"in order for a marriage to be legally valid under Canadian law, the parties to the marriage must satisfy both the requirements of the place where the marriage is celebrated... and the requirements of the law of domicile of the couple with regard to their legal capacity to marry one another."
Let us take this line of reasoning back a generation. It would also mean that inter racial couples from States with Anti-miscegenation laws, who married in Canada, are not, in fact, married under Canadian law. Remember the Anti-miscegenation laws in some US states existed up until 1967.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
4 comments:
Guess Irwin Cotler forgot to make sure SSDivorce was as legal as SSM.
Both requirements are in place for heterosexual and gay couples.
Non-residents should be able to apply to Canadian court to have their marriages annuled,
rather than change our divorce laws for foriegners, and the Cdn taxpayer pay the cost of foriegners divorces.
By the time Harpo leaves Ottawa no one will recognize Canada.
Again Wilson.
1) 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.
2) 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.
Nice content, I trust this is a nice blog. Wish to see fresh content next time. Thanks for sharing this post with us. Keep it up.legal extasy
Post a Comment