Will Scotland Lead the Way on UK Marriage Equality?

There is clear evidence that in the UK as a whole, there is political momentum building in favour of providing for full civil marriage for same sex couples. Opinion polls show that the idea is supported by the majority of British voters, and is gaining support by key people in all the major parties. Of these, the Scottish National Party, who control the devolved Scottish Parliament, were the first to commit publicly to the principle of marriage equality, and have in the past raised at least the possibility of going ahead on this alone, if the national government prevaricates too long. Now, they are coming under pressure from an important quarter to do just that.

This, from Pink News:

Scottish government advised to legalise gay marriage

The Scottish government has been advised to give gay couples the right to marry.

A report from the Equality and Human Rights Commission (EHRC) says that current law discriminates against gay people and is not supported by public polls.

In England and Wales, the UK government has announced plans to hold a consultation on the future of civil partnerships and marriage. As these are devolved issues, the consultation does not apply to Scotland.

However, polls of the Scottish public have shown rising support for allowing gay couples to marry. In 2006, a poll found that 53 per cent of people supported same-sex marriage. In 2009, this figure rose to 62 per cent.

This, the report says, means politicians should not fear a “backlash” from the public. The government is being urged to start looking at the issue after the May election

(Full report at Pink News)

New Yorkers Want Marriage Equality (Poll Shows Strongest Support Yet)

Even though New York Democrats lost control of the State Senate last November, the prospects for a bill providing for full marriage equality this year look brighter than ever - senators will know that in both parties, some of the most outspoken opponents lost their re-election bids (almost unheard of in state politics) and will not want to go the same way. Undoubtedly, some of those who voted against the last gay marriage bill will change their votes the next time around - we just don't know how many. For the waverers, this CBS6 Albany report of a new poll from  (highly reputable) Quinnipiac Research could help to sway them. Note that support for equality is strong in all geographic regions (suburban, NYC, and Upstate), and that 41% of Republican voters are also supportive. Note also that the gap between support and opposition has doubled in just 18 months, going from 10% in June 2009 to 21% this month.

Marriage Equality Gaining Ground in Maryland.

The movement to marriage equality continues to show progress in Maryland. As lawmakers in the Maryland House and Senate formally kicked off their push for gay marriage, a new poll has shown that for the first time, an absolute majority of Marylanders now support full marriage equality.

According to Annapolis-based pollster Gonzales Research, 51 percent of Maryland residents support gay marriage. Endorsements break down along party lines, with 65 percent of Democrats and 52 percent of independents favoring same-sex marriage, while only 24 percent of Republicans back the concept. The poll has a margin of error of plus or minus 3.5 percent.

-Hometown Annapolis.com

The steady growth in Maryland for acceptance of equality matches the trend nationally and internationally. Speaking of the US,

Tim Magrath, a lecturer in political science at Frostburg State University and a former congressional staffer, agrees that the national attitude toward same-sex marriage is changing.

"The polling data's been incredible, the numbers have completely turned around," said Magrath. "In the '90s when (President) Clinton first started talking about gays in the military, the approval rating was in the 30s, but now a vast majority of people support the idea of gays in the military."

"Public perception on marriage has been transformed in the last decade as well, and there's been a major transformation in public opinion," said Magrath.

The bill which is now being introduced will face strong opposition and a likely filibuster. Still, it has an excellent chance of being passed, after the mid-term elections saw an increased number of key supporters elected to the state legislature. Governor O'Malley has promised to sign the bill if it reaches his desk - but it will probably then face an attempt to force the issue into a voter referendum.

Related articles

• Marriage Equality Bill Introduced in Maryland House as New Poll Reveals Most Support It (towleroad.com)
• Marriage Equality Coming Closer in Maryland (itsaqueerworld.blogspot.com)
• In Maryland, a Majority Support Same-Sex Marriage (gayrights.change.org)
• Tomorrow Maryland Becomes The Next Battleground For Marriage Equality (lezgetreal.com)

Marriage Equality Safe in New Hampshire.

After the Republicans took control of the NH state assembly last November, there were some fears that they would attempt to repeal the marriage equality legislation which was enacted in 2009. However, the state GOP leadership has announced that this is not on their agenda "for this year". Same sex marriage is safe - for now. 

What about next year? Will the issue then appear on the agenda? Well, no. The GOP won't like to admit it, but in every jurisdiction where legal provision has been made for same sex marriage, the population has found that surprise- the sky has not fallen in, their own marriages have not been threatened, and life goes on as before - except for some businesses people, who find that they benefit from increased wedding and tourism customers. Living with the facts of gay marriage, and not the imaginary threats, quickly reduces the opposition.  

Even next year, the GOP are unlikely to take up the repeal of gay marriage. If they attempt it, they will find that not all their legislators will co-operate. An increasing number of Republicans are seeing that there is a conservative case for gay marriage,and against interfering in the bedrooms of citizens. I think we can safely say that marriage equality is safe in New Hampshire - period.

From the Washington Post

Gay marriage repeal not on NH GOP agenda this year

CONCORD, N.H. -- Republicans who control the New Hampshire House have decided that repealing the state's gay marriage law won't be on their agenda this year.

House Republican Leader D.J. Bettencourt confirmed to The Associated Press on Wednesday that jobs and the economy will be the top priorities on an agenda to be announced Thursday. Bettencourt says there's widespread agreement that social issues will have to take a back seat.

Gay marriage was enacted in 2009 when Democrats controlled the Legislature. Democratic Gov. John Lynch signed the law and has since said he would veto any repeal attempt.

Conservatives were hoping for enough votes for both a repeal and veto override after voters in November gave Republicans control of the Legislature. Lynch defeated a Republican challenger who opposed gay marriage, despite ads run by national groups criticizing his decision to sign the bill.

"Religious Freedom" does not include the right to discriminate - Canadian Court

In Canada, gay marriage has been part of the law since 2004 - but some marriage officers still attempt to avoid conducting them, on the basis that it is against their religious freedom. In Saskatchewan, the state parliament has attempted to build this into state law, with explicit provision for officials to recuse themselves on religious grounds. The state supreme court has ruled this out of order.

In its decision, released Monday, the court said both of the proposed laws -- allowing an exemption for all marriage commissioners or just for those who were commissioners at the time gay marriage was legalized in 2004 -- would be unconstitutional. If enacted, such a law would violate the equality rights of gay and lesbian individuals and would not be a reasonable and justifiable breach of those rights, the court said.

Read more   - Vancouver Sun 

Marriage Equality Advances in Maryland.

It seems increasingly likely, as I predicted last year, that Maryland will join Rhode Island as the next US states to  approve legislation to recognise same-sex marriage.

From CNN:

Maryland set to expand gay rights, same-sex marriage

Maryland is poised to become the sixth state to recognize same-sex marriage as proponents say they believe they have enough support to pass such a measure in the upcoming legislative session.

The expansion of gay rights appears to have gained significant traction as Maryland's General Assembly begins its 90-day session Wednesday. Not only are Democrats optimistic about their chances of approving same-sex marriage, but a leading Republican, sensing momentum on the issue, has instead countered with a proposal to grant civil unions to gay couples.

Democratic Gov. Martin O'Malley has publicly stated that he would sign a marriage bill into law. Maryland then would join Massachusetts, Connecticut, Iowa, New Hampshire, Vermont and Washington, D.C., in sanctioning same-sex marriages.

Maryland has been inching toward granting greater rights and protections for members of the lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender community. Last year Democratic state Attorney General Doug Gansler offered a legal opinion recognizing same-sex marriages performed in other jurisdictions. "We've been marching in this direction for a while now," said Democratic state Delegate Heather Mizeur.

Bills to legalize gay marriage introduced in R.I. House, Senate - ProvidenceJournal

With the introduction on Thursday of same-sex marriage bills in the House and Senate, the battle now begins.

In the House, Rep. Arthur Handy, D-Cranston, introduced his annual bill to legalize same-sex marriage in Rhode Island. The 29 lawmakers cosigning the bill include House Speaker Gordon D. Fox.

As she introduced similar legislation in the Senate, Sen. Rhoda Perry, D-Providence, said she hoped it would get a hearing and vote early in the legislative session.

A mirror of Handy’s bill, it legalizes “civil marriage” between people of the same gender to marry, while specifying that no religious institution would be required to marry same-sex couples if it goes against its teachings.

“We want to get it going early on,” she said. “We want to have debate and a hearing, and we do not want to wait until the end of the year.”

The legislation has strong support in the House, where Fox, who is openly gay, has also expressed his desire for an early vote.

Read more at Providence Journal

Related:

Primary Elections Advance Marriage Equality

Stand By for Gay Marriage, R. I.

The Fall of Rome, Reality Based History – and Gay Adoption

The vocal opponents of family equality are fond of making sweeping statements (in flagrant disregard of the evidence) about how marriage has "always" been between one man and on woman, how the proponents of equality are "redefining" evidence, quite ignoring the ways in marriage has been constantly redefined in the past - not least by the Christian churches. A variation on the theme has been that homosexuality has destroyed great civilizations, such as that of Rome. Illinois state Rep. Ronald Stephens has repeated this claim, blaming "open homosexuality" for the fall of Rome.

In a fun, sane response in the Chicago Sun-Times, Neill Steinberg dismisses the claim, basing his response on, well, historical fact, not what he calls Stephens' talking points. His most important observation is that the best known extensive study of the fall of Rome, Edward Gibbons "Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire", concluded that Roman civilization collapsed not because of homosexuality, but because of - guess what? Christianity.

Would that be a argument to ban Christianity today, for fear that it could cause the collapse of modern Western civilization?

The point I want to make is not that Gibbons was either right or wrong, but to heartily endorse Steinberg's larger point, that grand claims about the lessons of history really ought to be checked against the facts. This is certainly true in the secular sphere, but also in religious discourse. The often -repeated Vatican claims of Catholic "constant and unchanging tradition" are a smokescreen, often used to used to hide the importance of recently introduced changes, as Martin Pendergast noted recently, writing about gradualism in Benedict's theology.

But today, I do not want to explore this theme of the Church's constantly changing tradition. Let's just enjoy, instead, Steinberg's thoroughly delightful response to rep Stephens' ignorance. Here are some extracts:

Australians Support Marriage Equality, Opposition Waning.

In common with other countries, support for legal recognition of same sex marriage in Australia is increasing. Support is now at 62%, up from 60% a year ago. The only age group which does not yet show majority support is the over 50's - but only just. Even this group has support at 46%. The youngest group of Australian adults polled are overwhelmingly in favour: 80% agree with the prospect. Politically, only the misnamed "Liberal" party are against, while 75% of Labour voters are in favour. Why Labour PM Julia Gillard continues with her resolute opposition is entirely beyond me: the indications are that this issue has already cost her votes in the last election, resulting in increased seats for the Greens and Independents. As the independent MP Andrew Wilkie has stated, she is clearly out of step with her own voters.

From the Sydney Morning Herald:

Findings from a new poll of 1050 respondents came as the independent MP Andrew Wilkie called on the Prime Minister, Julia Gillard, to move on the issue, saying she was ''out of step with the people''.

Mr Wilkie said the Prime Minister should allow a conscience vote, saying it was "beyond time for the Parliament to start representing the people".

The Galaxy poll showed support for same-sex marriage increased from 60 per cent of respondents in 2009 to 62 per cent this year.

The survey, which was conducted over two days earlier this month, showed uniform support for a conscience vote across party lines with 80 per cent of Labor and 75 per cent of Liberal voters agreeing to the idea.

While supporting a conscience vote, Liberal voters were much less likely to agree to allow same-sex couples to marry, with less than half supporting the change. Nearly three-quarters of Labor voters and four out of five Greens voters support same-sex marriage.

The survey also shows that younger Australians are more likely (80 per cent) to support same-sex marriage than those aged over 50 years (46 per cent).

Related articles

• Push for same-sex marriage conscience vote (news.theage.com.au)
• Labor plays for 'pink vote' (theage.com.au)
• Moore urges free vote on gay marriage (news.theage.com.au)
• As Australia's Greens Submit Marriage Equality Bill, PM Julia Gillard Won't Let Anybody From the Labor Party Support it (queerty.com)
• Legalised gay marriage is inevitable, says Labor's Left (theage.com.au)
• Chart of the Day: Religion and Gay Marriage (queeringthechurch.wordpress.com)
• Gay Marriage: Coming (Soon?) to a Church Near You. (queering-the-church.com)
• Three Same-Sex Marriages Staged In Australia (towleroad.com)

What Constitutes a “Family”? Empirical Study Finds A Wider View

Religious conservatives are regularly referring to the “traditional family” as a foundation for their beliefs, but there is no such thing. The conservative interpretation of the so-called traditional family is  a relatively modern invention, created to fit the conditions of the nineteenth and twentieth centuries in Western Europe and North America. In earlier times, and other parts of the world. family structures varied enormously from  this particular model.

Family history, like all other history, is constantly changing to fit new circumstances, so it should be no surprise that conceptions of family in the twenty first century are continuing to evolve, to fit a world that is no longer what it was in the nineteenth and twentieth centuries. Some of these changes are obvious, but like so much that is familiar, can easily be “hidden in plain sight.” A new study by sociologist  Brian Powell brings this into plain view. (His study is specifically of American views, but with the emergence of a shared world culture, many of his findings will also have relevance across a much wider geographic region.)

The central finding is that people no longer define “family” as mom pop and kids, but also include   same-sex couples with children (Children seem to be central: childless couples, gay or straight, are not seen as “families”, but just as couples). However, there is an increasing movement towards acceptance. An important finding, familiar from previous studies on the subject, is that people who know gay people (more accurately, who recognize that people they know are gay), are more supportive than those who are not aware that family members or acquaintances are gay. This simply reinforces the necessity for the wider political struggle, that wherever possible, gay men and lesbians should come out openly, in as many contexts as possible. Coming out personally will improve acceptance in our circles of friends and family. Politicians and other public figures who come out   do so indirectly for the wider community.

I particularly liked an argument on gay adoption that I have been using regularly: framing arguments in terms of the “the best interests of the child” can work to our advantage, not those opposed to gay adoption. (In adoption considerations, the best interests of the child require placement with the best parents available. Sometimes, they will be gay).  Indeed, the claim made (but not elaborated on in the reports I have seen), is that the interests of children may well be a more effective argument than others in making the case for more general equality of same-sex couples.

From the New York Times

A majority of Americans now say their definition of family includes same-sex couples with children, as well as married gay and lesbian couples.

At the same time, most Americans do not consider unmarried cohabiting couples, either heterosexual or same-sex, to be a family — unless they have children.

The findings — part of a survey conducted this year as well as in 2003 and 2006 by Brian Powell, a sociology professor at Indiana University, Bloomington — are reported in a new book, “Counted Out: Same-Sex Relations and Americans’ Definitions of Family,” to be published on Wednesday by the Russell Sage Foundation. Since the surveys began, the proportion of people who reported having a gay friend or relative rose 10 percentage points, said Professor Powell, the book’s lead author.

“This is not because more people are gay now than in 2003,” he said. “This indicates a more open social environment in which individuals now feel more comfortable discussing and acknowledging sexuality. Ironically with all the antigay initiatives, all of a sudden people were saying the word ‘gay’ out loud. Just the discussion about it made people more comfortable.”

The book concludes that framing the equality of same-sex couples in terms of “the best interests of the child” might prove to be a more successful political argument than others.

Related articles at Queering the Church

• The Gospels' Queer Values
• Traditional "Family Values"; "Traditional Family" Values.
• Church Marriage: Required Only For Priests?
• LGBT community: The Real Defenders of Traditional Marriage.
• "Traditional Marriage Is Between Men": US Bishop.
• An Ignorant Mexican Cardinal, vs  Authentic History of Marriage
• Natural Law, Natural Sex, Natural Families.

Related articles by Zemanta

• Now I Know Who All These People Running Around My House Are (bilerico.com)
• Who's a family? New study tracks shifting US views (seattletimes.nwsource.com)

Marriage Equality Inching Closer in Maryland, New York?

Just as “gay marriage” is receding as an electoral issue on the US right, it is becoming an issue on the left. Two stated where this of current importance are New York and Maryland.

In Maryland, two recent news reports suggest the signs are promising for a successful attempt at gay marriage  legislation next year. Governor O’Malley appears to have read the tea leaves which show steadily increasing public support for marriage equality. He has stated that if re-elected, even though he would personally prefer to see civil unions, he will sign a gay marriage bill if the legislature presents one.  In a tough year for Democrats, he is not exactly a shoo-in for re-election, but the authoritative Cook Political Report says the race is “leaning” that way. So, the next question is, will the legislature play ball?

Hovernor O’Malley – Gay Ally?

Here too the signs are promising. Attempts at marriage legislation have regularly been launched, and as regularly have stalled.  The prospects for next year though, may be brighter. There are more out LGBT candidates than ever before standing for election, and several have an excellent chance of electoral success. It is entirely possible that the new state legislature could have a stronger caucus of LGBT and gay –friendly legislators. Their success could also send a message to those previously neutral or mildly opposed. Expect a strong push for either full marriage equality, or for civil unions as a compromise, in Maryland next year.

Meanwhile in New York, where the legislative paralysis in the state senate last year was largely precipitated by the fierce opposition of some Democrat senators to the proposals for gay marriage, the backlash has been fierce. Several initiatives to “take back New York” have seen strong primary challenges against the Democrat senators who opposed equality, and especially against two of the ringleaders, Senators Espada and Ruben Diaz Snr, in SD’s 32 and 33.  The outcome of next week’s primaries should be watched closely. If at least one of these, and some other opponents, are booted out, expect a dramatic shift in the political mood, and a much more realistic legislative attempt to achieve marriage equality next year. If both survive, equality will not come to NY state by legislative means for a long while yet.  

The "Impact" of Iowa Marriage Equality - Findings From Evidence.

One important feature of Judge Walker's verdict in the Prop 8 trial was his finding that the case against marriage equality rested on claims, of the "harm" done by same sex marriage and the supposed threat to children is based on no evidence whatsoever. The substantial evidence that does exist on gay parents, and the experience from Manhattan and the Netherlands where marriage is well established, is that there is indeed no demonstrable harm - to between sex marriages, or to the children of same-sex couples.

 

 

Now yet another independent survey, this one from  Iowa, shows the same finding. "Iowawatch" is an online news service for The Iowa Center for Public Affairs Journalism, an independent, nonprofit and nonpartisan news service. Their researchers conducted interviews with married couples and professional experts, and examined extensive published urnal articles, marriage statistics, census data, polls and court rulings.

The conclusion? There is no "harm" - at least no more than from the between sense marriages they so closely resemble. These are extracts from an extensive report at Press Citizen:

Although social conservatives in the 2010 election campaign depict gay marriage as a threat to married life as we know it, Iowa's 18-month experience with the newly legalized institution has revealed striking similarities to traditional marriage and no discernible harm to it, according to an IowaWatch study.

Thousands of same sex couples married during that period, and despite the controversy that has swirled around them, their marriages have endured.

The IowaWatch study found that similarities range from the way men and women often view marriage to the more mundane tasks of married life, such as doing yard work. Like people in traditional marriages, same-sex couples also talk about raising children and shielding them from the verbal slings of peers, the stability and unit-strength of a family and the value of loving relationships among parents and children, as well as legal necessities and financial security.

The Iowa Supreme Court ruling in favor of gay marriage was unanimous, but the opposition has persisted because it is fueled by fears that that the family, the bedrock of American society, is at stake.

"They shouldn't be allowed to marry," Maggie Gallagher, chairman for the National Organization for Marriage, said in an e-mail. "They shouldn't be allowed to redefine marriage to mean whatever relationship (they) choose."

In sharp contrast, married gays often depict a lifestyle and relationship that seems suburban stable, only now they have a marriage license like other couples."Not much has changed," said Ledon Sweeney of Iowa City, who married his partner of 12 years. "We live pretty boring lives. We go to work; we mow our lawn, we pay our mortgage, and we go on vacation if we can save enough money."

Read the full report at Press Citizen

The Turning (Conservative) Tide for Family Equality

One of the tragedies of the struggle for marriage equality has been the way the rightwing opposition has been able to portray this as a contest between the supporters of "marriage", and those bent on destroying the institution. This is clearly not so - the advocates for marriage and family equality are not wanting to destroy it, but to enlarge and strengthen it by bringing more couples and families under its legal protections. The opponents, on the other hand, who have insisted on a narrow and rigid, relatively modern interpretation which they insist on terming "traditional" marriage in total contradiction of all historical evidence, who who have re-interpreted and distorted it - and largely destroyed it themselves, with high rates of divorce and teen pregnancy. (Both of these rates are highest in the states most strongly opposed to marriage and family equality.)

Times, however, are changing. For some time, there have been signs that opposition to gay marriage is no longer the magic GOP vote winner that it once was. Earlier this year, the NOM poured big money into Republican Iowa primary races in support of state level candidates who promised to overturn last year's court judgement in favour of marriage - and they lost heavily. (In the same primaries, tea party candidates who steered clear of the marriage issue did well). More recently, in the wake of Judge Walker's judgement overturning the Prop 8 win against marriage, it was notable how Republican politicians were carefully avoiding notable comment.

The stance of the tea party is instructive, as it highlights one of the reasons conservative voices are now starting to speak up in favour of same sex marriage (or, more accurately, against laws to prevent it.) This is the libertarian belief that good government is limited government - and one of the areas where government should be just about entirely absent, is in the privacy of our bedrooms and families, especially at a time when there are urgent matters of jobs and the economy requiring attention. This was explicitly the argument used by Glen Beck last month, when he said

Argentina: The Weddings Begin

The first gay weddings under Argentina's new family equality law have begun. (These are not the first gay marriages- a handful of couples were able to sneak in by earlier court challenges and sympathetic magistrates, but these at the first to be arranged routinely under national marriage laws.  As you see, this was neither a traditional white wedding, nor a quiet affair in the registry office - there were too many reporters and photographers for that description. The couple are an actor and his agent - they will be used to the press, and won’t object to the publicity.

CNN reports:

Buenos Aires, Argentina (CNN) -- Two men who have been together for 34 years have become the first couple to obtain a same-sex marriage since it became legal in Argentina on July 15. Artistic representative Alejandro Vanelli and actor Ernesto Larrese were married in a civil ceremony Friday morning in Buenos Aires, Argentina's capital. They wore dark suits and striped blue ties and were surrounded by well-wishers and a throng of reporters, photographers and videographers. Larrese spoke to his partner -- but also to the nation at large. "To all those who are afraid ... those who are homophobic ... I tell them, don't worry; this doesn't affect you," Larrese said. "You have nothing to fear. Fear is the opposite of love. Any phobia can be cured with love. There is nothing love cannot cure.

However, the BBC says a different couple got in first, just an hour earlier, in a northern town.  Who cares? There will be many, many more.

An architect and a retired office administrator have become the first gay couple to marry in Argentina under a new law legalising same-sex marriages. Miguel Angel Calefato, 65, and Jose Luis Navarro, 54, have lived together for 27 years. Argentina is the first Latin American country to legalise same-sex marriage. The law was passed after a long and often bitter campaign and it still faces opposition, most notably from the Roman Catholic Church. After the early-morning ceremony in the northern town of Frias, Mr Calefato and Mr Navarro promised to hold a big party to thank all who had supported the passage of the law.

The couple have been together for 27 years

Why Catholics Support Gay Marriage.

Research results have consistently shown that US Catholics nationally are more supportive of gay rights (including gay marriage), and do not agree with the Vatican teaching that homosexual relationships are morally wrong. What has not been clear from research is why this should be, when the formal Vatican doctrine, and the publicly stated position of the bishops, is so different. The same conundrum was posed even more sharply this month in Argentina, where polls showed that in this overwhelmingly Catholic country, where the bishops very publicly opposed it, 70% of the population supported the introduction of full family equality.

In California, two separate polls released within days, by Field and by PRRI, confirm the patterns we have become accustomed to: over the longer term view, support for equality has grown steadily; Democrats and independents are supportive, Republicans are not; younger voters are strongly supportive - and Californian Catholics narrowly support marriage equality.

Irish Civil Partnership Bill Signed.

Irish President Mary McAleese has signed into law the provision of Civil Partnerships, which will provide Irish gay and lesbian couples with a legal status almost identical to that of heterosexual married couples - but not adoption rights. This is very similar to the UK Civil Partnership legislation. That too does not cover adoption, which was provided for separately.

In this deeply Catholic country, the legislation was strongly opposed by the Catholic bishops - who lost badly, It is notable that this legislation was not just passed, but warmly welcomed by the Justice Minster as "one of the most important pieces of civil rights legislation ...  since independence"  

Signing into law of new civil Bill welcomed

THE SIGNING into law yesterday of the Civil Partnership Bill was welcomed across the political spectrum and also by groups that have campaigned for legal recognition for same-sex couples in Ireland.

The Bill was signed into law by President Mary McAleese at Áras an Uachtaráin yesterday morning.

Minister for Justice Dermot Ahern said it was “one of the most important pieces of civil rights legislation to be enacted since independence”.

The Green Party’s justice spokesman Trevor Sargent also warmly welcomed the development, describing it as a significant step forward and a stepping stone towards greater equality in society.

While the Bill has now been enacted, it cannot fully commence until commensurate changes take place in social welfare, tax and pensions legislation.

Those changes are likely to be made in the Finance Bill and Social Welfare Bill drafted following December’s budget.

The changes will pave the way for the first civil partnership registrations to take place in January next year.

-(Full report from the Irish Times)

Full Marriage Equality for the UK?

When the UK first implemented civil partnerships, it was commonly reported as gay "marriage", and widely viewed as marriage in everything but name. With the passing of time and greater familiarity, the feeling has grown that "everything but name" doesn't cut it, that separate isn't equal, and that names matter. There has been increasing public pressure to upgrade to full marriage, and increasing support for the idea from leading politicians - without any firm commitments from the ones with the clout to implement it.

Today, a prediction (not a promise) from Liberal Democrat deputy leader Simon Hughes is the clearest indication that the change will indeed come. The difficulty is the time scale. Mr Hughes has not said anything more than that it will be "before the next general election" - that is within the next five years. That's all very well, but with the gay marriage train accelerating worldwide, five years from now, gay marriage will be routine across much of the world. I certainly agree that the UK will have full marriage equality by 2015 - but I hope it can be somewhat earlier than that.

This is from the Telegraph:

'Gay couples will get equal right to marry'

The Coalition will give homosexual couples the same legal rights to marriage as heterosexuals, a senior Liberal Democrat has said.

Simon Hughes, the Lib Dem deputy leader, said that the Government will allow same-sex couples to have “civil marriage” with same legal status as marriage between a man and a woman.

His comments follow moves by a Lib Dem minister to allow homosexual couples to have religious elements to their civil partnership ceremonies.

Under current rules, same-sex couples can contract a civil partnership, which is recognised in law but not given the same status as marriage for a heterosexual couple.

Mr Hughes predicted that before the next general election, the law will be changed to give an equal right to full marriage.

“It would be appropriate in Britain in 2010 to have civil marriage for straight people and gay people equally,” he said.
“The state ought to give equality. We’re halfway there. I think we ought to be able to get there in this Parliament.”

Earlier this month, Lynne Featherstone, the equalities minister, said the Coalition was considering allowing same-sex couples to include key religious elements in civil partnership ceremonies.

The full equality that Mr Hughes advocated would go further than that, although he insisted any change would be limited to civil marriage and would not place any obligations on religious groups to marry same-sex couples.

Mr Hughes, regarded as being on the left of the Lib Dems, has been critical of some Coalition policies and has threatened to reject parts of the Government’s Budget package.

But, in comments in an internet-based interview, he backed the Coalition and said it was increasingly following a Lib Dem agenda.

“All the time, we are making Tories, at least Tories in government, more enlightened and that must be good for the country,” he said.

During the election campaign, the Conservatives were the only main party to suggest that they would consider allowing full homosexual marriage. Some lawyers say that would be easier to legislate for than altering existing laws on civil partnership and civil marriage.

Gay Marriage: Where Next?

In the first six months of the year, three countries have already approved legal recognition for same sex marriage, up from just two last year, and an average of less than one a year during the previous eight years. The pace is clearly accelerating. We could well ask, where next? There are several candidates, some of which could see change quite soon.

The state of Marriage, Europe July 2010

Luxembourg is closely associated with its neighbours Netherlands and Belgium (hence the term "Benelux" countries), which were the first to introduce full marriage equality. At present, the Grand Duchy's legal provision is based on the French PACS, but the government has announced plans to upgrade that to full marriage. In January, the minister of Justice announced  promised that legislation would be passed before the summer recess this year. The  bill was accepted for the session which began last week, and could be passed within weeks.

Slovenia announced its intention to provide legal recognition in July 2009, and passed the first reading of the required bill in March this year. There have been no reports since.

The Global Growth of Marriage Equality

I wish I had thought of doing it this way! I have often reported on the global growth in gay marriage, and looked for ways to present it in a simple graphic. Nate Silver at fivethirtyeight has found the simple key - convert the jurisdictions, whether countries, provinces or cities, to the populations living under them, and treat all of Europe as a single entity.

This is the colourful chart that resulted:

 

That's 250 million people who now live in locations where legal recognition for gay marriage has been agreed. (More are on the way. Finland this week was just the latest to declare an intention to change the law.) Please note the rather prominent band of yellow - South Africa. I have only two quibbles with this. Nate refers to the "slow" growth to equality. But going from roughly one million at the start of 2007 to two and a half million now, I would describe as rapid. I would also stress that this applies to full marriage only: it would be interesting to see a similar chart which included civil unions.

Argentina Approves Family Equality.

It's been a long night waiting for confirmation, but Argentina has just become the latest country, and the fourth strongly Catholic country, to approve family equality, even in the face of vigorous, highly visible,  opposition by the Catholic  Church. (Note that I do not describe this as "gay marriage". The legislation which has been approved includes much more than just provision for same -sex marriage.)

What is particularly pleasing to me was that while the political argument in favour was based on human rights grounds, many of the supportive politicians made clear that their support was because of their Catholic faith, which emphasized the importance of respect for those human rights.

In their marathon debate, a number of senators in the 72-member upper house referred to their Catholic beliefs in presenting their reasons for opposing or supporting the bill.

-Momento24