With this statement, you suggest that the equal recognition of gays and lesbians is contrary to the core values of the family. This is discriminatory. One of the central messages of M. v. H. is that lesbians and gay men do form loving families, and that privileging heterosexual relationships is contrary to the equality guarantee and thus unconstitutional. The decisions in Egan, Vriend, M. v. H., and Moore v. Akerstrom all require that gays and lesbians enjoy substantive, not merely formal, equality. Granting identical rights and obligations using different nomenclature fails to acknowledge that human dignity is a central purpose of the equality rights guarantee.
Discrimination is a psychological harm as much as it is a material injustice.
In consultation with organizations seeking equality on behalf of lesbians and gays, our client has decided to bring a motion for rehearing before the Supreme Court of Canada. You will be receiving our notice of motion and memorandum of argument shortly.