WASHINGTON (ABP) — The Supreme Court of Canada has given legislators the green light to legalize same-sex marriage nationwide.
In an advisory opinion, known in Canada as a “reference,” the court's justices ruled Dec. 9 that the Canadian Constitution and the country's Charter of Rights and Freedoms do not bar the nation's parliament from adopting a bill that would legalize same-sex marriage nationwide.
The bill would change the definition of marriage, for civil purposes, to “the lawful union of two persons to the exclusion of all others.”
The move will do little to change life for most gay Canadians, since 85 percent of the nation's people live in provinces that have already legalized same-sex marriage — beginning with Ontario in 2003.
However, the Canadian Parliament has repeatedly stalled on legislation that would legalize same-sex marriage nationwide. While the idea enjoys strong support in many of Canada's urban areas and more settled eastern provinces, it is less popular in rural areas and has faced stiff opposition in the conservative western province of Alberta.
Only Belgium and the Netherlands allow gay marriage nationwide.
Unlike its American counterpart, the Canadian Supreme Court can accept requests from the nation's executive branch to review proposed legislation. The high court became involved in the case in 2003, when then-Prime Minister Jean Chretien asked the justices to determine the constitutionality of the gay-marriage proposal. Chretien reportedly made the request as a last-ditch effort, after his attempts to appeal several lower courts' rulings changing the definition of marriage failed.
Nonetheless, reports in Canadian newspapers Dec. 10 generally said the bill is now likely to pass the House of Commons, which is controlled by a governing coalition led by the nation's Liberal Party. Prime Minister Paul Martin, who said he is personally ambivalent about the morality of gay marriage, according to the New York Times, nonetheless said he supports the bill. Martin is a Roman Catholic.
In their reference, the court's justices also affirmed another part of the law saying that, as a matter of religious freedom, clerics and houses of worship cannot be forced to perform “marriages that are not in accordance with their religious beliefs.”