Does marriage ordinance contradict with basic law?
<p><em>I am new to this stackexchange and the field of law, so please kindly point out what I am wrong, and what should be corrected! :)</em></p>

<hr>

<p>Here are some background information I should list out, which I have serious doubt on.</p>

<p>Base on the "Sino-British Joint Declaration", the [Basic Law][1] is, and should be treated as a constitution for Hong Kong Special Administration Region. For the law itself, in Article 25 it states:</p>

<blockquote>
  <p><strong>Article 25</strong><br>
  All Hong Kong residents shall be equal before the law. </p>
</blockquote>

<p>And in Article 37 it states:</p>

<blockquote>
  <p><strong>Article 37</strong><br>
  The freedom of marriage of Hong Kong residents and their right to raise a family freely shall be protected by law. </p>
</blockquote>

<p>As for [the Ordinance of marriages in Hong Kong][2]:</p>

<p>According to the Ordinance(Cap 181) s40, it states:</p>

<blockquote>
  <p>(1) Every marriage under this Ordinance shall be a Christian marriage
  or the civil equivalent of a Christian marriage.  </p>
  
  <p>(2) The expression "Christian marriage or the civil equivalent of a Christian marriage" implies <strong>a formal ceremony recognized by the law as involving the voluntary union for life of one man and one woman to the exclusion of all others.</strong></p>
</blockquote>

<p>In the case "Leung TC William Roy v Secretary for Justice", we learnt that the case influenced the explanation of "[Hong Kong Bill of Rights Ordinance][3]" s1 and s22, which includes the category of sexual orientation.</p>

<hr>

<p><strong>Therefore my question would be</strong>: To the extend of freedom of marriage, and the right to raise a family freely, isn't the Marriage Ordinance is exact the opposite, which restricts the freedom of will that one would want same sex marriage? </p>

<p>Would the freedom of marriage includes same sex couples? </p>

<p>And will it become unconstitutional to the Ordinance itself, because of the allowance to one man and one woman?</p>

<hr>

<pre><code>Due to not enough reputation, I cannot post more than 3 links.

  [1]: http://www.basiclaw.gov.hk/en/basiclawtext/chapter_3.html
  [2]: http://www.legislation.gov.hk/blis_pdf.nsf/6799165D2FEE3FA94825755E0033E532/77660986F23DE390482575EE004A8F5C/$FILE/CAP_181_e_b5.pdf
  [3]: http://www.legislation.gov.hk/blis_pdf.nsf/6799165D2FEE3FA94825755E0033E532/AE5E078A7CF8E845482575EE007916D8/$FILE/CAP_383_e_b5.pdf
</code></pre>

<blockquote>
  <p>Would the freedom of marriage includes same sex couples?</p>
</blockquote>

<p>Maybe, maybe not.</p>

<p>The US Supreme Court recently determined that the word "marriage" means a union between two people regardless of sex. The Australian High Court ruled that "marriage" must be between a man and a woman unless parliament changes the law.</p>

<p>I do not know if the equivalent Hong Kong Court has decided the meaning of "marriage" and, if so, what it is.</p>

constitutional-law marriage hong-kong