Gay marriage and civil partnership, Nov 13th 2010 P59 N2P67 同性結婚
Like animals trying to get into the ark, a procession of couples are turning up at registry offices in London to challenge Britain's tendentious distinction between marriage (only for straight folk) and civil partnership (reserved for goys). On November 2nd the Rev Sharon Ferguson and Franka Strietzel were turned down when they sought permission in Greenwich to marry. A week later Isling refused to let Tom Freeman and Katherine Doyle, a straight pair, register a civil partnership. Others are set to test the rules, in a campaign run by Peter Tatchell, a gay-rights activist, to highlight what they see as two-way discrimination.
The rights conferred by marriage and civil partnership - over property, pensions, inheritance and so forth - are virtually identical. But straight couples have the choice of a civil or religious ceremony whereas gays stuck with an underwhelming secular one. For many it is the word ゛marriage゛ and its aura that matter. Gay couples say that being denied the right to marry make them feel like second-class citizens. Meanwhile, some heterosexuals say the patriarchal implications of marriage are off-putting.
The objection is, at bottom, that the law segregates couples according to their sexual orientation. Robert Wintemute, a lawer who teaches at King's College London and is helping the campaign, thinks there is a strong case that this violates the Human Rights Act.
Civil partnerships, enshrined in law in 2004, were a hard sell. Some conservatives feared that anything smacking of gay marriage would undermine ゛the real thing゛. Yet in time other laws too (on artificial insemination, for example) were changed to remove discrimination. Today Britain leads Europe on substantive rights for same-sex couples, Mr Wintemute says - so restriction on what the relationship is called and how it is consecrated seem petty. In any case, denying unmarried cohabiters (over a quarter of people aged 25-34) a shot at civil partnership, with its defined rights and responsibilities, seems myopic.
In one way, at least, things are set to change. An amendament in April removed a legal prohibition on holding civil-partnership ceremonies on religious premises； the government is pondering how to implement it. The Church of England is not keen； neither are Roman Catholics, but others have volunteered.
Civil marriage for gays may be on its way too. Various prominent Tories favour it； the Liberal Democrats back it； Labour won't want to be a laggard. No fools they： at least one poll suggests the British public is ready to go all the way.
