Ban Marriage!
There is a large movement in Canada (and probably larger in the United States) to ban the legalization of same-sex marriage. The people pushing for this typically say that gays and lesbians already have most of the rights of opposite-sex couples, and that should be good enough. Give them civil-unions. We will tolerate that...Right... Well, I'd like to start the movement to ban marriage in its entirety on account that it violates the equality rights guaranteed to us by our Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms. Thanks to my dad, I happen to have a copy of this charter in front of me. Under Equality Rights, it reads:
Now, I'm no lawyer, but my interpretation of this clause leads me to believe that in this country, every individual is to have equal rights. Not allowing one individual [of legal age] to marry another individual [also of legal age] is therefore in violation of the aforementioned right.
Marriage is defined by my Oxford Colour Dictionary (Second Edition) as "1. the formal union of a man and woman, by which they become husband and wife. 2. the relationship between a husband and wife." Interestingly enough, Merriam Webster's Online Dictionary (an American publication) is quite a bit more progressive in its definition: "1 a (1) : the state of being united to a person of the opposite sex as husband or wife in a consensual and contractual relationship recognized by law (2) : the state of being united to a person of the same sex in a relationship like that of a traditional marriage [same-sex marriage] b : the mutual relation of married persons : WEDLOCK c : the institution whereby individuals are joined in a marriage
2 : an act of marrying or the rite by which the married status is effected; especially : the wedding ceremony and attendant festivities or formalities
3 : an intimate or close union [the marriage of painting and poetry -- J. T. Shawcross]."
I liken my views on marriage to those of the libertarians. They criticize government regulation of and the state's involvement in marriage because it was and still is a religious institution. "Marriage" as it were — that is, a legal union between two individuals — should be treated no differently than any other binding, legal contract between two consenting parties. Whatever "family values" these parties may wish to apply to this arrangement should be up to those parties, and should have no involvement with the state.
A while back, I coined the term, registered partnership. While it has been pointed out to me that this isn't exactly "romantic", I do feel it satisfies everything about which the state should be concerned. Just think: you may one day hear yourself saying, "Sorry, I can't go. Me and the registered partner are having a quiet night in." Has a nice ring to it, doesn't it? :)
But seriously... The majority (if not all) of the people who oppose granting every Canadian that which is guaranteed (but not honoured) in the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms are religious. If the "traditional" definition of marriage is so bloody important to these religious types, I say we let them have it. Separate it completely out of our legal institutions, and let it prosper within the walls of churches, synagogs, temples, and whatever other godly structures are out there. Who needs it? And what would be the harm of doing this? I would be perfectly happy in a civil union or registered partnership, as I'm sure would the majority of other [sane] people like me.
