It’s time for truly Equal Marriage

March 6, 2013 11:27 am

The campaign for equal marriage has arguably been as much a fight against religious privilege and the grip of the churches on our democracy, as it has been about equality. It has been illuminating to see how wholly opposed the heterosexual male leaders of the biggest religions in this country have been to the principle of marriage equality.

Not content with the Tory-led Government bending over backwards to accommodate their demands for wide exemptions from the proposed new law on equal marriage, the main religions have lobbied hard against any reform at all. They have been determined to deny same-sex couples any access to marriage, even – outrageously – to civil, secular marriage. The strength of the diverse coalition of people and organisations standing up for equal rights for LGBT people in the face of those powerful opponents has been remarkable and wonderful to be part of.

Humanist groups have long campaigned for equality in marriage law and see the current reforms as overdue but very welcome. However, we want to see more reform to create real equality – and that would mean taking the opportunity now to legalise humanist marriage in England and Wales.

In its powerful support for equal marriage, Labour has quite rightly put the rights of same-sex couples as equal citizens at the heart of its arguments for reform of the marriage law. Yet even when Parliament passes the Bill, left unamended the marriage law will remain unequal and focused on religious rights. In effect, a double discrimination will be created for those with no religion, as no non-religious couple, gay or straight, will be able legally to marry in accordance with their beliefs as religious couples will.

We only need to look north across the border to see a far more equitable system. In Scotland humanist marriages have had legal status since 2005, and following a rocketing in demand for the non-religious ceremonies they are now more popular than Roman Catholic marriages.  When the Scots pass their legislation to allow same-sex marriage, that will mean that both same-sex and opposite-sex couples will have the choice of a religious, humanist or civil marriage.

There are some moves to tackle the inequality between Scotland, and England and Wales. In fact, an amendment with Labour and Liberal Democrat sponsors has been tabled to the Marriage (Same Sex Couples) Bill to be considered by the Bill Committee in the next week, which would give humanist marriage legal status in England and Wales. In the other House, Labour Peer Lord Harrison awaits the Second Reading of his Private Members Bill to debate the same issue. We expect support from the Party for both those measures – in the last parliamentary session 43 Labour MPs signed an Early Day Motion in support of legal humanist marriage, and the issue has had support when it has been debated before in the Lords.

However, to put real pressure on the Government to challenge the status quo, to tackle the religious privilege inherent in the marriage law, to help to future-proof against the potential for double discrimination for non-religious couples, and to fight for real equality, One Nation Labour needs officially to make supporting legal change for humanist marriage part of its policy for progressive change.

Naomi Phillips is Chair of Labour Humanists

  • Alexwilliamz

    Really stretching that ‘one nation’ thing. I think I have now lost all track of what marriage is even meant to be or why anyone cares about whether they are married or not, at least what the hell the state has got to do with any form of marriage.

  • Alexwilliamz

    Really stretching that ‘one nation’ thing. I think I have now lost all track of what marriage is even meant to be or why anyone cares about whether they are married or not, at least what the hell the state has got to do with any form of marriage.

  • jaime taurosangastre candelas

    I really do not understand your “double-discrimination” remark.

    Precisely what is the difference between an agnostic or atheist couple who marry in a registry office, and a humanist couple who are the next in line? God is not involved in either ceremony, by the couples’ volition, and presumably both couples look on a religious couple marrying in a church as being fairy-believing fantasists?

    In all 3 cases, the law regards them as equally married, and from now on, it does not matter whether the 3 couples are mixed sex or same sex.

    What could possibly be more equal?

    If, on the other hand, your view is that humanist couples should be allowed to marry in church, your argument is not with the state, but with the churches, and they would probably feel aggrieved at being asked to marry a couple who do not believe in God as a superior being to humans.

    If you want the “razzmatazz” of a church wedding, the white dress and flowers, but don’t actually believe in God, you can always pretend, as so many church wedding couples do. It is only 45 minutes.

  • Renie Anjeh

    I don’t see any problem. We are going to get gay marriage, which is brilliant and non-religious people can have civil marriage if they don’t want a religious marriage. What needs to happen now is to either abolish civil partnerships, or extend civil partnerships to straight couples. This should have been tackled in the Bill.

  • Pingback: Why Labour should support truly equal marriage | Labour Humanists


  • Comment Englishness, identity and social justice

    Englishness, identity and social justice

    Democracy and social justice are inseparable. Any socialist knows that. It’s why we saw the expansion of the pillars of social justice – free education, health, social security – following the expansion of universal suffrage. It’s why Labour is a Democratic Socialist party. It’s why it needs to be the party of English and British democratic reform. Yet, the impression it has given over the last few days is that democratic change is something to be quarantined, decontaminated and then […]

    Read more →
  • Comment Laying the Foundations for a Labour Century

    Laying the Foundations for a Labour Century

    This post is written by Liz Kendall MP and John Woodcock MP Britain stands at a crossroads. Scotland rejected separation, but the large numbers of traditionally Labour supporters voting Yes has highlighted an undercurrent of deep dissatisfaction that is reflected across the United Kingdom. One future path would see our country seeking to reject and counter the forces of change that are deeply unsettling many communities and threatening our established place in the world. The other would embrace change as […]

    Read more →
  • Comment Call for a People’s Campaign

    Call for a People’s Campaign

    We find ourselves at a crossroads. The path of our country and the character of our democracy will be shaped afresh in the coming months, for good or ill. Up and down the country, people’s energies are rousing — from Glasgow to Clacton, from London streets to Cornish hamlets. Their patience grows ever shorter. Most feel no one is listening to them. No one is talking their language, or offering them much change they can believe in. Is this really […]

    Read more →
  • Comment It’s incontestable – we need change in England

    It’s incontestable – we need change in England

    After a dreadful summer, the Scottish Independence referendum –and the developments that followed it – have again illustrated David Cameron’s inept political judgment. From the single question on the Scottish ballot, to the woefully inadequate Edinburgh agreement, Alex Salmond was lucky to have found a British Prime Minister who, in the words of Peter Oborne, has proven to be so infamously ‘indolent, inattentive…and out of touch.’ Campaigning in the central belt during the final weeks of the referendum campaign the […]

    Read more →
  • Comment Local Government Bold and unique – a role for local government in our modern state

    Bold and unique – a role for local government in our modern state

    As we talk about our country’s constitution in the coming months, the starting point is what powers the Scottish Parliament should have. And whilst devolution for other nations and regions is also a central part of the wider debate, it is a chance for us to be clear about what powers local government should be able to exercise in the future too. I appreciate that, as the councillor in charge of housing in Islington, this argument might sound a bit […]

    Read more →