Featuring fresh takes and real-time analysis from HuffPost's signature lineup of contributors
Natalie Bennett

GET UPDATES FROM Natalie Bennett
 

After Gay Marriage, the Next Step Should Be Heterosexual Partnerships

Posted: 06/02/2013 12:14

Yesterday's vote in the House of Commons for gay marriage marks a historic moment in the progress of equality in Britain. With the large Commons majority of 225, the elected representatives have spoken, and the House of Lords has no grounds for resistance.

Britain has joined other progressive states, including Sweden, Denmark, Canada and Belgium, in giving gay couples an equal right to marry as that enjoyed by heterosexual couples.
For once, a large majority of MPs (if not a majority of Tory MPs) fell into line with progressive public opinion (62% in favour to 31% opposed in a pre-Christmas poll) - as they've failed to do on issues ranging from drug laws to renationalising the railways.

I'm proud to say that the Green Party has been at the forefront of campaigns for LGBT equality. In Brighton, where the Green Party is running its first council in a minority administration, we hosted the council's first LGBT conference in 2011, holding workshops and presentations from council officers and local community organisations, whose work has benefited the city's LGBT community.

Just last month, lesbian, gay and bisexual pressure group Stonewall named Brighton and Hove City Council the most LGB-friendly local authority in the country, and the council has supported such events as the International Day Against Homophobia, Biphobia & Transphobia, and the Transgender Day of Remembrance. (Our sister party in Scotland has also been at the forefront of campaigning for gay marriage.)

Our Green MP Caroline Lucas was also leading in yesterday's debate, making the point that now there's a further equality issue be tackled. MPs have acknowledged that civil partnerships don't meet all couples' needs - now they need to go a step further, and acknowledge that marriage doesn't meet the needs of all heterosexual couples.

There can be no logical grounds for denying heterosexual couples the option of civil partnership as created under the Civil Partnership Act of 2004 - a simple, legal step that can resolve issues around child custody, inheritance, pension rights and a whole host of other issues.

There are many people opposed to the historical and political associations of the institution of 'marriage' - some of the same associations that have left some gay couples seeking the marriage option.

In France, the equivalent of civil partnerships have been available to gay and straight couples alike since 1999, and in 2009, some 95% of those taking up the pacte civil de solidarite (Pacs) were heterosexual. There are now two couple entering the civil partnerships for every three getting married.

And while we are talking about the institutions of 'coupledom', there's a further important issue to be addressed - an issue of education and understanding. There is no such thing as 'common law marriage' in Britain, yet it's a phrase that you'll hear bandied about regularly, and a false belief in its existence has had severe financial and emotional consequences for many.

There's also a recognised problem around inheritance when an unformalised partnership ends with the death of an intestate partner - a lot of work has been done around this issue; now's the time for action.

In 2004, 13% of men and 12% of women were cohabiting in England and Wales, and 1,278,455 children were dependent on a cohabiting couple. This affects a lot of people - and even if we complete the circle of equal marriage and civil partnerships it is still going to affect many.

We live in a world of many different family arrangements - what we need to do is to give couples a range of legal tools (and full understanding of them) so that they can have security and certainty about the shape of their family life, and real choices about how to construct it. We took an important step forward yesterday - now we need to complete the work.

 

Follow Natalie Bennett on Twitter: www.twitter.com/@natalieben

FOLLOW UK POLITICS
Yesterday's vote in the House of Commons for gay marriage marks a historic moment in the progress of equality in Britain. With the large Commons majority of 225, the elected representatives have spoke...
Yesterday's vote in the House of Commons for gay marriage marks a historic moment in the progress of equality in Britain. With the large Commons majority of 225, the elected representatives have spoke...
 
 
  • Comments
  • 47
  • Pending Comments
  • 0
  • View FAQ
Comments are closed for this entry
View All
Favorites
Bloggers
Recency  | 
Popularity
Page: 1 2  Next ›  Last »  (2 total)
12:34 AM on 02/09/2013
What a ridiculous idea. Bad enough to make a mess of marriage without complicating things further with a civil partnership for heterosexuals.
Homosexuals have never taken the same responsibilities as heterosexuals - never brought up children and made all the sacrifices that entails - so it is not fair for them to claim equal rights. They are just grasping and aggressive.
03:25 PM on 02/10/2013
What a ridiculous thing to say. I wonder just how many homosexual men or women stuck in heterosexual marriages have and are raising children. 19% of gay couples are raising children.
01:10 AM on 02/08/2013
I may be wrong, and I’m sure that there are those who will insist that I am, but as far as I can make out this debate has nothing to do with procreation etc. and more to do with same sex partners having the same rights in law as everyone else.

I see nothing wrong with this.

IMO, in this country at least, the religious definition of ‘marriage’ has only been around since we have had an established religion, a few thousand years at most.

With the rise of religious power, and its effect on government, that definition of marriage has become the ‘norm’; it should never be forgotten that until around the 4th century even catholic priests were married and have children .

I believe that same sex partnerships are nothing to be afraid of, and I see absolutely no reason why there should be any discrimination in law, with regard to pensions, allowances and basic human rights, against those that wish to confirm their commitment to each other in civil partnerships.

I my defence however I would point out that I recently attended my nieces ‘wedding’ to her girlfriend, and also that my eldest daughter is trans-gender and has a male partner who loves her (he knew her before her transition). My wife and I are very proud of my daughter, my niece and their respective partners.

I shall now sit back and await the brick-bats that are bound to head my way.
photo
vividrick
I came, I saw...I had a cup of tea!
01:42 PM on 02/07/2013
I'm glad the vote the the other day finally put this one to bed, and no doubt there's further variations of compatable human unionship to explore (eg German 7 year marriage license), but right now, especially with the muppets we have in Government and the state of the place, most notably war on disabled, poverty, homelessness, food banks, public service cuts, NHS scandal, cover-ups etc...clearly there's bigger fish to fry.
This comment has been removed.
01:16 AM on 02/07/2013
and as for the 'historical context of marriage' being something that heteros dont like.. well, simply by making marriage available to everyone ( sexuality wise) you have already updated it and shown that it no longer has the stigma of ownership or patriarchy that it once did.
01:11 AM on 02/07/2013
I would just automatically make civil partnerships into marriages. You dont have to pay to get it changed, but you have to pay to opt out and 'divorce' if you do not wish to have a marriage.

civil partnerships are like betamax or minidisks.. that thing that came along but gort replaced by something better.

So just get rid of them altogether, turn them into marriages, and have doen with teh while interim period that gave the 'not sures' time to get accustomed to equality.
10:00 PM on 02/06/2013
i have no objection to civil marriages for same sex couples but i do object to them looking for Gods approval in church weddings . The bible is quite unequivical on Gods opinion and im afraid he does not put things to a vote or listen to David Cameron . im sure the inhabitants of Sodom would have voted for gay marriage but God played the ultimate veto .
11:48 PM on 02/07/2013
LOL. The bible is the opinion not of god but of some confused old Jewish dudes from 2000 years ago who had as much understanding of sexual orientation as they did of the germ theory of disease. Millions of Jews and Christians fully support same-sex unions as being compatible with their faith. Don't presume to speak for all Christians. And don't forget god is merely a hypothesis.
12:39 PM on 02/08/2013
in that case marriage is irrelevant
09:48 PM on 02/06/2013
Let the public vote on this before it goes to far
12:48 AM on 02/07/2013
Why not go further you have nothing to loose except fear.

Simples ! Job Done ! End Of !
09:31 PM on 02/06/2013
Equality for all, under the Rule of Law. It is a very simple concept, and one astonishingly difficult to persuade people to adopt - less they lose their sense of special entitlement. Sad.
06:46 PM on 02/06/2013
Legalise bigamy - assuming it hasn’t already been done unnoticed by me.
05:51 PM on 02/06/2013
Please stop it.
At this rate us ginger people will be the only ones left to be discriminated against
12:46 AM on 02/07/2013
Your a fornicating disgrace to humanity !

Why not go and join the Taliban you plainly think just like them.

Simples ! Job Done ! End Of !
This comment has been removed.
This comment has been removed.
03:51 PM on 02/06/2013
I am going to start a new campaign for SINGLE people who seem to be ignored in this debate. Why cant they get married or have a civil partnership with themselves?

Just because they are single why should they be excluded? Another example of descrimination rearing its ugly head..
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Justinjuice
04:17 PM on 02/06/2013
You will get my vote ! And onanism must be respected as a deeply held expression of self love ¬
06:14 PM on 02/06/2013
In which case, I look forward to awkward Tory fossils discussing the issues of consummation and adultery in the House of Commons. I foresee a YouTube sensation.
09:06 AM on 02/07/2013
Exactly and I believe in order to love another, you must first love yourself..
10:02 PM on 02/06/2013
why cant i marry my dog .
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
barrysturn
Ut Veniant Omnes
12:49 AM on 02/07/2013
The dogs parents don't like you!
09:00 AM on 02/07/2013
I think you can in the US, can't you?
03:32 PM on 02/06/2013
Actually, pension rights are not as good for civil partners as for married people, so straight people would actually be worse off with their own civil partnerships. Careful what you wish for...
This comment has been removed.
photo
HUFFPOST BLOGGER
Lucy Uprichard
01:06 PM on 02/06/2013
There's a lot more to fight for in the world of LGBT rights before sorting things out for heterosexual couples. I'd say this was pretty far down the list of priorities, really.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Paul Wagland
Resistance is fertile
03:22 PM on 02/06/2013
I think it might be harmful to the LGBT cause if marriage was made equal, but civil partnership was not. It gives ammunition to the people who think the LGBT community is given special treatment.

I also think this needs doing sooner or later, so why not get it done while it's a hot topic?
08:02 PM on 02/06/2013
I disagree. We cannot have a system where gay people have a choice between civil partnership and marriage and straight people do not. That would be replacing inequality with inequality. In France the PACS system runs alongside marriage providing very similar rights and is extremely popular among straight couples who for whatever reason do not consider marriage to be appropriate for them. Over 90% of PACS are between straight couples.