BACK TO TABLE OF CONTENTS

JUDGES PARTY WITH HOMOSEXUAL ACTIVISTS

If there is anyone left in Canada who still believes that our judges are fair and impartial on the homosexual issue, they should know about an event that took place during Gay Pride Week in Toronto.

On June 26, 2003, The Ontario Law Society sponsored a panel consisting of the lawyers who had successfully argued for same-sex marriages in the Ontario courts. Attending this panel and the reception afterwards were invited guests including the judges who decided in favour of same-sex marriage and representatives of homosexual advocacy groups, plus organizations offering services for homosexuals/lesbians as well as representatives from all three levels of government.

On the lower court level, (Superior Court) Mr. Justice Harry LaForme, who wrote the majority decision in support of same-sex marriage, was present. He was pictured on the homosexual website, www.equalmarriage.ca at the reception with leading homosexual activists, Kevin Bourrassa and Joe Varnell, who had brought the legal challenge for same-sex marriage in Ontario. The activists' arms were around Mr. Justice LaForme's shoulders (see picture above). Chief Justice Roy McMurtry of the Ontario Court of Appeal waspictured smiling (also see picture on this page) happily between Mr. Bourrassa and Mr. Varnell, with the judge holding the former litigants around the waist. In another photograph, Chief Justice McMurtry is shown in deep conversation with long-time homosexual activist George Hislop, who was a defendant in the 1978 Toronto bathhouse raid, at which time Mr. McMurtry was then serving as Attorney General for Ontario. (See photograph.)

Recently appointed Chief Justice of the Ontario Superior Court, Heather Smith (who presided at the lower court level hearing on same-sex marriage), was shown in a photograph enjoying a drink and an obviously warm conversation with homosexual legal counsel, Douglas Elliott. Chief Justice Smith, by the way, is the wife of David Smith, a close friend of Prime Minister Chrétien, and a man who has served as the Prime Minister's campaign director for the past three elections. He was himself recently appointed to the Senate. This connection to the Prime Minister was vital to JusticeSmith's recent appointment, and is another example of the close intertwining of our legal and judicial systems.

Of course, such a celebration could not be complete without the presence of former Supreme Court of Canada Judge, Claire L'Heureux Dubé.

Madam Justice Claire L'Heureux Dubé, in public speeches at Queen's University and the University of London, England, (King's College) in 1999, spoke in support of homosexual rights and same-sex marriage. Yet even with her obvious bias exposed, she did not hesitate to sit as a judge on the notorious Surrey School Board homosexual case in which the court ordered homosexual material to be placed in public schools in the name of new found obligations for "tolerance" and "diversity."

At the reception, Chief Justice McMurtry thanked Madam Justice Claire L'Heureux Dubé for her excellent work on homosexual rights. He stated:

Claire L'Heureux Dubé advocated gay rights in Mossop and added dignity to equality in Egan. I would like to refer, briefly, to her dissent in Mossop, in 1993, ten years ago. I think her dissenting opinion can be said to be reflected in our recent same-sex marriage decision in the Ontario Court of Appeal.

In her response, Madam Justice L'Heureux Dubé stated:

… courts have been at the forefront of this [homosexual] evolution not to say revolution. It's fascinating that the courts played a unique role …

… It is not me you should celebrate. It is the Chief Justice [McMurtry], and Gillese and MacPherson that have made history… the Ontario Court of Appeal handed out, I am told, as I have not read it yet, one of the most perfect decisions on an issue which was difficult. It took a lot of courage … Canadian law owes them a great deal.

Judges L'Heureux Dubé and McMurtry were shown in another photograph clasping hands, looking at each other with looks of mutual admiration.

Mr. Justice MacPherson, another judge on the Ontario Court of Appeal same-sex marriage case, was also present and pictured on the website.

The most bizarre comment of all during that celebration was made by Toronto lawyer, Martha McCarthy, who had argued the homosexuals' case in the Ontario courts. During her speech on the panel she stated:

We have to be so thankful for the wonderful judges … who acted with impartiality when faced with an issue that Parliament dumped upon them. (Emphasis ours)

"Impartiality?" It is most definitely not the word to describe what has occurred.

Another female lawyer in the Ontario case was lesbian Cynthia Peterson, who perhaps inadvertently, revealed the Liberal Government's strategy in making the Reference (see article "Real Women of Canada Seeks Leave to Appeal to Supreme Court on Same-sex Marriage", p….., for definition of "Reference") to the Supreme Court of Canada on the three narrow questions. She stated:

The reference [to the Supreme Court of Canada] in my view is a political necessity, not a legal one. The government decided not to appeal the decisions, which I commend them for, but we know even within the governing party, there isn't unanimous support for that decision. So there is a lot of political pressure on the government .... that political pressure is evident in that they announced that there will be a free vote, which I think is reprehensible, but it is very common on gay and lesbian issues for the government to call a free vote, sadly. The reference is to get the approval of the Supreme Court of Canada, so that when it goes to the House for a free vote ... they can say that the Supreme Court has said that religious freedoms will be protected. There is a real political value in that ... the other political value is in the Alberta situation ... we know the government there is doing everything possible to prevent same-sex marriages. But if we can get assistance from the Supreme Court of Canada in the reference to either pre-empt the battle altogether or use it to ensure uniformity across the country, then I think there will be real value there as well ...

I'm pretty confident that this is more a political necessity than a legal one and that it will not in any way undo any of the legal victories that we've won. (Emphasis ours.)

In other words, it is obvious that the Liberal government's legislation on same-sex marriage is going by way of Reference to the Supreme Court of Canada to merely have it rubber stamped and endorsed by the Court for political not legal reasons. The Reference and debate on the bill in the House of Commons is just a matter of form to give the impression of democratic process in order to disguise the arrogant high-handed deed it is. The whole matter is a Parliamentary charade, and a grievous offence to democracy.

It appears that the judges in Canada have made a charade of justice. Who can trust judges any longer? Theirs is a political game playing out in Canada - not a legal one.

BACK TO TABLE OF CONTENTS