Rev. Troy Perry, left, and partner Phillip De Blieck were granted marriage license in Toronto last week (Photo: Toronto Star)
Posted on 07/24/2003 12:31:54 AM PDT by JohnHuang2
A prominent American homosexual activist is challenging U.S. courts to recognize his same-sex "marriage," which was granted in Ontario after a provincial court ruled Canada's ban is unconstitutional.
Rev. Troy Perry, left, and partner Phillip De Blieck were granted marriage license in Toronto last week (Photo: Toronto Star) |
Rev. Troy Perry of Los Angeles, and his partner of 18 years, Phillip De Blieck, were issued a married license in Toronto July 16.
Perry, founder of the predominantly homosexual Metropolitan Community Churches, will announce today his campaign to ensure the bond is recognized in his home country.
"I don't care what the U.S. government says. My partner, Phillip, and I are legally married under Canadian law," Perry said after his ceremony, according to the newssite 365gay.com.
"We've put our nation on notice: We're coming home and we are legally married," he added.
Perry, who says he and his partner are "missionaries for marriage equality," is encouraging thousands of same-sex couples to follow their lead and head to Canada.
As WorldNetDaily reported, Toronto began issuing marriage licenses to homosexual couples last month after a provincial court ruled the federal law limiting marriage to heterosexuals violated the 1982 Charter of Rights and Freedoms, part of the Canadian Constitution.
Since then, a British Columbia court has made a similar ruling.
The Ontario decision stemmed from a challenge brought by two same-sex couples who were united in a ceremony at Metropolitan Community Church of Toronto in January 2001.
In response to the ruling, homosexuals in the Detroit area announced they plan to cross the nearby border for a massive group wedding in August.
"I never thought gay marriage would be legalized in my lifetime," Perry said. "God bless Canada."
Appeal to Constitution
Perry, who considers himself the first national homosexual-rights leader to marry in Ontario, argues the U.S. government, through a concept called "lex loci contractus," has recognized marriages performed validly in other countries, including Canada.
A decision not to recognize same-sex Canadian marriages, he insists, could be a violation of international treaty law and of the equal protection clause of the U.S. Constitution's 14th Amendment.
"We are not seeking special treatment," Perry said in a statement. "We seek equal treatment. That is the only gay agenda – equality for everyone under the law."
"To not recognize my marriage and the marriages of thousands of other same-sex couples, would be discrimination – and we will not stand for that any longer," he said.
The Netherlands and Belgium are the only countries that treat a same-sex couple's relationship exactly as one between a man and a woman. While homosexual marriage is not legal in the U.S., Vermont has a civil-union law that allows couples to register and receive most of the benefits and rights of married couples without calling it marriage. Earlier this year, California's state Assembly passed a historic bill that would award virtually all the rights of marriage to homosexual "domestic partners."
Thirty-seven U.S. states have passed laws that bar them from honoring same-sex marriage from another jurisdiction. However, in Massachusetts and New Jersey, homosexual couples have filed lawsuits, and some analysts believe if a marriage license were issued in one of those states, it would have to be recognized in all others under the U.S. Constitution's "Full Faith and Credit Clause."
A decision in the Massachusetts case is said to be imminent.
Canada's federal government says it will introduce legislation this fall to allow same-sex marriage. In his announcement of the decision, Prime Minister Jean Chrétien emphasized the bill will allow religious groups to refuse to perform same-sex weddings.
However, evangelical groups opposing same-sex marriage say they will keep a close eye on that aspect of the bill, particularly since the right of religious exemption was not addressed in the Ontario court's ruling.
Bruce Clemenger of the Evangelical Fellowship of Canada, an umbrella group for churches, charged that by not contesting the Ontario decision, the government has allowed the court to unilaterally alter "an institution of vital social significance."
A prominent Canadian Christian television host plans to retire from his program after 41 years in order to campaign against same-sex marriage.
David Mainse, host of the show "100 Huntley Street," says he is intent on maintaining the word marriage to mean a man and a woman," the Toronto Star reported.
A Toronto lawyer who represented the MCC in the Ontario case, conceded marrying in a country that recognizes same-sex unions doesn't necessarily mean their acceptance in countries that do not.
"The principle is marriages in one country are recognized in other countries, but there are some countries and people and institutions that are going to discriminate against them," said Douglas Elliott. "They aren't going to recognize their marriage."
Employers, for example, might not grant spousal benefits to same-sex couples issued a license in Ontario, he said.
Perry's partner, De Blieck, however, said his employer, Southwest Airlines, began offering benefits to employees in same-sex relationships about three years ago.
Pronunciation: 'mar-ij
Function: noun
Etymology: Middle English mariage, from Old French, from marier to marry
Date: 14th century
1 a : the state of being married b : the mutual relation of husband and wife : WEDLOCK c : the institution whereby men and women are joined in a special kind of social and legal dependence for the purpose of founding and maintaining a family
Wrong. You are seeking special rights. You are seeking the right to marry someone of the same gender. This is a special right. At this moment in time you already have all the same rights that I do. You can marry any woman who will consent to marry you. You don't need any special rights, you need to get healed of your mental disease.
"To not recognize my marriage and the marriages of thousands of other same-sex couples, would be discrimination – and we will not stand for that any longer," he said.
First, you don't have a marriage as marriage is between a man and a woman. Secondly, it is in society's best interest to discriminate against certain pervese behaviors such as child molesting, beastiality, necrophilia and homosexuality
Sex, torture and erotic electrification in America's 'gay' churches
Uhh, thanks for the notice. So you're legally married in CANADA. When did Canadian law become US law. Moron.
THEN MOVE TO CANADA, YOU COMMUNIST BASTARD. Don't shove your CRAP down OUR throats if WE do not want it!
:/ ttt
| Homosexual Agenda Index |
| Homosexual Agenda Keyword Search |
| All FreeRepublic Bump Lists |
This, of course, is the biggest, most brazen lie this alleged man of God could say.
Fact is, they already have equal rights under the law as citizens of this country. What they want is the "right" to serve in the military openly (putting their sexual orientation in front of wanting to serve their country), marry, adopt, teach their "lifestyle" in public schools and bugger your children.
Nobody has the right to do any of those things, and they bloody well should not be given that right because of how they like their sex.
It is sick. It is disgusting. It is perverse.
And I don't know what God this guy thinks he is serving, but he sure as hell's not serving mine.
If that were the case, the US would have to recognize Islamic polygamous marriages. It doesn't, so it isn't.
That doesn't mean the unelected liberal SCOTUS superlegislature won't step in to give us a boost down the road to hell by sanctifying perversion in the name of marriage.
You mean you're not impressed with their "beautiful minds"?
"We are not seeking special treatment," Perry said in a statement. "We seek equal treatment. That is the only gay agenda – equality for everyone under the law."Sorry, that's just not true. They seek to eliminate one of many commitments that go into a Marriage.
I've pointed this out on other "same sex marriage threads," and I'll repeat it here.
Marriage is a three party contract between a man (one party must be a man), a woman (one party must be a woman) and a community (a social group of some kind that sanctions the marriage). The community could be a church, or a village, or a tribe, or a state or even a kingdom.
The full terms of the marriage contract are:
Traditional married couples in any Canadian province (or any state in the US if that ever happens) that allows same sex marriages should not have children in that province (or state). They should either move prior to having children, or they should just not bother having children. If marriage doesn't include a commitment to produce children, and same sex couples are under no obligation to produce children, why should traditional married couples go to the expense, pain and trouble to have and raise children?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.