Same-sex marriage beyond Charter dialogue: Charter cases and contestation within government
- Authors
- Barnes Sue
- Bateup
- Bill C-23
- Bill C-38
- Bill C-38
- Canada
- Department of Justice
- including Eight Liberal members of parliament who voted in favour of the opposite-sex definition of marriage in 2003 now voted to recognize civil same-sex marriages
- Hiebert Janet
- Standing Committee on Justice and Legal Affairs House of Commons
- Ibid at 7891
- Ibid.
- Ibid.
- appearing before the House of Commons Standing Committee on Justice and Human Rights, McLellan emphasized that the definition of marriage would remain unchanged: ‘Bill C-23 will modernize federal legislation to extend benefits and obligations to common-law same-sex couples in the same way as to common law opposite-sex couples. What is equally important is that Bill C-23 does so while preserving the existing legal definition and societal consensus that marriage is the union of one man and one woman, to the exclusion of all others, as defined by the courts. Ibid. Similarly
- which are characterized by considerable disagreement between and within courts In contrast to the same-sex relationship recognition cases of the 1980s and 1990s
- no legal purpose would be served by answering this question since the government had already accepted the rulings of the lower courts on the matter and had adopted it as its own position. In the Court’s view
- Lawton Valerie
- MacCharles Tonda
- Manfredi
- McTeague Dan
- ‘Statement by the Prime Minister on Same Sex Unions’ (17 June 2003) [Office of the Prime Minister, ‘Statement.’]: Office of the Prime Minister
- see Brenda Cossman On the relationship between law and popular culture
- Snow David
- Standing Committee on Justice and Human Rights
- Standing Committee on Justice and Human Rights
- Standing Committee on Justice and Human Rights
- moved by Stephen Harper (leader of the opposition, Canadian Alliance) on 16 September 2003, stated The Alliance motion
- The Attorney General was represented by Peter Hogg and Michael Morris.
- The comparison between the 2003 vote and 2005 vote is complicated by the fact that several Liberal Members of Parliament who voted against the
- The Court held that the promotion of the equality rights of one group cannot be seen to undermine the equality rights of another group.
- The first meeting was held 27 November 2002.
- The Ontario government introduced a bill to amend sixty-eight definitions of spouse entitled ‘An Act to Amend Statutes to Comply with the Supreme Court of Canada decision in
- This amendment was first tabled by Progressive Conservative member Pat Carney in 1980 and variations of this bill were introduced at least five times by New Democratic Party (NDP) member Svend Robinson before Allan Rock introduced Bill C-33.
- van Kralingen Alex
- it should be emphasized that there was an entirely legitimate legal basis for it While the immediate remedy may be suspect from the perspective of dialogue theorists
- Publication date
- Publisher
- 'University of Toronto Press Inc. (UTPress)'
- Doi
Abstract
Abstract is not available.Similar works
Full text
Available Versions
Last time updated on 06/12/2020