St-Julien to oppose federal same-sex marriage bill

ODILE NELSON

Guy St-Julien, the Liberal MP for Abitibi-James Bay-Nunavik announced this week that he would vote against his own government’s proposed legislation to allow same-sex marriage.

In an Aug. 5 press release, St-Julien, a devout Roman Catholic who has been married for 36 years, said “Neither the Supreme Court of Canada nor the government can change my opinion: It’s no.”

The federal government presented a draft bill July 17 that would redefine marriage so that homosexual couples can legally marry.

Draft wording of the bill says “Marriage for civil purposes is the lawful union of two persons to the exclusion of all others.” It does not specify that the union must be between a man and a woman.

The announcement comes as both Ontario and British Columbia’s provincial superior courts rule that excluding same-sex couples from marrying violates the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms.

But in his press release, St-Julien argues that marriage came before governments even existed.

“Because the institution of marriage precedes that of the state, and because it is a fundamental element of any society, it cannot be altered by either the Charter of Rights, or the Canadian government, or a Canadian court,” the release said.

St-Julien’s public announcement came on the heels of a papal edict asking Catholic politicians to stand against any proposed legislation that would alter the definition of marriage to legally include same-sex unions.

But St-Julien told Nunatsiaq News this week that his decision was his own and was and not promted by the Vatican’s.

“For me, it’s my personal values. They are more important than the Liberal Party. I don’t have a problem voting against the bill. For me it’s very personal,” he said. “I have nothing against a man staying with another man. It’s not my problem but for me I don’t vote for the modification of the definition of marriage.”

St-Julien said he’s not sure if his position reflects that of the majority of his constituents in Nunavik.

But he expects the Liberal government’s focus on the issue is not very important to the region.

“The people that I’ve spoken to are against this government project. They say to me they have other problems in Nunavik – like the caribou hunt [being affected by the U.S. ban on beef]…. There are more pressing problems. Families with three or four children need support. In Nunavik there really are a lot of other problems that need the help of the provincial and federal governments – like the question of the cost of food and the cost of gas,” he said.

Yet St-Julien said he also expects many Nunavimmiut prefer marriage’s long-standing definition.

“I have not verified this but I think in Nunavik people prefer the traditional idea of marriage of a man and a woman. But I have nothing against common law unions either,” he said.

Johnny Adams, chairman of the Kativik Regional Government, did not reply to a request for comment before Nunatsiaq News deadline this week.

St-Julien expects the House of Commons will hold a free vote on the legislation sometime before the next election in 2004.

But before parliament has the chance to hold a vote, the Liberal government will first consult the Supreme Court of Canada. It will ask it if the federal government has the exclusive legal authority to change the existing act, and whether the proposed legislation respects the Charter of Rights and Freedoms.

Hearings on the legislation should then begin in the House of Commons this fall.

The federal government has also assured Canadians and religious leaders that any amendment to the existing definition will “protect the right of churches and religious organizations to sanctify marriages as they define it.”

If the government does pass the legislation, it would become only the third country in the world to do so. Only the Netherlands and Belgium have similar laws.