Toby Keynes, Chair
50 Honister Heights
Purley
Surrey CR8 1EU
020 8405 9816
HUMANIST & SECULARIST
LIBERAL DEMOCRATS
Response to Government Equalities Office consultation “Equal Civil Marriage”.
from Humanist & Secularist Liberal Democrats
14th June 2012
Humanist & Secularist Liberal Democrats is an Associated Organisation of the Liberal Democrats, representing the views of members of the party who are humanist or secularist. As a secularist group, we welcome members of all religions and of none.
We seek a society that is fair, equal and open for all, regardless of their religion.
In September 2010, the Liberal Democrats adopted an Equal Marriage policy, by an almost unanimous vote of elected members from local parties throughout the country. We strongly support every aspect of this policy, and we regret that the proposals in this consultation do not cover the other key issue – legalisation of humanist weddings – addressed in that policy.
We respond as follows to the specific questions in the consultation:
Question 1. Do you agree or disagree that all couples, regardless of their gender, should be able to have a civil marriage ceremony?
We agree
Question 2. Please explain the reasons for your answer (1,225 characters)
This is a basic issue of equality and fairness.
British society has advanced from a position where relationships between gay men were brutally punished by law to one in which gay couples are a recognised and accepted part of many communities, and their relationships are recognised in law.
It can be argued that civil partnership is equal in status to marriage, but the reality is that one is only available to same-sex partners and the other only to opposite-sex partners.
In today’s world, the existence of “separate but equal” rights for people of different races, sexes, religions or sexual orientations should not be acceptable.
That is even before taking into consideration difficulties that arise for couples, precisely because of the existence of these two separate institutions for same-sex and opposite-sex couples, including:
· the forced exposure of one’s sexual orientation on any official form where “marital status” must be declared;
· the voiding of existing marriages, with massive financial and personal implications, when one partner’s change of sex is formally recognised;
· the extra barrier to recognition of the relationship in countries that do not have an equivalent status for “civil partnership”.
Question 3. If you identify as being lesbian, gay, bisexual or transsexual, would you wish to have a civil marriage ceremony?
This question does not apply to us.
Question 4. If you represent a group of individuals who identify as being lesbian, gay, bisexual or transsexual would those you represent wish to have a civil marriage ceremony?
This question does not apply to us.
Question 5. The government does not propose to open up religious marriage to same-sex couples. Do you agree or disagree?
Disagree – religious marriage should be opened up to same-sex couples.
Question 6. Do you agree or disagree with keeping the option of civil partnerships once civil marriage is available to same-sex couples?
Agree.
Question 7. If you identify as being lesbian, gay, bisexual and were considering making a legal commitment to your partner would you prefer to have a civil partnership or a civil marriage?
This question does not apply to us.
Question 8. The Government is not considering opening up civil partnerships to opposite-sex couples. Do you agree or disagree with this proposal?
Disagree – civil partnerships should be opened up to opposite-sex couples.
Question 9. If you are in a civil partnership would you wish to take advantage of this policy and convert your civil partnership into a marriage?
This question does not apply to us.
Question 10. Do you agree or disagree that there should be a time limit on the ability to convert a civil partnership into a marriage?
Agree – there shouldn’t be a time limit.
Question 11. Do you agree or disagree that there should be a choice to have a civil ceremony on conversion of a civil partnership into a marriage?
Yes, there should be an option.
Question 12. If you are a married transsexual person would you want to take advantage of this policy and remain in your marriage while obtaining a full Gender Recognition Certificate?
This question does not apply to us.
Question 13. If you are the spouse of a transsexual person, would you want to take advantage of this policy and remain in your marriage whilst your spouse obtained a full Gender Recognition Certificate?
This question doesn’t apply to us.
Question 14. Do you have any comments on the assumptions or issues outlined in this chapter on consequential impacts? (1,225 characters).
2.36: International recognition:
The government’s work to increase international recognition of same-sex relationships is a key element in reducing prejudice and discrimination against same-sex couples abroad, and the continuation of that work is welcome.
Some countries recognise same-sex unions but not same-sex marriages, and vice versa. Whether a foreign couple’s relationship is recognised as a same-sex union or as a marriage is therefore an accident of jurisprudence rather than a reflection of their wishes.
On the principle of equality, the UK government should allow recognition of foreign same-sex unions as marriages, so that the problems with civil partnerships for British same-sex couples, outlined above (question 2) do not arise for foreign couples. Couples whose relationship has already been recognised in the UK as a civil partnership should be able to convert to being recognised as married, in the same way as is proposed for British civil partners.
If recognition of a British couple by a foreign country depends on whether the relationship is a union or a marriage, it is essential that the UK allows British couples to choose between the two.
Question 15. Are you aware of any costs or benefits that exist in either the public or private sector, or individuals that we have not accounted for? (1,225 characters)
No.
Question 16. Do you have any other comments on the proposals within this consultation? (1,225 characters)
Freedom of religion is a core principle for both humanists and secularists.
We recognise that marriage has both civil and religious significance, to the couples and to their religious communities.
We therefore recognise and uphold the right of religious communities to decide, on the grounds of their religious beliefs, not to solemnise the weddings of same–sex couples.
However, we deeply regret that the proposals do not uphold the equivalent right of other religious communities who do wish to solemnise such weddings as religious ceremonies.
Equally, for many couples of faith it is deeply hurtful that the state bars not just them but their priests and their congregation from solemnising their wedding as a key religious event in their lives.
We therefore believe that a ban on same-sex religious weddings discriminates not just against same-sex couples but also directly against those religious communities who are barred from solemnising those weddings.
It is also disappointing that the proposals do not allow humanist officiants in England to conduct any weddings, as they are currently able to do in Scotland.
For these reasons, we believe that the proposals as they stand fail to fully uphold freedom of religion.