fCommons, by a vote of 216 to 55, supported a resolution affirming that "marriage is and should remain the union of one manand one woman to the exclusion of all others, and that Parliament will take all necessary steps ... to preserve this definition inCanada."(4) While some opponents of legal recognition of same sex relationships are homophobic, some of the oppositionhas psychological, social, political and religious roots. And some in the gay and lesbian communities reject "marriage," withits heterosexual and gendered connotations, as a desired legal alternative.(5) In the near future, if same sex partners are togain the right to "marry" it seems most likely that they will have to look to the courts to secure this right, though there isinterest from some politicians in exploring various alternatives that do not totally equate same sex partnership with marriage. It is noteworthy that in M v H and other Charter cases the successful discrimination argument was based on the unequaltreatment between same sex and heterosexual unmarried cohabitation, and the Supreme Court did not purport to legallyequate same sex unions to marriage.(6) While same sex partners have recently had very significant success in using the courtsto gain "spousal status" similar to unmarried heterosexual cohabitants, there has yet to be a successful claim in Canada (orany other country) by same sex partners to the right to "marry."(7) The Supreme Court in M v. H. accepted that individuals in same-sex relationships are not "less worthy of recognition andprotection" than unmarried heterosexual cohabitants.(8) Accordingly the Charter requires governments to recognize samesex partners in the same way that it recognizes opposite sex "common law" partners. However, this does not necessarilymean the courts will rule that the Charter requires that the federal (or provincial) government enact legislation that givessame sex partners the legal right to enter into the legal statu...
