LifeSiteNews.com Life, Family and Culture News

Email: "PARLIAMENT DOES NOT HAVE JURISDICTION TO CHANGE DEFINITION OF MARRIAGE"

Your Email:

Your Name:

Send To Email:

Subject:

Message:
Constitutional Lawyer Argues Change Would Require Constitutional Amendment BY LifeSiteNews.com OTTAWA, April 15, 2003 (LifeSiteNews.com) - On April 10 Constitutional lawyer David Brown presented before the House of Commons Justice Committee hearings into marriage and same-sex unions.  Brown pointed out that “Parliament does not possess the constitutional jurisdiction to change the definition of marriage in section 91(26) of the Constitution Act, 1867 to include relationships between members of the same sex.” He noted that the word “marriage” used in the 1867 Act “bears a distinct, constitutional meaning encompassing only a union between a man and a woman.” He said also that the courts cannot use the equality provisions in the Charter of Rights to test the constitutionality of the meaning of “marriage” since “the Charter cannot be used to alter a provision of the Constitution Act.”  Thus he said “the courts currently considering the “same-sex marriage” cases in British Columbia, Ontario and Quebec cannot compel Parliament to change the constitutional meaning of marriage.”  He concluded the point saying: “any change to the meaning of “marriage” . . .  can only be brought about by way of constitutional amendment.” http://www.lifesitenews.com/news/parliament-does-not-have-jurisdiction-to-change-definition-of-marriage/

Please enter the word you see in the image below: