A rchive Date
[ 04-08-2002 ]
Category
[ International Relations ]
sub-Categoy
[ Canada ]
|
Being married is not just about religion
By LINDA WILLIAMSON -- Toronto Sun
August 4, 2002
It has been, by turns, amusing and astounding to watch how our pundits and politicians have responded to the latest court decision on same-sex marriage.
Astounding, because of some of the unlikely luminaries who've come out, so to speak, in favour of it.
Ontario Tory Premier Ernie Eves says he, personally, has no problem with allowing gays to marry. The Globe and Mail is gung-ho. The Sun's veteran parliamentary correspondent Douglas Fisher says it's inevitable. Ditto The National Post's Andrew Coyne. This is not your usual group of touchy-feely liberal social engineers.
(Toronto councillors, always ready to rush in where they have no jurisdiction to tread, also voted 28-6 in favour of gay marriages. Gee, if only they could achieve such consensus on things like, say, ensuring we have garbage pickup.)
What was amusing, of course, was Justice Minister Martin Cauchon's awkward disappearing act, immediately after announcing he would appeal the Ontario decision (which said the feds' definition of marriage as exclusive to couples consisting of a man and a woman was unconstitutional).
Cauchon, who said more "clarity" on the issue was needed, was blatantly buying time, and in this case I think he was right. Canadians do need more time to think this issue over. The last thing they need is their government caving in to the courts (actually, only one court, since two other decisions at the provincial level conflict with this one) on a matter on which we all deserve a say.
Nor, I would submit, do they need their antsy politicians and bureaucrats twisting themselves and the laws every which way to craft a compromise that will please everyone in the deeply divided Liberal caucus, if not the country.
Among the more bizarre ideas floated this past week is that the Grits might abandon the marriage laws altogether (much as they did with abortion laws when courts threw them out) and leave weddings entirely to religious institutions; quaint rituals no longer necessary in secular society.
A related proposal would grant those who still want to get hitched at City Hall or the local courthouse - straight or gay - something called a "civil union."
This sounds to me like a copout. And a big mistake.
I was married by a judge in a civil ceremony and wouldn't have had it any other way.
There is something truly special about being married. It is not just about religion; indeed, for many of us, religion has nothing to do with it. It's about something else altogether - about making an official, public commitment to someone you love, about social sanction, tradition and stability.
We already know that average Canadians are abandoning traditional marriage in droves. Our politicians and courts long ago eroded the distinction between living common-law and being married, to the point where there's no discernible difference (in my experience, anyway) in terms of benefits, tax status, pension designations, etc.
Meanwhile, gay and lesbian couples have gained virtually all the same legal benefits as common-law couples. All that remains for them is the M-word - and all those intangible, indefinable joys that, as those of us who've taken that extra step well know, only marriage can bring.
To my mind, the state should be doing more to make marriage an attractive institution for all couples willing to take the plunge, not abandoning it or watering it down.
I take a dim view of judges dictating social issues, but I was honoured to be married by one.
I expect our politicians to come up with a solution that sits well with all Canadians. That won't be easy, since at the moment we're evenly split on gay marriage, though approval of it is higher among younger folks (count me among them).
But if they junk civil marriages and call them something else, I would take serious offence. I would take it to mean my marriage is somehow less solemn or valid than one performed in a church. I'd feel second-class and discriminated against.
In other words, exactly as the gay couples in this fight feel.
Rather than duck this issue, the feds should lead the way. Allow any two people in a loving relationship - straight or gay - to have a civil marriage. And call it a marriage, period.
Let religious institutions decide their own rules for their ceremonies, as they always have.
And let us all remember that marriage, despite the bad press it's had over the last half-century or so, remains a precious thing. The fact that there are so many stable, loving gay couples who simply want to share in its joys and responsibilities is cause for celebration, not fear.
Linda Williamson is the Toronto Sun senior associate editor. She can be reached by e-mail at linda.williamson@tor.sunpub.com Letters to the editor should be sent to editor@sunpub.com
 World Fact Book (CIA)]
|