HP3000-L Archives

June 2006, Week 1

HP3000-L@RAVEN.UTC.EDU

Options: Use Monospaced Font
Show Text Part by Default
Show All Mail Headers

Message: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Topic: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Author: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]

Print Reply
Subject:
From:
Bruce Collins <[log in to unmask]>
Reply To:
Bruce Collins <[log in to unmask]>
Date:
Fri, 2 Jun 2006 15:22:22 -0400
Content-Type:
text/plain
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (36 lines)
Mark Wonsil wrote:
> Same-sex marriage is a slightly different animal in Canada.
>
> In the States, marriage receives some benefits by some private companies,
> healthcare for example. By declaring all unions as marriage, companies 
> would
> have to provide the healthcare benefits to all - or to none. Since Canada 
> has
> a national healthcare program, there is no reason to marry someone to 
> receive
> it.

The national healthcare doesn't cover everything. I have dental coverage for 
instance via a private insurance plan where I work. This also covers my 
spouse and I assume would cover a same sex spouse under the current law.

>
> Secondly, Canada doesn't exactly have separation of Church and State. Many
> Catholic schools are public schools IIRC. A potential flash point in 
> Canada is
> that the government could force the Catholic Church to perform gay 
> marriages -
> at least according to the reports I saw on "The National" (Canada's 
> evening
> news program.)

The current law doesn't force any churches to perform same sex marriages. In 
my experience the clergy can deny marriage to anybody they feel like. It 
would only be judges & justices of the peace that would be required to 
perform the marriage if called upon.

Bruce 

* To join/leave the list, search archives, change list settings, *
* etc., please visit http://raven.utc.edu/archives/hp3000-l.html *

ATOM RSS1 RSS2