Good news for Pakistani Origin Canadian Citizen .... One more reason to go for Canadian Citizenship.


Muslims claiming cash for numerous wives

Islamic leaders: Hundreds in GTA get extra welfare for polygamous union.

Now I know why Pakistani origin Canadian have all the time to be online at

What do you think will there be a surge in second marriages in Pakistan?

Read ON !!!!!

Hundreds of GTA Muslim men in polygamous marriages -- some with a harem of wives -- are receiving welfare and social benefits for each of their spouses, thanks to the city and province, Muslim leaders say.
Mumtaz Ali, president of the Canadian Society of Muslims, said wives in polygamous marriages are recognized as spouses under the Ontario Family Law Act, providing they were legally married under Muslim laws abroad.
"Polygamy is a regular part of life for many Muslims," Ali said yesterday. "Ontario recognizes religious marriages for Muslims and others."
He estimates "several hundred" GTA husbands in polygamous marriages are receiving benefits. Under Islamic law, a Muslim man is permitted to have up to four spouses.
However, city and provincial officials said legally a welfare applicant can claim only one spouse. Other adults living in the same household can apply for welfare independently.
The average recipient with a child can receive about $1,500 monthly, city officials said.

In addressing the issue of polygamous marriages, the preamble to the Ontario Family Law Act states: "In the definition of 'spouse,' a reference to marriage includes a marriage that is actually or potentially polygamous, if it was celebrated in a jurisdiction whose system of law recognizes it as valid. R.S.O. 1990, c. F.3, s. 1 (2)."
"There are many people in the community who are taking advantage of this," Ali said. "This is a law and there's nothing wrong with it."
Immigration officials said yesterday that polygamous marriages aren't allowed in Canada, but that contradicts the provincial law.
"Canada is a very liberal-minded country," Ali said. "Canada is way ahead of Britain in this respect."
He said Britain recently began permitting husbands to collect benefits for each of their wives.
The British government recently admitted that nearly a thousand men are living legally with multiple wives in Britain. Although the families are entitled to claim social security for each wife, the department for work and pensions said it has not counted how many are on benefits.
In Canada, Ali said, the man and his main wife and children enter Canada as landed immigrants. The other spouses are sponsored or arrive as visitors to join their husband to share one home.
The families receiving benefits didn't want their identities released because it can lead to questions by authorities on how they entered Canada and can mean an end to their benefits, Ali said.
Brenda Nesbitt, the city's director of social services, said benefits are only paid to one spouse and names and addresses are cross-checked for possible fraud.
"There may be polygamous cases we are not aware off," Nesbitt said yesterday. "They can apply as single people and we won't know."
Ontario Community and Social Services spokesman Erike Botond said a social assistance benefit may only include one spouse. "Other adults residing in the same dwelling place as a recipient and their spouse may apply as individuals."
"I can assure you that polygamy is not recognized under immigration legislation," immigration spokesman Karen Shadd-Evelyn said yesterday. "A conjugal relationship, whether involving marriage or a common-law partnership, must be exclusive."
Councillor Rob Ford said taxpayers' money should be spent on education and schools instead.
"This is wrong," Ford said yesterday. "They should put a stop to this immediately."

23rd March 2011

Polygamy Case Tests Canada's Marriage Laws

A case in the Canadian province of British Columbia has the potential to overturn Canadian laws on marriage, which have banned polygamy since 1892.

British Columbia Chief Justice Robert Bauman will decide whether polygamous marriage, as currently practiced by members of a breakaway Mormon sect, is protected by the Canadian constitution’s guarantee of freedom of religion.

His ruling is likely to set off a long legal battle.

The case is rooted in a 2009 court decision to throw out polygamy charges against two men, James Oler and Winston Blackmore, the leaders of competing offshoots of the Mormon Church in a small settlement named Bountiful. The court dropped the charges based on the constitution's protection of religious freedom.
The British Columbia attorney general’s office then asked the province’s Supreme
Court to rule on the constitutionality of the anti-polygamy laws.
“The federal government has always taken the view that that law is constitutional,” says University of Western Ontario constitutional law professor Grant Huscroft. “But the responsibility for enforcing and prosecuting the law lies with the province,” he explained. “What that meant was, in effect, a federal law was not being enforced in one of the provinces,” he said.

The effects of polygamy A key issue for some legal scholars is whether the practice of polygamy itself is inherently harmful.

Testimony from former polygamists interviewed in the British Columbia case has been mixed. Some say they have had positive experiences in plural marriages, others say they suffered.

Bev Baines, a law professor at Queen’s University in Kingston, Ontario, suggests that some reported abuses might occur because polygamy has been driven underground and into isolated communities.
Baines says as long as the practice is illegal, it is hard to observe. “I’m arguing for decriminalization so that we can do the research to find out whether there is a problem that exists peculiarly with respect to polygamous relationships,” she said.


Bev Baines questions whether the government is failing to uphold its own principle of multiculturalism by banning plural marriages. “I would say that the vast majority of polygamous relationships are practiced (in the minds of those practicing them) for religious reasons,” Baines says. “This is not your hippie communes of the 60’s,” she added.
Grant Huscroft worries about the effect on society of allowing polygamy.
“It will be an incredible precedent if a Canadian court, under some theory or other of human rights, were to declare a practice that I think is antithetically opposed to human rights values to be constitutionally permissible,” he said.

Huscroft says other groups besides breakaway Mormons are interested in the case. Some Muslims are also watching the outcome, due to the traditional practice of multiple partner marriages in Islam.

Libertarians, who generally oppose government action in private matters, and certain sexual minorities have also expressed interest.
Chief Justice Robert Bauman's ruling is expected this summer.


Source for Second News
Last edited:


They will have to marry second wife with in the country or divorce one and sponsor 2nd from outside isn't it? Whats with these Muslim leaders trying to ruin it for every body maybe their wives don't allow them and they are jealous.:lol:


Councller (250+ posts)
FOR My Indien brothers
Jaskaran Mahil
Edmonton, Alberta
EMAIL: [email protected]
Nov. 18, 2006
I went to India in February 2004 with my uncle from England. This was my first trip to India. I was 22 years old and I was looking forward to find a life companion who would be with me and my family. I was introduced to few girls through my mom’s brother. I was being honest and I was telling them about my child from my past relationship.
During this process my sister in Canada talked to SUKHI (girl's Mama). He lives in Surrey, BC Canada and was a co worker with my sister and my brother in law. My sister talked to Sukhi about my situation and how I was looking for a girl to settle down. Sukhi knew everything about my past and my child. He proposed to my sister to tell me to take a look at his sister’s daughter. My sister and brother in law explained clearly to Sukhi that Johnny has a son and he is going to be a part of his life and his partner’s life after marriage. Sukhi accepted and says that is understandable and he already knows about it. Sukhi acted on behalf of his sister in India.
Then after this was all accepted and clearly explained he called me personally and proposed me to take a look at his niece. By that time my mother and my grandmother were there already with me in India. Sukhi had a conversation with my mother as well about it.
I, my mother and grandmother went to see *R.deep. I talked to R.deep one on one. I told R.deep about my past relationship, and my son. I also explained that it would be your decision not anyone else’s, because she is going to be my life partner and my sons new step mother. I told her to think before she makes her final decision. The next day Sukhi called from Canada and told me that his niece is willing to get married to me. I talked to my mother and finalized everything and arranged the marriage on a short notice, because my mother had to come back to Canada within 10 days.
I and R.deep got married on April 7, 2004. We went for our honeymoon to Shimla a hill station in India. During my stay in India after wedding I met her close family members. I left from India on April 17, 2004. My first priority after coming from India was to bring my wife R.deep to Canada as I was missing her a lot.
I filed documents for R.deep’s Immigration to Canada in May 2004. Because of my past relationship in Canada the immigration Department in India sent R.deep a letter for an interview. I flew to India especially to support and prepare her for the interview. During the whole time when R.deep was in India I was sending money for her day to day expenses and education. I was encouraging her the whole time to join classes for English speaking courses and basic knowledge in computers.
Unfortunately the Immigration department denied her immigration to Canada in Feb. 2005. I was very disappointed as I was looking forward to bring her to Canada for the past 1 year. I hired the lawyer right away with the recommendation of Sukhi to file the appeal against immigration decision. After a long wait the appeal date was set for February 2006. I and my father flew to Vancouver for the appeal date. Finally the Judge made the decision in our favour. I was extremely happy that God finally heard my and my parent’s prayers after a long time. I was looking forward to start my life with my wife. We had to reapply for R.deep’s medical and police clearance as it was already expired because of the delay in process of immigration.
I was very frustrated because immigration department was not issuing visa to R.deep even after wining the appeal. I called so many times to the immigration department but I dint get a response from them. So I finally decided to write an email to my local MP Rona Ambrose. I was talking to Tiffany Zender who represented the MP about this situation and she emailed the Indian embassy. Tiffany supported us a lot to make the process faster. Finally we got a response from the embassy on September 6th that the visa has been issued. We all were extremely happy. I booked R.deep’s ticket and sent her $2,900 for shopping in India before coming here.
During the plans of her coming here, I and my family were frequently talking to Sukhi regarding her booking ticket and other plans. We wanted her to land in Edmonton but Sukhi insisted everyone to make her land in Vancouver. He told us that he would like to keep R.deep for couple weeks at his place before sending to Edmonton. We didn’t like it as we all were looking forward to see her in our family. Especially my father was going to see her for the first time. Sukhi kept on insisting us to leave her in Vancouver for some time. I and my family agreed her to stay in Vancouver for a week but I decided to come to Vancouver to pick her up from the airport and stay with her for that week. I booked the returned ticket for myself and one way ticket for R.deep from Vancouver to Edmonton. Sukhi got mad that why we booked the ticket for Ramandeep as he wants to keep her in Vancouver for some time. We insisted that we would like her to come back with me as me and my family are loo! king forward to see her as soon as possible. Moreover she is going to stay in Vancouver with him for a week before coming to Edmonton.
R.deep landed in Vancouver on September 25th 2006. I, my brother-in-law, Sukhi and his family went to the Airport to pick her up. I took flowers and box of chocolate for her to the airport. From the very first day she landed in Vancouver, I saw a big change in R.deep. It was not the same person I married and used to talk to me on the phone for two years. She was all for her Uncle Sukhi rather than me. During her stay in Vancouver at her uncle’s house she gave me attitude and listened to her uncle. Along with her uncle she started insisting on staying in Vancouver for some time and told me to leave by myself to Edmonton. I was very angry and surprised with this situation as my family was waiting for her in Edmonton and my father was going to see her for the first time. I had arguments with her couple times on this issue and finally she and her uncle agreed upon her leaving to Edmonton with me.
We left for Edmonton on September 29th 2006. My family was very happy and looking forward to meet her. Upon arrival we had a very warm welcome from my family and everyone was excited with the presence of R.deep in our family. During all those happy moments me and my family was getting surprises from R.deep’s attitude. Most of the time she was lying in the bedroom, watching TV or calling India or her uncle Sukhi in Surrey. If I ever ask her something or wants her to mingle with us she would say that she is having a headache and want to lie down. I always asked her that if she would like to go to the doctor. Most of the t time she refused but upon insisting a lot she agreed to go and see the doctor. Doctor examined her and said everything is normal. I never understood where she was getting headaches from. I took her to the mall and bought her clothes. I even engaged her in the ESL classes to improve her English. I and my dad took her to look for the new SUV we were going! to buy. During all that she never showed any excitement or happiness while her stay with us.
R.deep was not very joyful to be with me, and I did not get to know why because she would not talk to me. She had been in Canada for three weeks and her Uncle in Canada was getting more communication than me. I felt that she was feeling upset so I tried to talk to her and told her that I would do what ever it takes to make you happy. I never knew that she would phone her uncle and say she was feeling upset and she did not want to stay at my house. On October 13th 2006 I got a big shock when her Uncle called and started telling me that I m not taking good care of her. He was totally disrespectful to me and even said that R.deep is smarter than me and Canadian people are dumb. In respect I did not talk back to her uncle. He told me to give the phone to R.deep and I did. After she got off from the phone while I was standing in from of her she asked my Dad if she can go to Surrey to her Uncle. I was shocked, I am her husband and she asked my father if she could go, she shou! ld have asked me and told me why. I did not say anything, because I now felt like ever since she got off the plane her and her uncle’s plan was to leave me and stay at her uncle’s house. She went upstairs and started packing. I continued working upset and feeling like what did I do wrong. After she was done packing she came to me and asked if she can go to Vancouver for couple of days. My reply was you are going on your own decision not mine, and if I say it won’t make any difference anyhow.
I dropped her off at the airport. My heart was broken and I felt used by R.deep and her Uncle just to bring her across Canada. When she left my Dad at the Airport gave her $100 and said call us once you get there. She didn’t call when she got there. After a long wait I called her uncles house and her uncle’s son answered the phone. He said R.deep was sleeping. I told him to give her a message to call me once she wakes up. She called me later and said she was so happy to be here. I was so upset thinking why I can’t make her happy. The second day she called again and said she was very happy and she has cooked food today. She cunningly asked me if I want her to come back. I said I never wanted you to leave in the first place so come back when you feel right. She replied she is not coming back. She talked to my Dad one or two times, she and her Uncle are always blaming me for all this. I still don’t know where I went wrong. All I can say that I and my family were being used to bring her across Canada.
I have heard a lot of stories these days that people living in India especially Punjab don't care about anything. They are even willing to sell their daughters just to get them to Canada and it disgusts me. I want to do anything to send R.deep back to India and set example for all the people in India who take advantage of families like ours and abuse the immigration system to get across here. Please let me know what could be done or what are the chances to teach lesson to people like Ramandeep and her uncle under any act or law. I would really appreciate if someone can get back to me on [email protected] email

*R.deep made shorter name


Councller (250+ posts)
Toronto NRIs, Launches Major Fight Against Immigration Fraud
formed an organization called: “Canadians Against Immigration Fraud”.
Runaway spouses....
The Canadian Marriage Fraud Victim Society, Vancouver has already documented 200 cases and believes there are many, many more. "Most of those that we have involve spouses from India because we deal largely with the Indo-Canadian community but I think it's happening in all immigrant communities," says spokesman NRI, an abandoned bride living in Vancouver. "We believe there are thousands of cases but people are too embarrassed to come forward."
Another victim SAID, "It is very difficult and Nobody listens to you."
The Canadian Marriage Fraud Victim Society argues that the program doesn't do enough to protect Canadians from unscrupulous paramours. They have presented a 20,000-signature petition to Parliament requesting that permanent residence should no longer be automatic for immigrants sponsored here by their Canadian spouses. Instead they want Canada to follow the example set by the United States and Australia, where the marriage must last three years before foreign spouses can attain their permanent papers.


Prime Minister (20k+ posts)

کہتا ہر پختون ہے عمران ہمارا خون ہے
کہتاہرپنجابی ہے عمران فتح کی چابی ہے
کہتا ہر بلوچ ہے عمران ہماری سوچ ہے
کہتا ہر اک سندھی ہے عمران ہی بلندی ہے
کہتا پاکستان ہے عمران ہماری شان ہے

wah wah kya baat kahi hai aap ney

I agree 100%


Councller (250+ posts)
Most trusted Name in the NRI media
Serving over 22 millions NRIs worldwide
Marriage-related violence
1,000 complaints from women against NRIs
NRI women tell torture tales
Hyderabad, January 11, 2006
Ashok Das

The increasing incidence of harassment and crime against NRI women was a cause of concern for the National Commission for Women.
Chairing a session on Gender Issues of the Diaspora, NCW chairperson Girija Vyas has said that the commission has received over 1,000 complaints from women against NRIs with regard to marriage-related violence and other offences.
There was also a spurt in the number of “marriage frauds” where women were the victims. Similarly, Indian maids and those employed in other jobs in the Persian Gulf nations were exposed to sexual abuse, she added.
Expressing satisfaction that “gender issues” were being taken up for discussion for the first time at the Pravasi Bharatiya Divas, Vyas said a comprehensive Bill against sexual assault on women, including rape and harassment, was likely to come up before Parliament in the coming session.
She said the NCW had already submitted a report to the Union home ministry on the need for giving more teeth to the laws relating to rape and suggested amendments to the CrPC.
Ranjana Kumari, national general secretary of the Mahila Dakshata Samithi, expressed concern over harassment cases against NRI women. While some women were dumped by their NRI husbands after marriage, demanding more dowry, others were subjected to harassment after being taken abroad, she said.
She suggested setting up of a gender cell in the ministry of overseas Indian affairs to deal with gender issues of NRIs.


Pak Zindabad

Councller (250+ posts)
Keep doing this............Keep getting disgraced in the world................ for not working.............and finding ways to make money without working..........does not matter how low you have to go..............Make other muslims proude,......


Chief Minister (5k+ posts)
Ghairat kehti hay aurat ko job nahi kernay beghairti hay mard ke.
Multiple benefits lena although is not beghairti..wo total ghairat hay...state should pay for every wife...dont care if goras are taxed to pay for it.. thts not beghairti, living off a goras tax money.

Way to go ghairat mando! :p


Minister (2k+ posts)
What the heck going on in this thread, Hans before starting this thread have you find out the facts. Never mind I will look into these things and then will talk to you.

As far as my knowledge has concerned being a Canadian citizen, there is no such B-S existing in our community, I know couple of people, who have two wives, but they never disclose their second marriage, because of Canadian law, which does not permit second marriage, if such kind of things have had been existing, these people should have had declared their marriages.


Prime Minister (20k+ posts)
What the heck going on in this thread, Hans before starting this thread have you find out the facts. Never mind I will look into these things and then will talk to you.

As far as my knowledge has concerned being a Canadian citizen, there is no such B-S existing in our community, I know couple of people, who have two wives, but they never disclose their second marriage, because of Canadian law, which does not permit second marriage, if such kind of things have had been existing, these people should have had declared their marriages.

You are right but Hans cannot help it. Remember he cannot see with his eyes as he has none on his head!


Councller (250+ posts)
I think Abbasi bhai is correct, Poly gammy is not allowed in Canada.
Very few muslims have more than 1 wife here. & if some one have he only declared 1 of his wives as spouse in canada.

As far as child tax benefit or social is concern, don't stick it with muslims.
It may found in person of any community.
So many professional muslims paying 2-3K tax per month & they don't get any amount as child tax benefit, as they already earning well.

Night_Hawk - Blogger
What the heck going on in this thread, Hans before starting this thread have you find out the facts. Never mind I will look into these things and then will talk to you.

As far as my knowledge has concerned being a Canadian citizen, there is no such B-S existing in our community, I know couple of people, who have two wives, but they never disclose their second marriage, because of Canadian law, which does not permit second marriage, if such kind of things have had been existing, these people should have had declared their marriages.

Abbasi Bhai This news is at-least 3 to 4 years old, I have searched the internet and I could not find any authentic source available to verify the actual law.
I would request the ADMIN and Moderators to temporarily remove or delete this thread till this is verified.

Last edited:


Senator (1k+ posts)
What the heck going on in this thread, Hans before starting this thread have you find out the facts. Never mind I will look into these things and then will talk to you.

As far as my knowledge has concerned being a Canadian citizen, there is no such B-S existing in our community, I know couple of people, who have two wives, but they never disclose their second marriage, because of Canadian law, which does not permit second marriage, if such kind of things have had been existing, these people should have had declared their marriages.

Yup Abbasi Bhai you are right. Polygamy is not supported by Canadian laws. I do not who made up all that crap.The other day in a post related to immigration to Canada he posted a news about elderly abuse in Canada. Hans has a habbit of posting controversial issues without ample evidence to support his theory. It had nothing to do with the elderly people from our society but he just have a habbit to posting things out of context and controversial. Sorry Hans, I like the way you think but not the way you try to post things out of contexts to prove your points without completely knowledge of the issue.


Biah jan .. why not read CBC website or go to any Canadian newspaper .... and see for your self.... before you shed your opinion.

There is a Case going on in BC, and In šāʾ Allāh very soon Muslim men will have the rights to keep more than one wife in Canada.

What the heck going on in this thread, Hans before starting this thread have you find out the facts. Never mind I will look into these things and then will talk to you.

As far as my knowledge has concerned being a Canadian citizen, there is no such B-S existing in our community, I know couple of people, who have two wives, but they never disclose their second marriage, because of Canadian law, which does not permit second marriage, if such kind of things have had been existing, these people should have had declared their marriages.


Staff member
This is not the Law.

B.C. mulling charges against polygamist sectLast Updated: Thursday, May 10, 2007 | 11:16 AM ET CBC News

A polygamist community in Bountiful, B.C., is again at the centre of a political and legal controversy as the province is looking at filing criminal charges.

Bountiful is home to a fundamentalist Mormon sect that continues to practise polygamy, which is illegal in Canada.

Bountiful, B.C.
B.C. Attorney General Wally Oppal told CBC News that taking action against the community is one of his top priorities.

"I would expect we will have some kind of answer within the next week or so as to whether or not we'll be laying charges," he said.

Church leaders in Bountiful insist young girls are never forced into a marriage they don't want. But Oppal said their claim could be tested soon in a criminal courtroom.

Oppal's comments came after the B.C. Human Rights Tribunal found it doesn't have the authority to hear a complaint against the provincial government, which was accused of failing to protect young girls from sexual exploitation.

Jancis Andrews, one of the women who filed the human rights complaint three years ago, alleges the province had a policy not to prosecute men in Bountiful for polygamy or the sexual exploitation of young girls.

"I wanted women's rights upheld," Andrews told CBC News. "And I don't think any civilized country should have concubines and harems among its populace, which of course is what Bountiful is doing."

Complaint dismissed by tribunal
Andrews said the Crown should have charged male church members who illegally married girls as young as 15.

But the tribunal dismissed the complaint, saying it has no jurisdiction over decisions made by Crown counsel.

"It's more than disappointing," Andrews said. "I personally find it frightening that even the Charter of Rights and Freedoms cannot be enforced in Bountiful."

But Oppal applauded the tribunal's decision and dismissed Andrews's claims the province was indifferent to the matter.

"They were alleging we weren't taking a serious enough approach to the polygamist issues that are said to exist there, and that's just wrong."

Former church leader Winston Blackmore could not be reached for comment.
Last edited:


Staff member
This is not the law yet. How these people, mentioned in the original thread are getting those benefits.

Law banning polygamy too broad: lawyer The Canadian Press Posted: Apr 4, 2011 8:46 PM PT Last Updated: Apr 4, 2011 8:46 PM PT

Polygamy hearing2:11
Canadians in relationships with multiple partners shouldn't be turned into criminals because of alleged abuses in a small, isolated community in B.C., says a lawyer arguing against the anti-polygamy law.

George Macintosh, a lawyer appointed to oppose the government at constitutional hearings, said Monday that the current law against polygamy is far too broad. He said it targets not just polygamous men who abuse women and children, but also people in multi-partner relationships that aren't harming anyone.

Much of the evidence in the case has focused on the small, religious sect of Bountiful, B.C., where residents follow the Fundamentalist Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints, or FLDS.

But Macintosh said the question isn't whether bad things are happening in a single community.

'Religious freedom does not extend to practices that create harm.'
—Kiernan Bridge, lawyer for Stop Polygamy in Canada
"The attorneys [general of B.C. and Canada] focused virtually the whole case on what would clearly be criminal behaviour by some FLDS people," Macintosh told Chief Justice Robert Bauman during closing arguments.

"I would urge you to redirect the spotlight to what is the central issue, and that is: Is Section 293 [of the Criminal Code] constitutionally justifiable? ... It would expose some [polyamourists] to criminal prosecution only for being in an open and honest and committed relationship."

No agreement among law's supporters
The case was prompted by the failed prosecution in 2009 of two men from Bountiful. Unlike the mainstream Mormon church, the community and the FLDS believe polygamy will help followers reach the highest level of heaven.

The provincial and federal governments have pointed to Bountiful to argue polygamy is always bad, inherently leading to a long list of alleged abuses, including physical and sexual abuse, child brides and human trafficking.

Macintosh said the law, as it's currently written, doesn't target abuse. Even in abusive polygamous relationships, he said, the law also makes criminals out of wives and children, who the governments have insisted are victims in need of protection.

He also noted even supporters of the law can't agree on what exactly it prohibits.

While the B.C. government argued the anti-polygamy law only targets men with multiple wives, and not women with multiple husbands, the federal government insisted it outlaws all forms of polygamy. Several interveners said the polygamy law only applies in cases involving exploitation and abuse.

He said the law violates several sections of the charter, notably the right to religious freedom, and that it wrongly prohibits the religious practice of polygamy while imposing a Christian definition of marriage.

The final group arguing in support of the law, Stop Polygamy in Canada, presented its arguments earlier Monday.

Lawyer Kieran Bridge cited testimony from experts that polygamy is harmful both to people in polygamous families and society, and he said that means critics of the law can't argue religious freedom.

"In our submission, religious freedom does not extend to practices that create harm," Bridge said.

"It is not necessary to show actual harm caused to a member of society to negate the infringement [of freedom of religion]. Simply increasing the risk of harm or creating a threat of harm is sufficient."

Christie speaks for group
The Canadian Association for Free Expression also presented arguments Monday opposing the law, arguing the state has no business dictating the religious practices of individuals.

"The courts should be reluctant to interfere with private arrangements of a religious nature affecting the most intimate relationships between human beings," said the group's lawyer, Doug Christie.

"If marriage unions are not a matter of private choice, what would be?... A religious belief, true and authentically connected to one's view of the divine, should not be the subject of state intervention."

Christie has represented a number of controversial figures, including Holocaust denier Ernst Zundel and aboriginal leader David Ahenakew, who was acquitted of hate speech charges after comments he made about Jews. The group's president is Paul Fromm, a former Ontario teacher who was fired from a Toronto-area school board because of his association with neo-Nazi groups and attendance at white supremacist events.
Last edited: