Canada

By MARIE LORENZO

Challenging assumptions is something
gay people have been doing ever since the
Concept of homosexuality has existed.

The challenge to “heterosexism,” as that
elated set of assumptions based on the prim-
acy of heterosexuality is called, has taken
Many different forms. More important, ithas
had many different implications, all of them
Televant to all of our personal and social
lives. At stake are concepts of marriage,
family, childrearing, beneficiaries, social-
ized health care, collective agreements, and
more,

Most recently, the Brian Mossop case has
brought the issues into the legal arena at a
national level. A Toronto man, Mossop
works for the federal government. In 1985,
he applied for bereavement leave to attend
the funeral of his lover’s father. When he
was denied the leave, he took his case to the
Canadian Human Rights Commission com-
plaining of discrimination on the basis of
family status. The Commission agreed and
Tuled in his favour. The ruling was appealed
by the federal government and the decision
of the Federal Court went against Mossop
last month.

Mossop argues that the law is obviously
lagging behind reality in Canada, and his
supporters agree. “There are all kinds of
household relationships,” he says. “A few
years ago, the law loosened up and recog-
nized common-law heterosexual couples.
Now we think it should go further.

“People say we are not a family because
we can’t have children. Do they think het-
erosexual couples who can’t have children
are a family?” he asks.

“There is the issue of caretakers of dis-
abled people as well,” he says, referring to

Test cases have
shown amending
legislation is needed
to all relevant |
provincial and federal
statutes so that people
in same-sex
relationships can
enjoy the same social
benefits as those in
heterosexual
relationships do now.

one of the intervenors in his case, the
Canadian Disabled Council, which argued
that their constituency should also be able to
enjoy “family” benefits.

Commendably, the Human Rights Com-
mission is appealing the Federal Court
judge’s decision to the Supreme Court. The
Commission takes issue with the judge’s
narrow definition of “family,” and his argu-
ment that though Mossop and his partner of
14 years are “functionally” akin to a family,
they are nonetheless not a family. The
Federal Court judge defined family as those
related by blood or marriage.

In fact, the concept of “family” has no
intrinsic definition and only has the meaning
historically attributed to it and modified by

ss
In fact, the concept of“family”has no intrinsic

definition and only has the meaning historically
attributed to it and modified by society to reflect
its organization. Today, women’s and gay
organizations argue that the current legal usage
cf “family”does not reflect the variety in people’s

lives and relationships.

society to reflect its organization. Today,
women’s and gay organizations argue that
the current legal usage of “family” does not
reflect the variety in people’s lives and
relationships.

At a conference on relationships recog-
nition organized by the Coalition for Les-
bian and Gay Rights in Ontario (CLGRO)
last year, a working group was established
based on the principle that: “All people,
regardless of sexual orientation, have the
right to determine for themselves their prim-
ary personal relationships and to have these
relationships supported and recognized in
law and by social institutions.”

Helen Robinson, spokesperson for the
working group, points out that the way
society currently distributes its benefits per-
petuates the supremacy of the “traditional”
family.

“The recognition of common-law rela-
tionships was the opening edge of the
wedge,” she told the Tribune. “Now we want
the government to make.a broader statement
than that and include everyone in that kind
of relationship.” ;

Tom Warner, spokesperson for CLGRO,
feels that unfortunately the decision in the
Mossop case will not be helpful for future
cases since it hinges on a technicality: ac-
cording to the Federal Appeal Court judge,
the Human Rights Commission did not have
the jurisdiction to interpret the “family
status” provision in the Human Rights Act
the way they did.

Groups like CLGRO are lobbying for the
inclusion of sexual orientation in the Can-
adian Human Rights Code, as well as ul-
timately in the Charter of Rights and Free-
doms. But Warner and Robinson argue that
other test cases have shown amending legis-
lation is needed to all relevant provincial and
federal statutes so that poeple in same-sex
relationships can enjoy the same social
benefits as those in heterosexual relation-
ships do now.

Meanwhile, the Women’s Legal Educa-
tion and Action Fund is keeping a close eye
on the progress of the Mossop case. Kristy
Jefferson, director of LEAF, feels optimistic.
“I think he has a strong case,” she told the
Tribune. “The case could be quite far-reach-
ing, with implications for many people
whether they are single or otherwise.”

LEAF is currently involved in a similar
case involving Carol Neilson, a lesbian in
British Columbia who also works for the
federal government and is seeking the exten-
sion of benefits to her partner under the
Canadian Human Rights Act.

“What these test cases do is provide a
forum for discussing these issues,” Jefferson
says. “In our particular case, we are looking
at discrimination on the basis of sex and
sexual orientation.” LEAF, a national or-
ganization that takes on test cases under the
equality guarantees in the Charter of Rights
and Freedoms, has education as one of its
main objectives.

“One of the most important things about
having the Charter is that it provides an

opportunity for public education and public
discussion,” Jefferson reiterates. “Even

when we lose at the highest level, sometimes

there is such public outcry that the legisla-
tion is changed anyway.”

Robinson and others feel that the Karen
Andrews case, a similar case taken up under
the Charter, arguing that the Ontario govern-
ment must recognize a lesbian couple as a
family for the purposes of Ontario Health
Insurance benefits, influenced that provin-
cial government’s move to a more universal
system of health care.

Ontario Hydro also gave in to the chang-
ing times and recently announced it was
extending health care coverage to partners
of homosexuals, and the YMCA of Metro-
politan Toronto signed a collective agree-
ment that includes compassionate leave for

a spouse, parent, child, sister, brother, grand-
parent, cohabiting companion or that
companion’s children or parents.

The issue of universality gradually emer-
ges as a key point. Socialists have fought for
the concept of universality for social
benefits regardless of economic status. But
isn’t it time to move beyond that to univer-
sality regardless of personal status as well?

“There is a whole question of whether
these things should be family rights or in-
dividual rights,” Mossop points out. “Per-
haps (in his case), employers should provide
for so many days bereavement leave for an
individual, letting the individual decide
which funerals are important to attend.”

Warmer and Robinson tend to agree.
“There are problems pursuing these issues
on the basis of family status,” Warner says,
“since we are locked into what the legisla-
tion says. Our long-term objective is that
other types of relationships would receive
the same status, particularly around finan-
cial support — that’s something very impor-
tant to disabled people and their caretakers.”

Robinson points out that the implications
go even further and could affect questions of
income tax and immigration policies. “What
if someone falls in love in England and
would like to bring their lover back to
Canada? Ora disabled person wants her best
friend who lives in France to live with her in
Canada?”

“The real problem is the structure (of our
society) is set up to reflect units, instead of
reflecting each individual’s actual need,”
says Warmer.

NANOOSE BAY — Disarmament
activists in this Vancouver Island com-
munity near Parksville demonstrated
Aug. 30 against the visit of a nuclear-
powered aircraft carrier that has a history
of breakdowns, accidents and deaths.

The USS Nimitz, visiting the Can-
adian Forces Maritime Experimental
Testing Range for the second time, may
also be holding F
captive four sail-
ors who exposed
the ship’s record in
a recent television
expose, they re-
ported.

Members of
Greenpeace had
staged a flotilla
protest Thursday om
and the Nanoose MacBRIDE
Conversion Campaign held a vigil out-
side the gates of the test base that morn-
ing, NCC spokesperson Laurie Mac-
Bride said.

The Nimitz, powered by two nuclear
reactors and carrying about 100 nuclear-
capable aircraft, was also the target of
protests when it visited Nanoose Bay and
Vancouver two years ago.

Ithas a legacy of weapons-related and
reactor accidents. The NCC cites docu-
ments reporting that a cannon on one its
aircraft accidentally fired in the Arabian
Sea in 1988, damaging six other aircraft
and killing a crew member. Fourteen
were killed and 48 injured off Florida
when an aircraft crashed while landing in
1981.

The Nimitz came under scrutiny re-

Carrier Nimitz: visit
to Nanoose protested

cently through the testimony of four crew
members who aired the ship’s history of
faked data on nuclear qualification tests,
faulty hardware and reactor problems on
a Seattle television program recently.

The sailors, with faces and voices
electronically altered, said some crew
members were so fearful of accidents
they were considering sabotaging the
reactors to prevent the ship from sailing.

After that, “the four were rounded up
and held aboard the Nimitz, pending a
U.S. Navy investigation,” MacBride re-
lated. A lawyer retained by Greenpeace
along with the sailors’ families demand-
ed they be retumed to shore and provided
legal counsel, but the ship sailed Aug. 7
with the members aboard, she said.

“Tt appears that not all the US.
hostages are in Iraq,” MacBride com-
mented.

“Some of them are right in Georgia
Strait, and Canadian tax dollars are help-
ing to protect this appalling disregard for
human rights and democracy.”

In addition to the vigil and flotilla
protest, yellow warning signs with the
message, “Danger — Nuclear Ship at
Nanoose,” began appearing in local resi-
dences in several communities, through
a campaign organized by Vancouver Is-
land peace groups, NCC said.

Eight NCC members were arrested
for blocking access to the CFMETR base
when the Nimitz visited in 1988. Mis-
chief charges were subsequently

dropped.

Pacific Tribune, September 3, 1990 « 3

|
|
i
|