Thursday, January 12, 2012
Conservative position on foreign SSM hopelessly muddled
Thousands of SSM American couples got married in Canada. At the time many of them got married, the state they resided in did not recognize their marriage, but later did. Is Harper and friends really going to insist that these marriages, and there could be thousands of them, never happened even though they have since been they legally recognized Stateside?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
8 comments:
It would seem that no couple can seek a divorce in Canada if they have lived here for less than one year.
This includes same sex couples and heterosexual couples.
While the argument is poor the decision is the right one. The Libs have yet again overplayed their hand to try and look relevant in a new political reality.
Their argument is poor. You have got that right, but that is it. The rest of what you said makes no sense whatsoever.
1) The Liberals have said next to nothing. This came out of nowhere. To say the Liberals "overplayed their hand" -- as if this was ploy on their part -- is absurd.
2) No one has problem with the residency requirement. It is the absurd argument that the marriages never took place in the first place, that has everyone bewildered.
You have not been paying attention.
Rae has been commenting and so have the usual suspects. The hidden agenda garbage is being spewed again. It certainly didn't work in the last election and it won't work now.
When ssm was made law no one bothered to look at divorce. They should have.
The NDP have been much wiser in their response.
It needs to be fixed.
This what Rae had to say. “I understand Mr. Harper said he didn’t know about it and he doesn’t see every legal brief that goes before the courts. Of all the people in Canada who could actually make that argument it’s a little hard for him to make the argument because my sense of that government is that he controls everything. ... But I have to take the Prime Minister at his word when he says what he says.”
I heard any number of people, from all walks of life, say exactly the same thing.
As for divorce, of course it was talked about. What was not foreseen was the Charter challenge to the divorce residency requirement.
All that being said, none of this changes the stupidity of this "legal option". Indeed, we are not only talking about couples from states or countries who have since legalized SSM and recognized these couples as being married. These marriages often have legal ramifications even in states without SSM.
Suppose if they are granted a divorce. How are assets, support payments one time compensations to be paid?
As far as I know any decisions made by a Canadian court are unenforceable in other countries. It is in large part a waste of time and money.
I am not saying the divorces shouldn't happen but from a practical point of view it is all moot.
This might as well be the Judge Wapner show.
1) I am amazed that couple has gone as far as they did. I am not exactly sure what they hope to accomplish.
2)No one is demanding that Canada get rid of its residency requirement. Again, what is at issue is the notion that these marriages are not in fact marriages. Do you really want the government to say that these marriages, and we are not just talking about SSM, but potentially some intra racial marriages as well, never happened because some couple is leveling a charter challenge to Canada's residency requirement? The government has tried used a nuke kill a fly.
3)The fly will not die. Saying that Canada can shore up its residency requirement by denying that x number of SSM are not in fact marriages is, obviously not going to work. After all, same sex couples, from places without SSM, are not the only foreign couples getting married in Canada.
Myth:
Harper sees every piece of paper, email, lawyer brief,
and makes every department decision right down to ordering paper clips.
There is a court case going on, and one of the 1000 lawyers from the Justice Dept, made that submission,
not the Harper Govt.
Irwin Cotler and/or the Senate should have given SSDivorce a little thought.
Just have the courts, upon petition by the couples, annul the non-resident marriages.
Christ Wilson.
1) Let me get this straight. The Feds intervene in a provincial case, propose something that was always bound to make international headlines and you are telling me no one at the PMO knew anything about this.
2) Who cares what Colter did or not do. That has absolutely no bearing here. The issue at hand is the justice department touting a policy that is manifestly unconstitutional, makes Canada look ridiculous on the international scene and causes all kinds needless heart ache and worry. These people paid real money to have have to their marriages supposedly officially sanctioned by Federal government. By denying the validity of these marriages, the government is essentially saying that it perpetrated a fraud against these people.
3) Saying that Canada can shore up its residency requirement by denying that x number of SSM are not in fact marriages is, obviously, not going to work. After all, same sex couples, from places without SSM, are not the only foreign couples getting married in Canada.
Post a Comment