Quebec: Oui To Same-Sex Marriage

Homosexuals have the right to wed, Quebec's top court said Friday, making it the third Canadian province to allow same-sex marriage.

The Quebec Court of Appeal upheld a lower-court ruling that the traditional definition of marriage is discriminatory and unjustified.

Same-sex marriages have been declared legal by provincial courts in Ontario and British Columbia, and together the three provinces represent more than half of Canada's 32 million people.

Canada's Supreme Court has been asked to clarify the constitutionality of gay marriage in a nonbinding ruling due next year, and Prime Minister Paul Martin has promised to introduce a bill to legalize it.

The Quebec court case pitted some religious groups against Michael Hendricks, 62, and Rene Leboeuf, 48, who want to marry after being together for 31 years.

"The floodgates seem to be open and it looks like Canada is going to become the first North American country that has equal marriage, and this is wonderful," Hendricks told a news conference.

"We're going to go home and start planning for April 10 and make the guest list," said Hendricks, an AIDS activist. "It's going to be open to everyone."

The religious groups were appealing a September 2002 ruling by Justice Louise Lemelin of Quebec Superior Court that said restricting marriage to a union between a man and a woman was unjustified under Canada's Charter of Rights and Freedoms.

Canada jumped to the forefront of the gay rights debate last June when it announced plans to legalize same-sex marriages. The decision followed the court rulings in Ontario and British Columbia allowing gays to marry.

Gay couples from the United States have since flocked north to wed in Toronto.

Despite the rulings, polls show Canadians are about evenly split in favor and against legalizing gay marriage.

That uncertainty has some members of the governing Liberal Party fearful they will have to deal with the gay marriage issue during an election campaign expected to be called in the next weeks.

Some observers say that was the reason the government gave the Supreme Court more constitutional questions to answer on the issue, in effect delaying any ruling and possible legalization until next year.

By Colin McClelland