Box Turtle Bulletin
News and commentary about the anti-gay lobby“Now you must raise your children up in a world where that union of man and box turtle is on the same legal footing as man and wife…”
News and commentary about the anti-gay lobbyJuly 4th, 2010
The distinctions between civil partnerships and marriages in the UK are peculiar to American notions of religious liberty and freedoms of speech. And one of them may soon disappear. (AP)
Britain’s government is considering letting same-sex couples include religious elements in civil partnership ceremonies.
Equalities Minister Lynne Featherstone says the government’s review of gay equality rights will consider allowing homosexual couples to include hymn singing and religious readings in their union ceremonies.
Parliament recently removed the ban on same-sex unions in churches and other places of worship.
Yes, you soon may gain permission to sing hymns of rejoice to God (though, oddly enough, some religious ministers object to that).
However, this change could result in an oddity which challenges the distincions between all civil and religious recognition and some think the new conservative government may take a different step. (Times)
Mr Bryant said he believes the Government will eventually have to allow full homosexual marriage rather than creating the unusual situation under which same-sex couples can have religious language in their civil partnerships, but heterosexuals cannot in civil marriage.
…
During the election campaign, the Conservatives were the only main party to suggest that they would consider allowing full homosexual marriage, a move that although contentious would be easier to legislate for than altering existing laws on civil partnership and civil marriage.
Latest Posts
Featured Reports
In this original BTB Investigation, we unveil the tragic story of Kirk Murphy, a four-year-old boy who was treated for “cross-gender disturbance” in 1970 by a young grad student by the name of George Rekers. This story is a stark reminder that there are severe and damaging consequences when therapists try to ensure that boys will be boys.
When we first reported on three American anti-gay activists traveling to Kampala for a three-day conference, we had no idea that it would be the first report of a long string of events leading to a proposal to institute the death penalty for LGBT people. But that is exactly what happened. In this report, we review our collection of more than 500 posts to tell the story of one nation’s embrace of hatred toward gay people. This report will be updated continuously as events continue to unfold. Check here for the latest updates.
In 2005, the Southern Poverty Law Center wrote that “[Paul] Cameron’s ‘science’ echoes Nazi Germany.” What the SPLC didn”t know was Cameron doesn’t just “echo” Nazi Germany. He quoted extensively from one of the Final Solution’s architects. This puts his fascination with quarantines, mandatory tattoos, and extermination being a “plausible idea” in a whole new and deeply disturbing light.
On February 10, I attended an all-day “Love Won Out” ex-gay conference in Phoenix, put on by Focus on the Family and Exodus International. In this series of reports, I talk about what I learned there: the people who go to these conferences, the things that they hear, and what this all means for them, their families and for the rest of us.
Prologue: Why I Went To “Love Won Out”
Part 1: What’s Love Got To Do With It?
Part 2: Parents Struggle With “No Exceptions”
Part 3: A Whole New Dialect
Part 4: It Depends On How The Meaning of the Word "Change" Changes
Part 5: A Candid Explanation For "Change"
At last, the truth can now be told.
Using the same research methods employed by most anti-gay political pressure groups, we examine the statistics and the case studies that dispel many of the myths about heterosexuality. Download your copy today!
And don‘t miss our companion report, How To Write An Anti-Gay Tract In Fifteen Easy Steps.
Anti-gay activists often charge that gay men and women pose a threat to children. In this report, we explore the supposed connection between homosexuality and child sexual abuse, the conclusions reached by the most knowledgeable professionals in the field, and how anti-gay activists continue to ignore their findings. This has tremendous consequences, not just for gay men and women, but more importantly for the safety of all our children.
Anti-gay activists often cite the “Dutch Study” to claim that gay unions last only about 1½ years and that the these men have an average of eight additional partners per year outside of their steady relationship. In this report, we will take you step by step into the study to see whether the claims are true.
Tony Perkins’ Family Research Council submitted an Amicus Brief to the Maryland Court of Appeals as that court prepared to consider the issue of gay marriage. We examine just one small section of that brief to reveal the junk science and fraudulent claims of the Family “Research” Council.
The FBI’s annual Hate Crime Statistics aren’t as complete as they ought to be, and their report for 2004 was no exception. In fact, their most recent report has quite a few glaring holes. Holes big enough for Daniel Fetty to fall through.
“Google” is a trademark of Google Inc.
© Box Turtle Bulletin. All Rights Reserved.
Posts 
Posts via daily email:
Tony
July 4th, 2010
This seems so weird to me. You can’t legislate how to follow particular religions. They should have done what other jurisdictions have done and allow them to opt-out.
Clay
July 4th, 2010
The same current rules in terms of what can be done at a civil partnership ceremony (in terms of a ban on religious content) also apply to civil marriage ceremonies. The distinction between civil and religious marriage ceremonies is not “peculiar” to the UK, but actually is widespread in Europe.
I’m not defending the current state of affairs in the UK, but so much US comment is misinformed.
penguinsaur
July 4th, 2010
You can’t legislate how to follow particular religions.
Britain has a state religion, so I think they can actually.
TampaZeke
July 4th, 2010
“During the election campaign, the Conservatives were the only main party to suggest that they would consider allowing full homosexual marriage…”
Could you provide resources to back up this statement?
I seem to recall an off the cuff comment about marriage by a conservative but I don’t remember it being even a “suggestion” that they would seriously look at considering marriage equality for same-sex couples.
Tony
July 4th, 2010
@penguinsaur
I didn’t mean they literally can’t. I meant that they shouldn’t. Kinda like how you can’t go around slapping people in the face, but really, you can.
Tony
July 4th, 2010
@Clay
You say there are misinformed comments being made, yet I don’t see you trying to inform. Would you care to elaborate? In the U.S., a priest can sign a marriage license. Is this not the case in the U.K.? Are they not stopping churches from ordaining a civil partnership?
Clay
July 4th, 2010
@Tony
In a religious marriage, a priest is licensed by the state to preside over the signing of the marriage certificate. That is done in another room, outside the service, and afterwards the service restarts. It is clear that the legal union is a separate state-licensed act from whatever is done “in the eyes of God”.
Civil marriages and civil partnerships are conducted in non-religious venues, usually a government register office, but it can be another licensed place. If such a venue offers one, it has to offer the other, otherwise it loses its license. The registrar is a government official (think of them as justices of the peace in this context) who conducts civil partnerships and civil marriages. Again, this official can’t discriminate. There was a case in which a registrar refused to officiate at civil partnerships on “religious grounds” and was fired. The council that employed her even refused to adapt her rota so she’d only do marriages. Her job was to do both, and that was that. Her dismissal has been upheld by an employment tribunal and on appeal.
My main point was that, at the moment, neither a civil marriage nor a civil partnership ceremony is allowed to have religious content, whether hymns or prayers or whatever. That was true of civil marriages long before civil partnerships came into force. (We had “Together at Last” from Annie, and even though our witnesses were our oldest friends, a vicar – in dog collar – and his wife, he was there in civilian capacity.)
Apart from the name, there are only minor differences between civil marriages and civil partnerships.None of them affects legal equality in tax, inheritance, immigration etc. With the NHS, health care is less of an issue than in the US, since it is not linked to employment or marital status, but if any company offers private care to married couples, it must by law also offer it to civil partners.
I am not defending the UK situation as ideal. Countries with full equality, including in name, are better. But UK civil partnerships give more full civil rights than anything currently on offer in my native US (including states with same-sex marriage), and – in the UK context – has been a good place to start, since they are beyond controversy in all mainstream parties.
I hope this, even though long-winded, is useful.
Clay
July 4th, 2010
@TampaZeke
Your recollection is correct. The Tories had some off-the-record spin to that effect before the election, given a bit too much credence by one gay news website. It’s hard to know what will happen, especially with the Liberal Democrats (with a far stronger heritage of supporting equality than either of the two larger parties) now in coalition with the Conservatives. Stable to mildly positive is my best guess.
Speaking of Tampa: http://www2.tbo.com/content/2008/oct/05/co-notes-from-a-native-son/news-opinion-commentary/
Timothy Kincaid
July 4th, 2010
Zeke,
It was a cut and paste from the Times. I don’t have independent knowledge of who did or did not support marriage in the UK
Other Fred in the UK
July 5th, 2010
@TampaZeke and Clay
I am afraid I must correct you. The Tories made more than an off-the-cuff remark, it was part of their manifesto. In their Equalities Manifesto they specifically committed to considering the case to turn Civil Partnerships into Marriages. How sincerely it was meant at the time and whether it will be stuck to by the coalition government I cannot say.
Timothy (TRiG)
July 5th, 2010
A UK marriage can be held in a church (which will presumably have religious content), or a registry office (where religious content is not allowed), or in another licensed venue (which may or may not have religious content). Civil Partnerships can be held only in registry offices, and therefore religious content is not allowed during the ceremony (though a minister may, of course, bless the union later).
I’ve heard of a straight couple wanting a non-religious registry office marriage, and having their choice of music contested because, though it was not originally written as religious music, it was later used as a setting of a hymn.
I’ve also heard that very few mosques are registered to perform marriages, and that therefore most Muslim marriages in the UK are registry office marriages (or are never legally formalised).
Personally, I prefer this separation of the legal from the religious or cultural aspects of marriage. In France, all marriages are performed at the Town Hall. That’s it. No options. You can have a priest bless the marriage afterwards if you like.
Disclaimer: I’m Irish, though fro an English background, and I follow UK news quite a bit, but I could be wrong on some of the finer details.
TRiG.
Clay
July 5th, 2010
@Timothy (TRiG)
Very useful information, although incorrect on one detail – where civil partnership ceremonies can be conducted. This is from the official government website http://www.direct.gov.uk/en/Governmentcitizensandrights/Registeringlifeevents/Marriagesandcivilpartnerships/DG_175715
“A civil marriage ceremony or civil partnership can take place in any register office in England or Wales, or at any venue approved by the local authority. These include stately homes and other prestigious buildings, hotels and restaurants.”
Clay
July 5th, 2010
@Other Fred in the UK
I stand corrected. I think the disconnect happened between the Equalities Manifesto, which did mention it, and the Tories’ main election manifesto – published later, if I recall correctly – which did not. But you’re right, it was more than off-the-cuff.
Leave A Comment