I support my government’s decision to allow same-sex “marriages”
through the civil process but I chose to qualify such marriages by emphasizing
the word “civil” – they are “civil marriages”. 
(I wish my local MP, Karen Redman, had stuck to her well thought out
compromise and not whipped senior Liberals to vote for the present Canadian
definition of “marriage”.) The new definition is not the same as the
traditional church definition.  The
Church marriage down through the ages unites a man and a woman as husband and
wife for the purpose of the formation of a family unit, procreation and the
education and nurturing of children.

I believe that same-sex marriages are not compatible with Anglican Church marriages.
I am extremely worried that the issue of blessing same-sex unions may split the
Anglican Church in Canada
and get us thrown out, along with the U.S. Episcopalians, of the world-wide
Anglican Communion.  I really don’t
understand the Dioceses of New Westminster, Ottawa
and Montreal
voting to allow the blessing of such unions. 
Same-sex marriages are contracts or civil unions.  They differ from a bond of life long friendship
between two same sex persons in that there is a sexual element and the contract
seeks to legitimize the sexual relationship. Friends also make a lifelong
commitment though there is no exclusiveness. The Church does not bless
friendship or general contracts so why should it bless same-sex marriages?  If you are going to bless same-sex marriages
then make it different from the traditional church marriage and include all
committed friendships. Friendship is indeed blessed!