Date

Dear --------: 

I am writing to express my opinion regarding the redefinition of marriage to include same-sex relationships.

Marriage is a human reality, a natural institution that precedes all social, legal and religious systems. It predates our present government or any other. Marriage as a union between one man and one woman has existed across all cultures, in all civilizations, and in all religions for all of recorded history. It is not the creature of the State or Church, and neither a government nor the Church has authority to change its nature. Marriage as a form of life for couples has always been valued and protected as an institution because of its unique character, its way of ordering human relationships, and its procreative potential.

Marriage between a woman and a man constitutes a unique good for all society. It has a fundamental and irreplaceable role in building societies and civilizations. The social value of marriage comes from its role as a stabilizing force for the family, the basic unit of society. The conjugal partnership of a man and a woman has always been considered to be the basis of the family, providing a stable and positive environment in which to raise and care for children and to educate future generations. The family is at the heart of the social bonds that unite one generation with the next, and it is within the family that tomorrow's society learns how to love and relate to others. The most recent data from Statistics Canada (2001 Census) clearly indicates that marriage is the most stable union in which to raise children.

The principles of equity, equality, autonomy and freedom of choice have been invoked by the government in its draft legislation in an effort to remove the distinctions between heterosexual spouses and same-sex partners in order to give the latter access to normative marital status. However, equality does not mean uniformity. Non-discrimination does not require uniformity; rather, it requires respect for diversity and differences. In the current context, refusing to establish the necessary distinctions leads to confusion and to devaluing of diversity. It is not discrimination to treat different realities differently.

I believe that solutions to the desire and need to give formal protection to forms of adult personal relationships, other than marriage, which also involve commitment, mutual care, and emotional and financial interdependence can be found without proceeding with a radical redefinition of marriage. Although the proposal before parliament is to change the definition of marriage, allowing religious groups their own interpretation of marriage would actually create two different definitions of marriage – one civil, the other religious. This can only lead to future confusion and disorder.

I trust that you will see fit to exercise your responsibility as a parliamentarian to consider this problem with an informed conscience as a reference point, and for the good of the country cast your vote for the protection of the institution of marriage as the union of one man and one woman to the exclusion of all others. This is necessary to insure the security of the family unit and the stability of our society. Changing the definition of marriage does not change its reality.

Signature:

Name:

Address:

Send letters to:

Honourable Ralph Goodale

House of Commons

Ottawa, ON K1A 0A6

e-mail: Goodale.R@parl.gc.ca

The Honourable Martin Cauchon

Minister of Justice and Attorney General of Canada

Department of Justice Building

284 Wellington Street

Ottawa, ON K1A 0H8

e-mail: Cauch.M@parl.gc.ca

The Right Honourable Jean Cretien

Prime Minster of Canada

House of Commons

Ottawa, ON K1A 0A6

e-mail: pm@pm.gc.ca

Honourable Paul Martin

House of Commons

Ottawa, ON K1A 0A6

e-mail: Martin.P@parl.gc.ca