I thought I'd already addressed this, but they're changing the definition of marriage, and I do believe our definition of divorce is based on the definition of marriage. In other words, I don't think it's going to be a problem. :)
Ok good, I know friends of mine had problems because the divorce laws were still "man and woman", so they fought their asses off to get married but then couldn't get divorced... =/
SUMMARY This enactment extends the legal capacity for marriage for civil purposes to same-sex couples in order to reflect values of tolerance, respect and equality, consistent with the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms. It also makes consequential amendments to other Acts to ensure equal access for same-sex couples to the civil effects of marriage and divorce.
no subject
Date: 2005-06-29 05:41 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2005-06-29 05:44 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2005-06-29 05:50 pm (UTC)This enactment extends the legal capacity for marriage for civil purposes to same-sex couples in order to reflect values of tolerance, respect and equality, consistent with the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms. It also makes consequential amendments to other Acts to ensure equal access for same-sex couples to the civil effects of marriage and divorce.
From the Parliament website.
So I wasn't exactly right in what I said, but I was right in that it's taking care of the divorce issue, too.