![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
Petition time In Parliament
These petitions were submitted prior to yesterday's debate on the new same-sex marriage act.
Mrs. Cheryl Gallant (Renfrew—Nipissing—Pembroke, CPC): Mr. Speaker, the petitioners from Renfrew--Nipissing--Pembroke recognize that the best foundation for society, families and the raising of children is the lifelong union between one man and one woman. They are asking that Parliament define marriage in federal law as being the union of one man and one woman to the exclusion of all others.
Hon. Don Boudria (Glengarry—Prescott—Russell, Lib.): Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to table a petition originating from the very excellent riding of Kingston and the Islands.
Queen's University students, Ian Griffiths and a number of others, put a tremendous amount of time, I am told, into assembling 2,000 names of students who support the government's legislation concerning equal marriage.
I am pleased to table this petition on behalf of the good citizens of Kingston and the Islands, so well represented in this Parliament.
Mr. Gary Goodyear (Cambridge, CPC): Mr. Speaker, I have the honour today to present two petitions on behalf of the Canada Family Action Coalition.
The petitioners request that Parliament use all possible legislative and administrative measures, including invoking section 33 of the charter if necessary, to preserve and protect the current definition of marriage as between one man and one woman.
The second petition reads the same way, that Parliament use all possible legislative and administrative measures, including invoking section 33 of the charter if necessary, to preserve and protect the current definition of marriage as between one man and one woman.
Mr. Jay Hill (Prince George—Peace River, CPC): Mr. Speaker, the second petition is concerning, as so many are, the very historic debate that is about to get under way concerning the redefinition of marriage. The petitioners are from Fort St. John, Charlie Lake and Chetwynd, communities in my riding.
The petitioners wish to note that marriage is the best foundation for families and for the raising of children. The House passed a motion in June 1999 that called for marriage to continue to be recognized as the union of one man and one woman to the exclusion of all others. Marriage is the exclusive jurisdiction of Parliament. Therefore, the petitioners call upon Parliament to pass legislation to recognize the institution of marriage in federal law as being a lifelong union of one man and one woman to the exclusion of all others.
Mr. Mark Warawa (Langley, CPC): Mr. Speaker, I am honoured to present a petition from Langley residents. The petitioners state that the majority of Canadians support the current definition of marriage and they are calling on Parliament to provide legislation to preserve and protect the current definition of marriage as being between one man and one woman.
Mr. Dave Batters (Palliser, CPC): Mr. Speaker, pursuant to Standing Order 36, I have the honour of presenting a petition on behalf of the good people of the Caronport Community Church who reside in my riding of Palliser.
The petitioners wish to call to the attention of Parliament that marriage, defined as the lifelong union between one man and one woman, is the best foundation for families and the raising of children. This definition of marriage has been changed by the courts, but it is in the exclusive jurisdiction of Parliament to define marriage.
These constituents petition that Parliament define marriage in federal law as being a lifelong union of one man and one woman to the exclusion of all others.
Mr. Leon Benoit (Vegreville—Wainwright, CPC): Mr. Speaker, I am delighted to present two petitions on behalf of my constituents.
My constituents feel that it is wrong that the courts have been involved in defining marriage. They believe that is a responsibility correctly left to the elected people in the House of Commons. Further, they believe it is the responsibility of the members of this House of Commons to uphold the current definition of marriage as the union of one man and one woman to the exclusion of all others.
Mr. Paul Szabo (Mississauga South, Lib.): Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to present a petition on behalf of my constituents, who would like to draw to the attention of the House that the majority of Canadians believe that the laws of Canada should be determined by Parliament, not by our courts.
The petitioners state that it is the duty of Parliament to ensure that marriage is defined in the manner in which Canadians wish. Therefore, they call upon Parliament to use all possible legislative and administrative measures, including the invocation of the notwithstanding clause, section 33 of the charter, to preserve and protect the current definition of marriage as being the legal union of one man and one woman to the exclusion of all others.
no subject
Thank you for the links.
no subject
no subject