Changing its definition would inevitably change the effectiveness of marriage as the fundamental foundational underpinning of society that it has been over the ages. The question of whether same sex partnerships ought to be called marriage is clearly not one of human rights at all.
All our lives, we work hard to pay for life insurance so that our families will not have money worries when we die. That argument is very difficult to comprehend. The question is on the motion.
Speaker, as you may have noticed, the debate on this bill to change the definition of marriage is having a polarizing effect. That, in the opinion of this House, it is necessary, in light of public debate around recent court decisions, to state that marriage is and should remain a union of one man and one woman to the exclusion of all others, and that Parliament will take all necessary steps to preserve this definition of marriage in Canada.
That is why we have different words to describe different distinctive relationships. They were people who were motivated by their religious beliefs and were successful in leading great reforms in their societies. Specifically, the rights of marriage can and must be given only with the responsibilities of marriage.