Gay marriages indeed valid - Liberals screwed up on divorce
Today, Justice Minister Nicholson diffused the left-wing spin by ensuring all same-sex marriages in Canada are indeed valid. And further to that, a loophole left open by the previous Liberal government, didn't allow for same-sex divorces! Shame on you Irwin Cotler! Well, that's changing now.
But the CBC wouldn't make you believe that. Power & Politics host Evan Solomon has an online poll question asking if you think the Conservatives are trying to reopen the debate. And of course, the majority of the answers are yes. Pathetic. Sad really.
So no, Harper is not re-opening the gay marriage debate. The Conservative government is in fact, making gay marriages even more equal.
Typical left-wing untruthiness on social issues. Unfortunately, the only loophole that the Conservatives left open was a whole day of spin to the left.
Posts
13 comments:
It's pretty disgusting how the frothing at the mouth left have distorted and spun this. They should be ashamed and we do know that they have lost any credibility they had.
It's pretty disgusting how the frothing at the mouth right have distorted and spun this. They should be ashamed and we do know that they have lost any credibility they had.
"didn't allow for same-sex divorces!"
Wow! And with an exclamation mark no less!!
Only problem is, that is BS. Anyone who is married (as defined in Canada) can divorce here under our rules. One of those rules is that you have to be a resident here. Same rules apply to everyone. No need for any special rules.
But Yikes! Those Cons sure are good at spin. Turning at best a major screw up by The Harper Government into somehow being a screw up in need of a fix.
Because it was the Harper Government yesterday (actually a few weeks ago and reported yesterday) filing an application in a court of law claiming that a same sex marriage was invalid because of the laws of some foreign country.
Good for Nicholson to correct himself and the error of his Ministry and clarify that they didn't actually mean what they actually said in court.
And good for the media to catch them on that.
So Ted its a screwup now and not a hidden agenda!!
OMG! cancel the convention in Ottawa! We don't need a Liberal party anymore. Return the stockpiled coathangers!!
Ted, you are so full of it! Until today, non residents could not divorce here without living here. These two never lived here, ergo they could not divorce here?
So this is fixed now and the Harper Gov has assured SS couples thatmtheir marriages are valid.
Too bad, so sad that anoyher gotcha attempt has not only failed, but has causd ypthe Harper Gov to, once again, have to fix something the Liberals did.
OImagine what they can fix over the next 4 years!
Alberta Girl?
What on earth are you talking about.
Until today, no couple - same sex or otherwise - could divorce here.
And lo! as of today, no couple - same sex or otherwise - could divorce here.
No change has occurred. We'll see if Nicholson does anything to change the law. I don't think he should. I think it is important to be resident here in order to get a divorce and I think this former couple are wrong to sue Ontario to try to force the issue.
But how am I "so full of it" to state a fact: i.e. that the Harper Government filed an application in court in that former couples lawsuit claiming that their marriage was invalid.
As far as Canadian laws are concerned, the marriage is completely valid. The court filing by the Harper Government was incorrect and Nicholson confirmed that today.
How is that "full of it"??????
@AlbertaGirl don't let the facts get in the way or anything.
Ted, you usually get things right, so I am so very surprised that you are short afew facts.
-Dept of Justice (arms length from Harper Govt) lawyer (there are 1000 in the dept) made a submission to the courts,
one of the 2 laws presented, if left on the books, rendered SS marriages of non-residents, invalid.
Numerous legal minds agreed.
That smart cat picked up on a law that has been missed by all the smart guys inside and outside of government.
Harper had nothing to do with creating nor bringing forward the law.
Now this law has been in place long long long before Irwin Cotler drafted his SSM legislation.
He missed it.
SSM, until CON Minister corrects the error, was invalid.
Shouldn't you be at the Liberal convention wiping sweat from Bob Rae's brow?
Ted, You need to read Andrew Coyne in Nat post. The lawyer Did Not get it wrong...ergo Nicholson could not have said it was a mistake. What was a mistake was the Globe and Mail and every other left wing media outlet and blog jumping in bed with them saying that Harper was reversing SSM. That was a lie.
How do I know I am right...because today it has virtually disappeared from the media spotlight. If there were any inkling that anyone in the Harper Govt had made a mistake, they would still be screaming a out it.
Oh and anonymous..You shoul check the facts before you question others.
Wilson:
If Harper wants to call our government The Harper Government and that ministers are responsible for their departments then he can't have it both ways.
As for the law, what law renders a marriage invalid? Certainly not the divorce act. Which is what the Harper Government claimed in its filing, erroneously. And I'm glad that Nicholson clarified and corrected the error.
The law is pretty cut and dry here which is why the Harper Government filing was so alarming: for all Canadian legal purposes, this is a valid and good marriage, not void ab initio as claimed.
The woman from Florida who married a British woman knows very well that Florida does not recognize same sex marriage. so whatever property they have is no business of the courts far less canada's since they dont reside here.
If they lived here and got a divorce then their propety will be settled.
Ted Betts said...
As for the law, what law renders a marriage invalid? Certainly not the divorce act. Which is what the Harper Government claimed in its filing, erroneously. And I'm glad that Nicholson clarified and corrected the error.
That's easy, Ted. Read the relevant part of Coyne's column for yourself:
Normally marriage law is relatively straightforward. Each country defines marriage for itself, and within its borders its citizens are bound by that definition. Where citizens of one country marry in another, however, responsibility is divided between the two, according to the set of common-law rules known as "conflict of laws."
The "formal validity" of the marriage - that is, whether the vows were exchanged in the appropriate manner - is determined by the laws of the place where the marriage was performed. But the "essential validity" - that is, whether the couple were eligible to get married at all - is determined by the laws of each partner's "ante-nuptial domicile," the place they lived before they were married.
There's no actual controversy on this point. It's supported by reams of precedent. It's not some invention of this government, or of Canada, but is part of the fabric of international law. Nor is it surprising: I'm basing this article in part on a piece by Jeffrey Talpis, professor of law at the Université de Montréal, in the Lawyer's Weekly of Sept. 22, 2006. It's hard not to sympathize with those who were told when they came to Canada they were legally married. But the fault lies with those who misstated the law then, not those who correctly interpret it now.
Clear enough for you, Ted?
You have about as much understanding of this issue as you did of the recent CWB changes that you and your kind tried oh-so-hard to spin as an "attack on democracy itself" (and other equally laughable claims). Don't quit your day job. :)
These marriages are not "valid". They're void. These people can't get divorced because they're not married. As we have to assume they always knew, since it's the farthest thing from secret.
Post a Comment