NEWS RELEASE

March 2, 2000

For Immediate Release

BREITKREUZ RENAMES BILL C-23, THE DEATH OF MARRIAGE ACT

"If this bill passes, the institution of marriage will be the next casualty of gay and lesbian lobby groups and weak-kneed politicians."

 

Ottawa – Today, Garry Breitkreuz, M.P. for Yorkton-Melville, sounded the alarm bells for everyone concerned about preserving the institution of marriage, traditional families and society as we know it in Canada. "Bill C-23 is officially known as The Modernization of Benefits and Obligations Act, but it should be renamed The Death of Marriage Act," stated Breitkreuz. "This bill amends 68 federal statutes and directs 20 federal government agencies to extend benefits to same-sex couples on the same basis as common-law couples. To show how ridiculous this legislation is, the government intends to extend benefits based on a person’s private same-sex activities but excludes all other types of dependent relationships. How will same-sex couples prove to the government that theirs is a homosexual relationship? How will the government prove that it’s not?"

"In the 1950s, buggery was a criminal offence, now it’s a requirement to receive benefits from the federal government. This is a ridiculous rationale for extending government benefits!" exclaimed Breitkreuz. "With the passage of Bill C-23, any logical public policy foundation for government recognition and support for the institution of marriage and families will be gone." Breitkreuz encouraged every person who believes that marriage is reserved exclusively for a man and a woman to contact their Member of Parliament immediately and ask them to vote against this bill. "I’m hoping that public outrage will stop this bill in its tracks," said Breitkreuz. "Failing that, Reform will be propose amendments to include the definition of marriage and family in the legislation."

"The federal government started down this slippery slope more than ten years ago when the Progressive Conservatives passed laws that gave common law couples the same benefits as legally married couples. This led the Supreme Court to conclude in the recent court cases that a family is any couple (including a same-sex couple) who shacks up for a year, and if they’re having sex, they must be treated the same as legally married couples," reported Breitkreuz.

"The courts have specifically asked Parliament for direction on this important issue and yet the Liberals have purposely ignored the will of Parliament by refusing to include a definition of marriage in this bill. On June 8, 1999, Parliament passed a motion (216-55) to ‘take all necessary steps’ to preserve the definition of marriage as ‘the union of one man & one woman to the exclusion of all others.’ It is deceitful for the Liberals to try and claim that they are defending the institution of marriage when they won’t even define marriage in federal law," declared Breitkreuz.

"For thousands of years, the traditional family has been the basic building block of our society. Reformers are very concerned that the erosion of the traditional family and society will take place if the institution of marriage as we know it isn’t defended vigorously. It’s our children that will be hurt the most if we fail. If the people don’t mobilize now, this insidious bill will take us to the bottom of the slippery slope," concluded Breitkreuz.

-30-

For more information please call:

Yorkton: (306) 782-3309

Ottawa: (613) 992-4394

e-mail: breitg0@parl.gc.ca