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 The Living Wage has to be more than a photo op

    The Living Wage has to be more than a photo op

    The referendum on Scottish independence casts its shadow over every aspect of Scottish public life these days. This is understandable, the debate on whether Scotland should remain in Union with partners in England, Northern Ireland and Wales is a huge one, but the way it pervades every matter at Holyrood is doing a disservice to the people of Scotland. Yesterday I led a debate on behalf on Scottish Labour in support of the living wage, and specifically on extending it […]

    Read more →
  • Comment Who made my clothes?

    Who made my clothes?

    By Stella Creasy MP and Alison McGovern MP It’s been a long four years in opposition, and each year we’ve seen the country decline further for the lack of a Labour Government. But whether speaking up about legal loan sharks, the misuse of zero hours contracts or promoting the economic case for the living wage, we both believe that there are campaigns worth fighting, even if, from opposition, progress is many times harder, and very much slower. That’s why we […]

    Read more →
  • Featured 5 things Labour’s new rapid-rebuttal team need to get right

    5 things Labour’s new rapid-rebuttal team need to get right

    Yesterday’s story of a new Labour media management team, seemingly in the mould of Alastair Campbell’s famously effective rapid-response unit, and headed by Michael Dugher, should be welcome news to us all. A well-run operation can make a huge difference, and in an election as close as 2015 looks set to be, that difference could be Miliband or Cameron in Number 10. But for it to be truly helpful, it needs to get some things right. 1. Be rapid This may sound […]

    Read more →
  • Comment Should politicians do God?

    Should politicians do God?

    Easter is traditionally a time when Christians reflect on their faith, and there is no reason why politicians shouldn’t do so too. But this year David Cameron forsook his usual Easter message for a much stronger and more personal foray into the religious arena. He urged Britain to be more confident of its status as a Christian country; he spoke of the strength of his own faith; he said that we should be “frankly more evangelical about the faith that […]

    Read more →
  • News Iraq Inquiry report possibly delayed until after election

    Iraq Inquiry report possibly delayed until after election

    We reported recently that the Chilcot Report is now not due to be published until 2015, causing worries among Labour strategists that it could harm the Party’s chances at the general election. However, according to the Mail today, its release date could now be held back until after polling day next year. The article states: “Whitehall sources suggest that with an election due in May 2015, it will be deemed too politically difficult to publish it until after voters have […]

    Read more →