So... kind of ashamed to be Canadian today.

No, that's not the point and to even claim that this issue is about foreign law overruling Canadian law on Canadian soil is stupid and disingenuous.

Read my post again.

What, like Iranian women that get drivers licenses while they're in Canada?

How dare they?

What I don't understand, and what only the CBC has hinted at so far, is that undere the Divorce Act (federal legislation) one must be ordinarily resident for one year in the particular province that you are starting your divorce action in. How do the tourists get around that?

This particular aspect of the law causes real headaches for some Canadians whose marriages break down shortly after moving to a new part of the country.

What's this aboot, eh?

Skin's not rilly shore what it's aboat, eh.

The one question at the top of my head now: is it possible to get married in a country (and under that country's laws) even if you're not a resident? If I decide to get married in some Caribbean island while being a resident of another country, according to which country's laws am I then married? And which country's divorce laws would apply?

Would it be fair to summarize the case at hand as follows: a Brit and a US lesbian get married in Canada as tourists, while living in Florida; they then return to Florida (where their marriage doesn't get recognized); after a while, they separate and now want a "divorce"?

Sounds pretty complicated to me, e.g., I'd find it quite hard for a Canadian court to rule on property issues that are happening in another country...

Considering that everyday is today when you get there, does that mean you are going to be in perpetual shame of being Canadian (which is completely understandable) or only for as long as this thread is kept on the top page?

I'm pretty sure the shame at being Canadian has nothing to do with this.

After reading over this again, I do feel that this has been misrepresented. This doesn't concern foreign residents in Canada; in concerns tourists who come to Canada for marriage, only to return to their home country.

Really, what is the point of getting married in Canada if the marriage isn't valid where you're going to live and receive the benefits thereof? It's just a personal token.

Canada's laws have no weight outside Canada, and yet in the case of divorce the Canadian government would be expected to rule on two foreign citizens outside its borders. It makes no sense.

Therefore, it seems reasonable for the Canadian government to wash its hands of this kind of thing.

The Conservatives either clarify or backpedal, depending on your perspective.

http://news.nationalpost.com/2012/0...marriages-are-correctly-recognized-in-canada/

I believe the idea was to pressure their own government into recognizing their marriage, since governments normally recognize marriage licenses issued in other countries. I've known Canadian citizens that travelled to Afghanistan, Pakistan and India to get married, their foreign marriage licenses were accepted here. Same thing with the licenses of immigrants that were married before they became Canadian citizens.

Even if this gets resolved tomorrow, the fact we still have an entire territory named "Nunavut" fills me with a constant low level shame.

I blame 14thDoctor.

Yeah... it would be nice if he would just admit that he fucked up, was overdramatic and posted before he entirely understood the issue.

But this is Wordforge, so that ain't gonna happen.

Oh, the plight of the queers

It is a shame that you can't be honest with yourself, yes.

I understood it just fine, thanks.

You're saying "This doesn't effect Canadian citizens living in Canada!"

Yeah, I know. That's not the point.

You're saying "This is in response to the issue of divorce!"

Yeah, I know. That's not the point.

Even the article detailing the governments clarification says what I was saying:

It's idiotic for the Canadian government to refuse to recognize something that's legal in Canada just because it's illegal in another jurisdiction. England and Florida can do what they like on their own soil, but on Canadian soil, Canadian laws should take precedence.

But it appears the Conservatives understand the outrage and they're planning on doing just that, so it's a positive sign.

^ You actually just proved you don't understand the real issue.

Again.

Okay, what do you think the "real" issue is?

We need a smiley.

EDIT: Well, shit. What do you know. We have one.

They weren't married before. Don't sweat it.

They should let them "marry" as long as one of them looks like a man. Like the dude on the right.

Nope.

To elaborate on my previous post, it can be summed up fairly simply:

1) the capacity to marry is based on the law of where you actually live (Americans from certain states cannot marry people of the same sex, so they can't marry someone of the same sex in Canada even if Canadians can do that there)

2) the validity of the marriage that you enter into is based on the law of the location of your marriage. (if Canadian law says that you're only married if there is an elephant present, then the lack of elephant invalidates the marriage if you're doing it in Canada, even if there is no such elephant requirement in the law of your home jurisdiction).

Issue 1 appears to have been the problem, so 14th Doc's shame is probably not necessary. I'm not a fan of Harper at all but I don't think this is his doing.

IMHO!

That's silly, though. If two people want to get married in Canada, and they're eligible to get married in Canada, Canada should be just fine with marrying them and recognizing that marriage in Canada. (It's not just a gay marriage thing. As Bailey pointed out, some countries don't allow interfaith marriages.) If another country doesn't consider it valid, that's the other countries problem, not Canada's.