Canada grants world's first same-sex divorce

[dr. what]

Er--yea us?

http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=s ... ys_divorce


Canada grants world's first same-sex divorce

TORONTO (AFP) - A court in Canada has granted what is believed to be the world's first same sex divorce to a lesbian couple, barely a year after the country gave the green light for gays and lesbians to wed.

A landmark ruling Monday by Judge Ruth Mesbur of the Ontario Supreme Court found that the definition of a spouse in the country's marital laws was unconstitutional.

Canadian law currently specifies that only a couple, defined as a man and a woman may seek divorce.

The two women, who were not identified in court documents other than as "M.M." and "J.H." tied the knot on June 18, 2003, a week after Ontario's court of Appeal cleared the way for gay marriage in Canada's most populous province.

"The definition of a spouse is unconstitutional, inoperative and of no force and effect," Mesbur said in her decision.

Martha McCarthy, who represented one of the women, said "we believe that this is not just the first gay or lesbian divorce in Canada, but actually the first gay or lesbian divorce in the world."

Canada has emerged as one of the most liberal nations regarding civil same-sex marriage, which is permitted in three provinces, Ontario, Quebec and British Columbia.

The federal government has asked the Supreme Court to rule on whether the definition of marriage as a union between a man and a woman violates Canada's Charter of Rights and Freedoms.

A ruling is not expected until October, and Judge Mesbur refused to delay the case until then

[Jalinth]

Er--yea us?

http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=s ... ys_divorce


Canada grants world's first same-sex divorce

TORONTO (AFP) - A court in Canada has granted what is believed to be the world's first same sex divorce to a lesbian couple, barely a year after the country gave the green light for gays and lesbians to wed.

A landmark ruling Monday by Judge Ruth Mesbur of the Ontario Supreme Court found that the definition of a spouse in the country's marital laws was unconstitutional.

Canadian law currently specifies that only a couple, defined as a man and a woman may seek divorce.

The two women, who were not identified in court documents other than as "M.M." and "J.H." tied the knot on June 18, 2003, a week after Ontario's court of Appeal cleared the way for gay marriage in Canada's most populous province.

"The definition of a spouse is unconstitutional, inoperative and of no force and effect," Mesbur said in her decision.

Martha McCarthy, who represented one of the women, said "we believe that this is not just the first gay or lesbian divorce in Canada, but actually the first gay or lesbian divorce in the world."

Canada has emerged as one of the most liberal nations regarding civil same-sex marriage, which is permitted in three provinces, Ontario, Quebec and British Columbia.

The federal government has asked the Supreme Court to rule on whether the definition of marriage as a union between a man and a woman violates Canada's Charter of Rights and Freedoms.

A ruling is not expected until October, and Judge Mesbur refused to delay the case until then

Decision makes sense. Allowing them to marry but not get divorced is contradictory. If the feds do win at court on the entire marriage definition, I'd expect them to either set-up a parallel divorce act for same-sex partnerships (whatever the actual name will be) or (most likely) include in Divorce Act words along the lines of "those individuals registered under Act X are deemed to be spouses for all purposes relating to the Divorce Act".

Just shows you that wedded bliss doesn't always last regardless of the gender.

[Bob the Gunslinger]

Now I suppose they'll be excommunicated.

[Rogue 9]

Now I suppose they'll be excommunicated.

Can't excommunicate someone who's not a church member.

[salm]

i told you, i told you, same sex mariages just don´t work.

[Skelron]

i told you, i told you, same sex mariages just don´t work.

Hope your joking... if not then here goes, if so my Apology in advance.

So one divorce = Same Sex Marriages don't work, but the divorces in Mixed Sex couples dosn't? My suspicion is that this couple where so happy to be allowed to legally get married that they never thought that maybe they where not ment for each other, and that they rushed into it. It happens, and it's perfectly understandable for people in this situation to do that.

I feel sorry for them that they had this experiance, but I HOPE it dosn't get used against Single Sex Marriages because it would be hypocritical. Anyway I hope that the silly problem is over ruled and the full and equal rights under the law can be established.

[salm]

Hope your joking

yes.

[/quote]
I feel sorry for them that they had this experiance, but I HOPE it dosn't get used against Single Sex Marriages because it would be hypocritical. Anyway I hope that the silly problem is over ruled and the full and equal rights under the law can be established.[/quote]
i´m sure there are morons out there who are going to use that to argue against homomarriages.

[Metrion Cascade]

I thought the first one was an Iowa judge granting a divorce to a Vermont couple last year?

[Talon Karrde]

I thought the first one was an Iowa judge granting a divorce to a Vermont couple last year?

Hmmm... not sure, I never heard that, and I'm from Iowa.

[Metrion Cascade]

Linky