilly said. "The bill clearly provides
this protection and the Ontario bishops accordingly support it."
"Ontario
to include gays, lesbians as spouses", The Globe and Mail,
Feb. 23, 2005
|
A simple
voice vote in favour of the bill took place last night, leaving no record
of individuals votes. Instead, the parties worked together united for
human rights.
"We
made a decision a couple of years back in order to deal with the issue
of marriage in the province of Ontario,"said Mr. Gilles Bisson (Timmins
- James Bay). "It was a bill that the Conservative government had
brought forth that we voted for. We extended that right to individuals
within Ontario. This Legislature did that at the time. I believe it was
unanimous, if I remember correctly: Conservatives, New Democrats and Liberals
stood together unanimously to give people of the same sex the ability
to marry within Ontario. We did that unanimously, and if I remember correctly,
there was not a divided vote on that particular issue. Every member had
an opportunity to get up and divide. Some of the gentlemen who got up
today and said, "You know, we should divide today," had an opportunity
to do that when we originally extended the right to do this back some
years ago. So let's deal with this for what it is. This is in order to
bring the statute into line with what the law already is. It doesn't deal
with the extension of any rights. It doesn't deal with anything other
than making sure that all of the acts within the province of Ontario comply
with what is already in the bill, which is already the law."
"I
have to say,",Ms. Kathleen O. Wynne (Don Valley West) said in
debate on February 23, "as I've watched the federal debate unfold,
when I began to read the ink that's being poured out on this debate
federally, my initial position was, "What is the big fuss?" I have
been in both a heterosexual marriage and I'm in a committed homosexual
lesbian relationship. To me, the tired old institution of marriage
was something that we probably should be polishing up. Originally,
the debate was not one that I wanted to particularly engage in, but
I have to say that as the debate has continued and as it has escalated
and as the issue of human rights has become clearer, as we listen
to people talk about rights being taken away or people being marginalized,
it has become clearer and clearer to me that it's important and necessary
that all of us who believe that this is a human rights issue and that
it's the right thing to do to extend the right to marry to same-sex
couples speak up on that." |
"I'm
not naive enough to believe that one debate or one piece of legislation
can change the engrained notions of society; I know that's not the
case. But if we can protect the right of our children to be who
they are, then they will change those notions, and I believe that's
already happening. It's up to us to change the laws so that the
next generation can change the attitudes. We all deal with internalized
homophobia. Every straight person and every gay person has internalized
the norms of society. My hope is that our children will be able
to change those attitudes."
Ms.
Kathleen O. Wynne (Don Valley West), Feb 23, 2021
|
Ms.
Wynne spoke passionately
about the need to publicly speak out against homophobia.
"Homophobia
can be a loud and violent fact, or it can be subtle and whispering. It's
the teasing that can stop a talented young male figure skater from pursuing
a dream. It's the force that creates and reinforces stereotypes. It's
the norm that can convince a beautiful, vibrant, healthy young girl that
she's ugly because she doesn't want to wear makeup. It's the fear that
forces teenagers struggling with their own sexual orientation to be the
most abusive to others, because they're trying to cover for themselves.
It's the fear that forces a little boy to turn to his mom one day and
to tell her that he isn't going to wear bright colours any more, even
though his whole little life he's loved those bright colours. He's figured
out that that's not OK. Homophobia is the fear that forces those things."
Minister
of Health George Smitherman spoke of the contribution of Rev. Dr. Brent
Hawkes, Metropolitan
Community Church of Toronto:
"Now,
I must be careful in acknowledging that Brent Hawkes is my preacher, because
if attendance were taken there as it is here, there would be some concern
about how one can make a claim that someone is their preacher when they
don't go in person quite as often as they might to hear the tremendous
oratory, the passion and the tremendous wisdom that Brent Hawkes brings
in his role as pastor of the Metropolitan Community Church. That church
on Simpson Avenue, in the riding of Toronto-Danforth, home to the member
opposite, has a reputation, I think it's fair to say, as a place where
a progressive, inspirational congregation does what it needs to do to
make the kinds of advances, the human rights advances, that the gay and
lesbian community has been much in need of over a period of time. This
courageous band, a very small group of people in the grand scheme of things,
has demonstrated that you can, in a certain sense, fight city hall, that
you can make the progress that's necessary for a society to evolve. I
think that is the essence of the greatness of Canada. That in this land,
with a Charter of Rights and Freedoms, we have made a home for people
from all over the world where we celebrate diversity and recognize it
as our greatest strength is, I think, a credit to the fabric of our country.
I just want to say that I'm honoured to be here today and to have a chance
to speak in the presence of Brent Hawkes, who stands out as one of the
most exemplary leaders I think our country has ever known."
Like
the Court of Appeal for Ontario decision that preceded it, the move by
Queen's Park sends a strong and timely message to the federal MPs in Ottawa.
"Christianity
and other religions are about tolerance; they're about love,"
said MPP Bisson during the Feb. 23 debate. "They're about how
people are able to live together in some harmony. I can't believe
that Jesus Christ or whoever else you might believe in would come
of the view that because a person happens to be gay, somehow or
other they shouldn't belong and shouldn't be part of our society
and shouldn't be able to practise within our churches. So I just
want to put on the record that I think we need to be mindful of
the views of other people and the practices of other people.
|
"I
don't know what kind of mess it would create overall if these statutes
weren't changed, but I've been urging the government for over a
year now to move on this, and finally they're doing it. It is the
law of the land. We have to change the statutes, and you guys agreed
with it at the time. You have to change the statutes to make it
work properly. That is all we are doing here today, so let us vote.
Let us get on with this."
Marilyn
Churley, NDP Member of Ontario's Parliament, Feb 24, 2021
|
"I
just want to come to the last point. I know to some people in politics
this is a bit of a hot-button issue. We've watched the debate unfold in
Ottawa, and some people have used this to their own advantage, as far
as being able to trump it up as trying to be on the right side of the
issue, as they see it, thinking that if they vote in opposition the voters
back home will be happy with them and vote for them in great numbers.
I just want to say that that's not where the public is at. The public
on these issues, quite frankly, is way beyond that."
Conservatives
need only compare Stephen Harper's
meek response to this week's presentation of the Liberal government's
budget, and compare Harper's divisive
attack against
charter rights and gay marriage.
The evident priorities of Harper's extremist social agenda have shown
how he is unsuitable for leadership, being so out-of-step with voter rich
Ontario and Quebec.
"There's
really no one left in mainstream Canadian politics representing fiscal
conservatives anymore. Stephen Harper certainly isn't. He's spending too
much time congratulating Prime Minister Paul Martin," Winnipeg
Sun columnist Tom Brodbeck wrote in yesterday's column titled "Conservatism
is extinct". Which raises the question: what's the purpose of
the Conservative party? You might as well just vote Liberal."
|