Canada Can Legalize Gay Marriage, Supreme Court Rules

Dec. 9 (Bloomberg) -- Canada's Supreme Court ruled that the federal government can proceed with a plan to legalize same-sex marriage, saying the rights of gays and lesbians to formalize their bonds is protected by the constitution.

"Canada is a pluralistic society,'' the Supreme Court said in the ruling, which was released in Ottawa. "Marriage from the perspective of the state is a civil institution.''

( Read more... )

Link to article: bloomberg.com.

Supreme Court of Canada Decision on Gay Marriage, Summarized and Plainified

I'm reading through the Supreme's decision and trying to summarize and plainify the language. Here's what I've got so far, and I'll be posting as I go. Note: text in blue indicates a direct quote.

Reference re Same-Sex Marriage
Supreme Court of Canada
Judgment: December 9, 2004.
Present: McLachlin C.J. and Major, Bastarache, Binnie, LeBel, Deschamps, Fish, Abella and Charron JJ.
(i.e. full court press).

The Feds asked the following questions:

1. Is the federal government allowed to (a) change the definition of marriage and (b) affirm that religious officials who don't want to marry gays will not be forced to do so?
   
2. If yes, is the proposed law OK with the Charter?
   
3. Does the freedom of religion/conscience section of the Charter protect people who don't want to perform gay marriage?
   
4. Is it OK with the Charter for marriage to remain exclusively het?

This is the proposed legislation:

1. Marriage, for civil purposes, is the lawful union of two persons to the exclusion of all others.
   
2. Nothing in this Act affects the freedom of officials of religious groups to refuse to perform marriages that are not in accordance with their religious beliefs.

Held:
(Note: As far as I can tell, this decision was unanimous. Please correct me if I'm wrong.)
Question 1: With respect to [Proposed Act] s. 1, yes. With respect to [Proposed Act] s. 2, no. So yes, the Feds can change the definition of marriage. No, they cannot state that this change will not affect the freedom of those who choose not to perform marriages. Only the provinces can do that.
Question 2: Yes.
Question 3: Yes.
Question 4: Don't ask, don't tell ;)

( The Questions and Answers summarized )

Added Thursday night: Paragraphs 1-30 of the legal nitty-gritty
( Let's talk about marriage, baby )

Added Friday afternoon: Paragraphs 31-46, where the fun never ends
( Let's keep talking about marriage, baby )

Added Friday night: Paragraphs 47-end
( Let's stop talking about marriage, baby )

CirNote: There. All done indulging my inner geek ;)


And for those who like pain, here's the actual text of the decision.