| When
civil is not >> After civil union, why civil marriage?
by MICHAEL HENDRICKS
For the last four years, my “chum” of 29 years, René LeBoeuf, and I have been suing the federal and provincial governments for access to civil marriage. We are now awaiting the Quebec Superior Court’s decision in our case heard in November 2001. However, since civil union has become law, René and I are asked over and over why we insist on continuing to sue for access to civil marriage since we have “won.” In fact, Quebec has merely conceded defeat in practical terms so it appears that we have only won the first round. In court, our provincial government, together with the Canadian government and an assortment of fundamentalist religious groups, still opposes our request for civil marriage. Strategically, granting civil union strengthens their legal argument against our having access to civil marriage.
On March 22 of this year, Superior Court Judge Louise Lemelin, who heard our case last November, called us back to court to determine if we intended to continue our pursuit of civil marriage and if we intended to be “united civilly.” Under oath, we answered yes to both questions. As we explained to the judge, marriage is the “gold standard” of relationship recognition and we believe our relationship should be recognized as equal in every sense to heterosexual conjugal relationships. While we agree that civil union is a big advance for same-sex couples in Quebec, and we intend to take advantage of its provisions, we seek the dignity that comes with equality of choice and equal treatment under the law. For us, access to civil marriage means that gays and lesbians, and their families, will finally be seen as part of the social fabric and not as perpetual social delinquents. For us, access to civil marriage means complete civil equality. Quite frankly, we seek full citizenship, equal status to heterosexual citizens, not second-class status in a legal ghetto created for same-sex couples (even though heterosexual couples can choose civil union over marriage if they wish, this freedom of choice is not available to us). There are also practical reasons for our decision to continue our court challenge. Marriage is federal, but civil union is provincial, and thus, should we move to another province, our legal relationship would no longer exist. Moreover, marriage is recognized internationally while a local arrangement like civil union could never be. In addition, for our community, marriage is important because it is recognized by the federal government for immigration purposes: Canadian citizens can sponsor their married spouses for immigration but this is not automatically true for those in civil unions.
However, beyond all these everyday practical questions, there is another issue that René and I see as profoundly important. Civil union is a provincial law and, like any law, it can be repealed should the winds of change blow in a different direction. Or it could be challenged by the present, or some future, federal government as being another form of marriage and thus outside provincial jurisdiction. While it is important that the National Assembly voted unanimously for granting same-sex couples access to provincial family law, this decision is still a political one. If we can convince the courts that we, as citizens, have an equal right to civil marriage under the Charter of Rights in the Canadian Constitution, then civil equality for gays and lesbians will be “carved in stone” and not vulnerable to electoral politics in the future. Never again would Canadian gay and lesbian youth be presented with the bleak picture of their futures that René and I grew up with. No longer could gays and lesbians be treated by society and by the law as social outcasts, a marginal and disposable fringe. Should we get a favourable decision from the Supreme Court, Canadian gays and lesbians would finally have full civil and legal recognition as human beings with full, equal citizenship. Is that worth fighting for? We think so. So, for the Supreme Court, we have a message: hang on to your robes, we’re coming. : Michael Hendricks is a Montreal activist and a leader in the fight for legal recognition of same-sex marriages |
On
June 24, 2002, the Province of Quebec’s new law on civil union
came into effect. Like Vermont’s civil union, Quebec’s Bill
84 permits a same-sex couple to enter into a legally recognized conjugal
relationship that permits access to all aspects of provincial family
law including alimony, parental rights etc. In Quebec, same-sex couples
may now register their unions and have access to all the responsibilities
and benefits that accrue to legally married couples, except for marriage
and divorce which are federal jurisdiction. And, of course, not to those
federal statutes that offer specific protections for married spouses
(for example, the bankruptcy law or the evidence act, which protects
married spouses from being forced to testify against each other).