What’s happening is there’s a controversy brewing after two lesbians, one from Florida and one from the UK, came to Canada to get married back in 2005 and are now seeking a divorce and finding they can’t. Neither the UK or Florida are willing to accept the Canadian marriage, so looking to divorce here and going to court, they’re discovering that 1) they can’t divorce because of a clause in our federal divorce laws that says you must be a resident for a at least a year to get a divorce and 2) the marriage might not even be valid because a lawyer for the feds is arguing that same-sex marriages performed here are only valid if they are recognized by the places where married couples are living.
Let me first say I’m glad and proud that we have same-sex marriage in this country, and I feel very fortunate to have that option open to me should I choose to go down that road. But its issues and debates like these that make me question getting married in the future. For me, marriage should be a symbol of the love between two people, pure and simple. When you begin talking about divorce, alimony, tax breaks and other bureaucracy, it becomes a bit of a joke and it sort of ruins my definition of marriage. I also feel that there’s that ridiculous “pressure” in society to get married because “that’s what you do” when you’re a couple, and then there’s the added “pressure” for gay couples to take advantage of your rights. I just feel that, today, there’s just way too much of an emphasis in getting married for these ridiculous bureaucratic, legal and social reasons. And so my thought is: why bother getting into this mess? Common-law partnership allows you to be in a loving relationship without the enormous hoopla and pressure of a wedding ceremony, prenups, paperwork, legal definitions and social expectations of a marriage. But I guess it also sways your perception when you have good, successful examples of common-law relationships in your family. =)
ANYWAY, back to the article. There are really two issues here: the divorce/residency clause and the validity of same sex marriages performed here for foreigners. I’m by no means an expert on the divorce laws in this country, but I’d assume the residency clause is an non-issue, since, as someone in the CBC comments said, it’s no different from a straight couple getting married in Niagara Falls, going home, then getting screwed trying to get a divorce because they don’t live here.
What’s a little more disturbing is the validity/invalidity of the marriages performed for foreigners. It’s seems like a slap to the gay rights movement to offer the ability for gays from other countries to come here and marry, only to refuse to acknowledge the marriage just because it isn’t recognized where they live. Why bother performing these marriages then, and just restrict gay marriages to Canadians?? Hopefully that argument doesn’t hold up in court, because I’d like to see Canada set an example and demonstrate the progressiveness and support there should be for the international gay community. Of course, this whole issue wouldn’t really be a problem if the entire world recognized same-sex marriage, but that’s another issue. Lastly, I'm hoping the Conservatives keep their word and don’t reopen the same-sex marriage debate over this, although I’ve been wondering if they would since they gained complete power in May. But, I mean, politicians ALWAYS stay true to their word, right?
PS. Here's some extra reading (with Dan Savage content) & statistics (with pictures!) if you're interested:
