![]()
|
News release |
![]() |
Communiqué |
|
Inky Mark, MP |
Dauphin-Swan River-Marquette |
(
Conservative M.P. Inky Mark
explained, “The Court said that in its opinion, the federal government has
the sole jurisdiction to legislate the civil definition of marriage; that the
legal definition should be expanded to include same sex marriage; and that
churches are protected under the Charter of Rights to choose whether or not
they will perform same sex marriages.”
“Simply put, this issue rests
with Parliament – it is a matter to be decided by elected representatives
and that churches and other religious bodies will retain the right to maintain
the tradition definition of marriage as that of a union between one man and
one woman.”
The court declined to comment on
whether or not the traditional definition of marriage is unconstitutional.
“Same sex couples would not be
discriminated socially or economically under the status of a civil union.
For me nothing has changed. I
will continue to support the majority of my constituents and vote to preserve
the traditional definition of marriage as the union of one man and one
woman,” Mark concluded.
![]()