A political struggle over marriage was won in Canada's parliament in mid-September—but only by a very tiny margin. The victory is good news for gay marriage, but the close call suggests that the battle to change the definition of marriage to include gays and lesbians there is not a done deal. The close call also serves as an important reminder to those of us in America who are watching what happens in Canada, hoping the changes there are a harbinger of things to come here, too.
In June, an Ontario appeals court ruled that same-sex couples couldn't be denied the right to marry, and Ontario began issuing marriage licenses to gay and lesbian couples immediately. A court in British Colombia soon followed suit, and gay and lesbian couples began marrying there, too.
The Canadian government decided not to fight the rulings, but rather to introduce legislation that would redefine marriage to include same-sex couples, thus giving the right to gay and lesbian partners all across Canada. There was much rejoicing at this decision, both here and in Canada, and commentators have announced marriage for gays in Canada a done deal.
But the lessons of history tell us that we should never underestimate our opponents, and this time is no different.
Conservatives in Canada opposed to the same-sex marriage developments introduced a motion into the Canadian parliament that would have reaffirmed the existing government definition of marriage as between a man and a woman. The motion was made in an attempt to derail the Canadian government's plan to introduce legislation next year that would change the definition of marriage.
The anti-gay motion was defeated—but very narrowly. The final vote was 137 to 132, defeating the motion by a mere five votes.
The good news is that the motion was defeated. But it might also mean that the proposed legislation to redefine marriage to include gays and lesbians will be slowed down, or that when the legislation itself is finally presented, it could face a steep battle.
It's important to note that the opposition to same-sex marriage in Canada is clearly trying to make the gay marriage issue a major one during next year's elections in Canada, where a new parliament and prime minister are up for grabs. Stirring anti-gay sentiment is always a good political tool for conservative politicians, be it here in America or elsewhere.
But the moves by opponents of same-sex marriage in Canada shouldn't simply be dismissed as political maneuvering as the gear-up to an election year. After all, more than 50 members of Canada's Liberal party voted with the conservatives to preserve the existing definition of marriage as a union between a man and a woman.
The Canadian government has said it will continue with its bid to redefine marriage by legislation. That legislation is expected to be introduced sometime in April 2004.
But it isn't certain that the legislation will pass, and there is sure to be a huge national battle in Canada over it.
The lesson for those of us here in America who are watching isn't a new one, but it remains an important one. Just because courts rule in our favor, doesn't mean we win the final prize. We saw that here in Hawaii and Alaska in the past. Now, all American eyes are on the Massachusetts court—which is expected to rule sometime soon on same-sex marriage in that state as well. Many experts are predicting that the Massachusetts court will rule in favor of same-sex marriage.
But as we've seen in the past, and as we are witnessing now in Canada, a court ruling in our favor does not necessarily make marriage a reality.
Along with winning important court cases, we also have to be winning over the hearts and minds of average citizens, who, in the end, are the most important juries and judges to sway.