This was in the paper today and this is something I continue to read about, but dont understand the arguement... (I've bolded the statement)
Text
I don't care about the other issues at the moment. I'm just interested in what the arguements are for saying that same-sex marriages that are recognized by the government fail to protect religious freedom?
The government has stated that the legislation does not force religious institutions to perform same-sex marriages. What the legislation does is give same-sex couples the same legal rights and benefits that opposite-sex couples receive.
Text
'Rights are added'
Gov't presents its same-sex marriage bill
By KATHLEEN HARRIS, Ottawa Bureau
Calling it a key step in Canada's "rights revolution," the Liberal government has moved to approve gay marriage by summer break. Tabling the bill in the Commons yesterday, Justice Minister Irwin Cotler worked to fend off critics with assurance that religious freedom won't be sacrificed as civil marriage rights are extended to homosexual couples.
"The minority rights of gays and lesbians do not in any way undermine the rights of religious groups or opposite-sex couples," he said. "Their rights aren't taken away -- only rights are being added."
Aiming to "reflect values of tolerance, respect and equality" enshrined in the Charter of Rights and Freedoms, the bill also tinkers with eight other acts to redefine spouse in the Divorce Act and Income Tax Act.
The contentious legislation goes to a committee for study before heading to the Commons for debate and a vote.
While most Conservative MPs and a healthy faction of Grits remain staunchly opposed to redefining marriage, Cotler hopes to pass the bill before the House rises in June.
Alex Munter, spokesman for Canadians For Equal Marriage, called it a "great day" but cautioned the bitter fight isn't over yet.
'LONG STRUGGLE'
"The finish line for marriage equality is within sight -- but there are still hearts to change, there are still arguments to be made and now is no time to let up what has been a very, very long struggle," he said. Referring to Conservative Leader Stephen Harper's push to restrict gays to civil unions, Munter said same-sex marriage supporters must battle "bound and determined" opponents.
Terence Rolston, president of Focus on the Family Canada, slammed the Liberal bill as an "experiment" that fails to adequately protect religious freedom and threatens the traditional family unit.
"It's an experiment that we're putting on the backs of our children, and that's not fair."
While Cotler stressed that religious officials won't be required to marry gay couples against their convictions, he admitted protecting the religious freedom of civic officials is out of his hands.
Solemnizing marriage falls into provincial jurisdiction. But despite a spate of human rights complaints filed by marriage commissioners in Manitoba and Saskatchewan who were ordered to marry gays or face dismissal, Cotler said his provincial counterparts are confident any problems can be resolved.
Cabinet ministers must support the government, but parliamentary secretaries and backbenchers are allowed a free vote.
Only a handful of Tory MPs, including Belinda Stronach, have publicly expressed support for same-sex marriage. Most Bloc Quebecois MPs endorse the bill, while only one New Democrat, Manitoba's Bev Desjarlais, intends to defy her party's whipped vote.
I don't care about the other issues at the moment. I'm just interested in what the arguements are for saying that same-sex marriages that are recognized by the government fail to protect religious freedom?
The government has stated that the legislation does not force religious institutions to perform same-sex marriages. What the legislation does is give same-sex couples the same legal rights and benefits that opposite-sex couples receive.
