On Tuesday 2nd November 2010 our Chief Executive Sharon Ferguson went with her partner to Greenwich Registry Office to apply for a marriage licence. An act so un-newsworthy and commonplace that it should barely need mentioning (other than to offer congratulations to the happy couple who would be shortly announcing the date of their wedding). But Sharon and her partner Franka Strietzel were refused the licence. Not because anyone in Greenwich doubted the genuineness of their relationship but simply because the law doesn’t allow them to apply for a marriage licence. As a same-gender couple they could have applied for a civil partnership but they cannot legally get married. It is this simple and clear-cut example of inequality that led Sharon and Franka a few months ago to decide to challenge the law. After discussions with others it was agreed that they would be the first of four same-gender couples to apply for a marriage licence and thus begin a process which they feel confident will eventually cause a change in this major piece of unequal legislation. At the same time four heterosexual couples agreed to apply for civil partnerships, also currently unavailable to them, in order to further emphasise the inequalities that still exist. And so the Equal Love Campaign was born (see sidebar for more information). In the following pages Sharon explains the reasons for her and Franka’s decision and her personal belief in marriage as something she had always hoped for.
How did the Equal Love Campaign come about?
About a year ago I was invited to speak at a conference on marriage equality being organised by the Unitarian Church in Stoke Newington. This Church had taken the radical step to refuse to conduct weddings at their church until they could conduct them for all couples regardless of sexual orientation. At this conference, Peter Tatchell and Professor Robert Wintemute were also speaking. During a panel discussion the idea came up that the law should be challenged. I had already explained that I would not personally enter into a civil partnership and so I was asked if I’d be prepared to challenge the law with my partner.
From this, Peter, Robert and I started talking about the possibility of taking action. It is particularly pertinent that the campaign started when it did as Guy Bentham, who organised the conference, died shortly before the first application was made.
Why is marriage equality so important to you?
There are two main reasons: the first is a professional one. LGCM has a long history of campaigning for marriage equality and although it was decided five years ago to accept the introduction of civil partnerships, as the protection being offered was too great to risk, the desire for full equality has never gone away. Fighting for equality is what underpins all the work of LGCM and the current system of two institutions is clearly segregation.
Personally, I want to get married. Maybe I’m a traditionalist at heart or unconsciously seeking conventionalism, but for me, marriage combines the legal requirement of our society for recognition of my relationship alongside the spiritual affirmation. I don’t separate my life into secular and spiritual, God is integral to everything I do, consequently, when it comes to the biggest commitment of my life, I don’t want to split that celebration.
So, does that mean you see civil partnerships as a second class system?
Not in the slightest! I hope that couples who do not want to get married will continue to enter into civil partnerships and I will continue to wholeheartedly bless those commitments. My argument is about the discrimination that having a dual system that excludes on the basis of sexual orientation brings about. Civil partnerships and marriage are almost identical in the rights and benefits they bestow. It is because of this that the discrimination is highlighted. We are segregated according to the gender of the person we love. If we love someone of the same gender we are not allowed a marriage and if we love someone of the opposite gender we are not allowed a civil partnership. The only purpose for introducing a separate identical system is to discriminate —what other reason can there be?
Why are you also campaigning for civil partnerships for straight couples?
Basically for the reasons already outlined. Equality. I believe that in God’s eyes we are all equal and therefore entitled to be treated equally. The current law denies gay and lesbian couples the right to marriage but equally it denies the right for straight couples to have a civil partnership. There are many people who do not agree with marriage because of its basis in patriarchalism. For those couples, civil partnerships are an ideal way to register their commitment to each other. On the same note, there are couples who dislike the heteronormativity of marriage and so again a civil partnership would be more appropriate. The bottom line is that we should all have the choice regardless of sexual orientation.
Stonewall didn’t support this campaign initially and still want to keep civil partnerships purely for gay and lesbian couples. What do you feel about that?
My understanding is that Stonewall wanted to establish if their supporters wanted them to devote their resources to this campaign given the level of protection already afforded through civil partnerships. Consequently, I asked the members of LGCM to let Stonewall know if this was an important issue for them. I’m really pleased that they are now supporting the action as I feel it’s important that we all work together.
I appreciate that Stonewall is about fighting for equality for lesbian, gay and bisexual people and not for the rights of the heterosexual majority however, to keep civil partnerships only for gay and lesbian couples is not equality as then we would not be treated the same. Why should we have access to an extra system that straight couples don’t? Especially when some straight couples have the same or similar issues with the institution of marriage.
How is the campaign going?
The campaign started on 2nd November 2010 when my partner, Franka and I, applied for a marriage license and were refused on the grounds that we are both female. There are three other same gendered couples who are applying for a marriage license and there are also four different gendered couples applying for a civil partnership license. It is expected that we will all be refused as we don’t comply with the gender requirement.
On 21st December 2010, the fifth anniversary of the introduction of civil partnerships, there will be a conference at which we will launch our legal challenge.
It is likely to be a long campaign but it is an issue that I strongly feel needs fighting for.
LGCM is not like other human rights groups in that it is concerned with equality in the religious domain. How does fighting for ’civil’ marriage fit into this?
We have a system in the UK that confuses civil and religious marriage. A religious marriage is only legal if all the civil components have been satisfied, i.e. a license has been issued and a person authorised by the state has witnessed that acceptable vows have been made and both parties have signed the register. The license has to be supplied by the registry office and an authorised person is either a register officer or a clergy person with a licence to perform marriages.
In other words, we need the right to have a civil marriage in order to be able to have a religious marriage.
The main objection to lesbian and gay people having a marriage rather than a civil partnership came from the religious sector because for them marriage is between a man and a woman. Therefore, the right to be able to get married is clearly a religious issue as well as a human rights issue.
