U.K. Marriage Equality Bill Introduced This Week – What Will It Do?

Posted on January 26th, 2013 by Katherine Franke

BThis week the British government introduced a bill into Parliament that would allow same-sex couples to marry.   While the bill may signal progress on the issue of marriage equality in Britain, some details about the bill and the circumstances surrounding it are worth noting:

– Britain now has a civil status called “Civil Partnerships” which is available only to same-sex couples.  A complaint was filed in the European Court of Human Rights in February of 2011 challenging not only the exclusion of same-sex couples from marriage but also the exclusion of different-sex couples from Civil Partnerships.  This is unlike any ligation (to my knowledge) in the U.S. challenging the exclusion of same-sex couples from marriage in states that also exclude different-sex couples from civil unions or domestic partnerships. Even if the Marriage Bill passes, at a minimum there will remain live claims in the ECHR case relating to the sexual orientation discrimination experienced by different-sex couples in their access to Civil Partnerships.

– The new Marriage Bill would create marriage equality (sort of) for same-sex couples, while leaving in place the civil partnership inequality for different-sex couples.

– The new law would allow same-sex couples who are now in Civil Partnerships to convert their partnerships into marriages, but when they do so their marriages will be post-dated to the date upon which they entered the Civil Partnership (“the resulting marriage is to be treated as having subsisted since the date the civil partnership was formed.”).

– The new law enables married individuals wishing to change their legal gender to do so without having to end their marriage.

– The new law does not abolish Civil Partnerships, as have some laws in the U.S. granting marriage equality to same-sex couples, but rather, as Robert Wintemute from Kings College London wrote me the other day, “treats civil partnership as an inferior institution from which same-sex couples are being offered the option of liberating themselves.”

– The law is FULL of unnecessary references to religion.  As Robert Wintemute explained it: “It is shocking to read all the special rules regarding the Church of England, the Church in Wales, “the usages of the Society of Friends (commonly called Quakers)” and “the usages of the Jews”.”  The Bill allows any religion, including 3 of the 4 named religions (the Quakers, any branch of Judaism, and the Church in Wales), to “opt in” to marrying same-sex couples.  All except the Church of England.  It will take another Act of the UK Parliament to permit the Church of England to marry same-sex couples.  This is the “protection” against “the threat” of having to marry same-sex couples (in fact, against liberal tendencies inside the religion) that some members of other religions envy.  For example, the Muslim Council of Britain has asked for the same “protection,” explained here.  As Wintemute wrote me: “I would prefer the French system in which legal marriage and religious marriage are completely separate, or a rule that religious organisations applying for legal authority to marry couples must be willing to marry all regardless of sexual orientation.”

Those who want to read more about the bill can read a factsheet, short guide, a mythbuster, and a press notice.



  1. Hi thhere Dear, are you rewlly visitiing this web site daily, if so after that you will
    definitely obtain nice experience.

    Feell free to surf to my weblog :: youtube whale watching in long beach

  2. I discovered your blog site on google and examine just a
    few of your early posts. Continue to keep up the superb operate.
    I simply extra up your RSS feed to my MSN News Reader.
    Looking for forward to studying more from
    you in a while!…

    My homepage :: Allison O’Hara

  3. Write my essay is one among our nice laborious works for you. Starting here you will get on acquainted terms with regarding the small print of essay and essay writing. So, keep secure with United States of America.

Add a comment

Comments are subject to moderation and do not necessarily reflect the opinions of
Columbia Law School or Columbia University.



"Homeland" Security Abortion Rights Activism Adoption adultery Advocacy Affordable Care Act Alien Tort Claims Act Amicus Brief Asylum Bankruptcy BDS Bullying Census Politics Children Citizenship Civil Unions Clinic Columbia Law School Compulsory Marriage Condoms Contraception Contraception Mandate Cordoba House Criminal Law Cures for Homosexuality Defense of Marriage Act Disability Rights Discrimination Divorce Domestic Partnership Domestic Violence Domestic Workers Don't Ask Don't Tell Earth Day Economic Justice Education Egypt Elections Employment Discrimination ENDA Estate Planning Events Family Law Fellowships femininity Feminism Free Speech Gender and Technology Gender Identity Discrimination Gendering the Economy Gender Justice GSL Online Haiti Hate Crimes Health Care Hilary Clinton Hillary Clinton Hiring HIV HIV Discrimination Hobby Lobby Homelessness Homophobia Housing Human Rights Identity Politics Illegitimacy (sic) Immigration Reform In-ing Incest India International Law Intersectional Feminism Islamophobia Israel Jobs Justice Sotomayor King & Spalding Labor Trafficking Land Reform Law School Legal Profession Legal Scholarship Lesbian & Gay Parenting LGBT Parenting Marital Status Discrimination Marriage Marriage Equality Masculinity Medicaid Michelle Obama Migration Military National Security Obama Administration Obama Appointments Obergefell Outing OWS Palestine Parenting Pinkwashing Policing Politics of the Veil Polyamory Popular Culture Pornograpy Pregnancy Presidential Politics Prisons Privacy Products Liability Profanity Prop 8 Prosecutorial Discretion Publications Public Rights/Private Conscience Public Rights/Private Conscience Project Queer Theory Queer vs. Gay Rights Race and Racism Racial Stereotyping Rape Religion Religious Accommodation Religious Exemption Religious Exemptions Religious Freedom Restoration Act Religious Fundamentalism Reproductive Rights Reproductive Technology RFRA Romania Rwanda Sartorial Commentary Schools Sex Discrimination Sex Education Sex Stereotyping Sexting Sex Trafficking Sexual Assault Sexual Duplicity Sexual Harassment Sexual Health Sexuality and Gender Law Clinic Sexual Orientation Discrimination Sex Work Silencing of voices SMUG Sodomy Law Reform Solidarity Sports Supreme Court Surrogacy Technology Title IX Trafficking Transgender Uganda Uncategorized Violence Women and Poverty Women of Color Work Zimbabwe

Academic Calendar  |  Resources for Employers  |  Campus Map & Directory  |  Columbia University  |  Jobs at Columbia  |  Contact Us

© Copyright 2009, Columbia Law School. For questions or comments, please contact the webmaster.