Skip to main content

View Diary: Gay Marriage? STOP IT ALREADY! Marriage Equality, please. (60 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  Bloody Headline! (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    JBL55, The Marti

    You may note that the headline/title of my diary was:

    Gay Marriage for England and Wales Passes Last Real Hurdle
    Which was the ONLY reference to "gay marriage" in the entire diary and was used to avoid the title getting even longer.

    You may also note that I went on to explain that the Marriage (Same Sex Couples) Bill [.pdf of the bill without recent ammendments] is not absolutely equal marriage because of opt-ins for religious bodies and a prohibition on same sex marriages being conducted by the Church of England and the Church in Wales because they would require changes to Canon Law in their synods. So in fact "marriage equality" would have been a false claim. I gave the full title of the bill in the very first line of the diary.

    The bill also provides for the continuity of a marriage or civil partnership by mutual consent in the event of somebody, married or entered into a civil partnership before the law becomes active, who then undergoes gender re-assignment. Currently that means their marriage would be dissolved and the couple having to enter into a Civil Partnership. (See Schedule 5 of the draft bill).

    I hope therefore you can understand quite why I had to grossly simplify the title of the diary.

    We will work, we will play, we will laugh, we will live. We will not waste one moment, nor sacrifice one bit of our freedom, because of fear.

    by Lib Dem FoP on Wed May 22, 2013 at 07:34:21 AM PDT

    •  No, I can't (5+ / 0-)

      Make the title longer in that case. Use the name of the bill. It's still not that long if you say "Marriage (Same-Sex Couples) Bill for England and Wales Passes Last Hurdle" and it's more accurate.

      Or is this a case where British English is different from American English altogether?

      -7.75, -8.10; . . . Columbine, Tucson, Aurora, Sandy Hook, Boston (h/t Charles Pierce)

      by Dave in Northridge on Wed May 22, 2013 at 07:40:32 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  Could be (3+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        Dave in Northridge, The Marti, ybruti

        Remember the main influences on British English were Anglo-Saxon and Norman French/Latin. English law for historical reasons uses the latinate form of words - even today Royal Assent for an ordinary bill to become an Act and pass into law is "La reigne le veult" and is either announced in Parliament or, very unusually, written by the Queen on the vellum roll copy held at Westminster.

        In everyday language the Norse derived "wedding" and the latin "marriage" are used interchangeably for the ceremony however strictly in English law "marriage" is the institution and the ceremony is the "solomnization of marriage". The current equivalents for same sex couples are "civil partnership" and "registration of civil partnership" which might sadly be followed some time later by a "dissolution of a civil partnership".  You can see why these are usually shortened to marriage and divorce!

        Records of both civil partnerships and marriages are maintained on national registers and strictly it's the signing of the registration certificate in the presence of witnesses and a "registrar" that is the legal moment of joining two together.

        In the UK, the local authority employs the Registrar of Births, Deaths and Marriages and his/her deputies however there are two types of ceremonies. Civil weddings and partnerships are conducted by deputy registrars either at the Registry Office or, more recently, a 'licenced place' which cannot be a religious place of worship. Often that would be historic houses or hotels who rent out space for the ceremonies and usually a reception afterwards. The licences are given for a period (IIRC 2 years) during which anybody can hire the place to register a marriage or civil partnership so the frequent American practice of holding single weddings in private houses is unknown.

        During religious weddings, there is a break where, after the religious vows are taken, the couple and the witnesses sign the registration certificate (.jpg sample picture) in the presence of the priest who is authorized to act as registrar.  

        The current bill simply recognizes religious freedom for a sect not to be required to conduct a ceremony that would contradict their religion. It does not prevent a couple receiving a religious blessing after a civil ceremony - Prince Charles and  Camilla did it that way because as divorced people, with a former spouse still living, they could not be married in a CofE church.

        Incidentally, in a recent  radio topical affairs comedy programme one "caller" to a "shock jock" phoned to say he had a same sex marriage because he and his wife had had the same sex for years.

        One of the more interesting provisions in the bill is that marriages between two people of any sex could be legal in Houston, San Francisco, Los Angeles, New York, Miami and Washington D.C. from 2014 or 2015 - if you are marry a British citizen in the Consulate.
         

        We will work, we will play, we will laugh, we will live. We will not waste one moment, nor sacrifice one bit of our freedom, because of fear.

        by Lib Dem FoP on Wed May 22, 2013 at 09:30:23 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site