What can we expect with a conservative government in power influencing the outcome of this case? Sarkozy is against marriage equality and so is his party, out of touch. Marriage equality in the EU, Canada and Argentina happened under their version of a Labour government. Expect nothing under conservatives, including our own.
well i suppose thats acceptable though, the court jurisdiction itself may have felt insufficient or potentially uneducated to the particular facts and in a move of cowardice to the publics potential differences decided to leave the decision to parliament, i hope though that its possible to get the bill passed to parliament for at the very least a vote or something, given proper statistics in near all western and modern european nations, the majority support it, the non-supporters only have their say because of the dreaded undecideds and given what is shown today i would imagine it to be very possible, and considering the rise in statistics over a period of a few very short years its most definately an innevitability
the Pacs is more than enough for gays. marriage is between a man and a woman. I only think that pacs should have the same rights of marriage, but pacs for gays, marriage for straights.
I’d be surprised if our courts will be any different. The question is what to do next. Of course Stonewall should be more actively campaigning but at least these cases are high profile and out there, therefore hard to ignore.
Think it’s a bit unfair to carry on about what the Conservative here may or probably won’t do being that under the last Labour government, Gordon Brown said Civil Partnerships were ‘adequate’ and now in opposition still haven’t made much progress in making Equal Marriage party policy.
It will come, probably under another Labour government but it will be a fight to get it but well worth it in the end.
Gay/Lesbians should remain separate then?
Civil Marriage should be for whoever consents to marry, male or female to male or female.
Will you please then campaign for all Gay/Lesbians to pay less tax then because as it stands we pay equally like everyone else.
Liberte, egalite, fraternite?
France had better change its motto as their court has just declared that ‘egalite’ is not a French characteristic.
Will the couple appeal France’s apartheid laws to the European Court of Justice?
cj marriage is only between a man and a woman until it changes. Gay acts were outlawed up to 1967 so it’s hardly surprising that marriage didn’t allow two men or two women at that stage. There is no reason why marriage should be limited to just hetersexual couples other than tradition and it’s also a tradition that things change.
@ c.j.: I think you have trouble understanding the concept of equality.
“marriage is between a man and a woman” – according to whom?
Oops, just realised I didn’t comment on the case. I don’t think it’s surprising that this was the outcome. Although seven European countries have gay marriage, that leaves 30+ that don’t. So it’s not really a surprise that the Constitutional Court didn’t find a right to marry for gay people, because even the vast majority of Europe doesn’t. Once a bigger European state makes the move (and I hope it’s us) then with any luck we’ll see movement in other countries too. But right now, it’s up to the legislatures to make the moves.
58% of respondents are in favor of gay mariage, not 51..
It sounds as though the court’s role was to comment on whether the ban was constiutional. The French constitutional principle of égalité would suggest to me that the ban should be struck down. But if they are syaing that it required a political change then they are throwing the ball into the court of the politicians to see if they will reflect the will of the French people. Hopefully they will, but it all depends on the right people and the right balance of power. I think Germany will get there first and this will have a big impact on other countries. Whether marriage equality will finally arrive in France or the UK first remains to be seen.
There are several other countries that are supposedly close, so hopefully they will change soon.
“Gay acts were outlawed up to 1967″ – actually, only between men – lesbian acts were never covered by the 1885 act outlawing gay male sex (dear Queen Victoria could not contemplate the possibility). This case will be the start, or the continuation, of the crumbling of the French legal position, and will put yet another nail into the coffin of unequal laws.
Ho Hum…all very interesting for the French etc..but can anyone tell me why Pinknews have disabled comments regarding the Derby homophobic leaflet article?? Surely this is much more consequential for us in the UK then what the French are doing??
Maybe for legal reasons, Damian?
Germany won’t have equal marriage rights before France. There are Presidential and General elections in France next year and the socialists have a good chance to win both. Germany’s Bundestag elections are in 2013.
This year Denmark and Finland hold elections and Finnish politicians already said that equal marriage is a strong possibility and with the Left poised to win in Denmark, all of Scandinavia might have equal marriage by next year.
I am a French Gay man and bee in a relationship with an American for many years .As of today the PACS doesn’t give us any immigration rights, because we are 2 guys.
Marriage would of gave us the opportunity to be together legally and raise our one child without fear of deportation. We tried to make it legal but France doesn’t allow a No EU citizen same sex partner the same immigration asylum as it would with a straight one…. At this point we are simply going to move to Spain or Belgium and make it happen… we have to start our lives but it will be worthies , we are tired to live in a country where we are second class citizen.
Spot on Robert,as the old adage has it,if your not black/workshy or gay Labour has nothing for you
All I can say is C’est beaucoup de merde.
Get the Socialists and Greens in and a different result it will be!
Laurent – wasn’t there a case a few yrs ago in France where a French person married a Dutch guy , took his partner’s nationailty and as a consquence lost his French one…..I think the reasoning was that you (as a Frecnh person) are not allowed dual nationailty unless you’re married ie married to someone of the opposite sex!!!… French people who get married abroad have no recognition or rights in France when they return there only foreingers. The French seem to treat their own nationals worst when they get married (gay) than foreigners…pretty nasty moral control of their own nationals!!!
I had the impression that they never thought they would win this case anyway and that this was only a prelude to it being discussed at parliament ….The PS opposition party have promised a bill before the summer…..just hope the lib dem in the UK promise one too soon!!!!!!!!!
marjangles is right, except that there are 47 European countries in the Council of Europe, to which the European Convention on Human Rights applies. Only 7 have equal marriage so far.
There is already a French equal marriage case at to the European Court of Human Rights (Chapin & Charpentier v France), but it’s likely to go the same way as the Austrian case did last year.
In the Austrian case, the Court effectively said that it would not insist on equal marriage across the 47 countries until the majority of them already have it.
> What can we expect with a conservative government in power influencing the outcome of this case? Sarkozy is against marriage equality and so is his party, out of touch.
The Parti Socialiste are also against.
Was directed to here today, not this news story but about hypocrite Stephen Green. Think maybe if he protest outside Pride Marches handing out leaflets about what the Bible says about homosexuality, someone should give back leaflets on what the Bible says about divorce or wife beating?
Of course it helps if I post the link as well… :)
de Villiers….I say bring back Segolene Royale to head the socialists, then we’ll get civil marriage equality.
This is disgusting. Liberty, equality, fraternity, my @$$!
de villiers – the French media are saying the parti socialiste want to issue bills before the summer for gay marriage…but there is very little chance it will succeed because the UMP , unlike the cons here, have a majority govt!!!
The PS are like rats in a sack and are divided over everything – including this. Royal cares about no-one except herself. If Sarkozy supported gay marriage then she would oppose it.
Strauss-Khan would be the best leader – and he is in favour. None of the éléphants have said anything on it.
equality but only for heterosexuals, as they get pacs and marriage, gays get only pacs, justice french style
Well the court case was always unlikely to succeed as Tim above said, these cases don’t normally go in marriage equality’s favour, I don’t think this couple were naive enough to think that their chances in court would be that successful – they have succeeded though to get it into the media and into the political forum – I suspect the PS marriage bill will now have to go ahead and be discussed on the back of this court case….Many PS deputies and senators have been working hard to get French couples either recognition of their foreing marriage in France or to get marriage equality…I don’t know where de villiers get’s this negativity from about the PS party…As far as
I know the opposition and the gay orgs in France all want gay marriage and it’s only the UMP that is stopping it…
My hope in the UK was that the equal love campaign would also have generate more media attention and have thrown the debate into the political arena… sadly that hasn’t happenned yet in the UK!!!! They can’t even bring in relgious CPs. May only a few days ago dithered on this question yet again…
“Bob Blackman (Harrow East) (Con): What her policy is on the hosting of civil partnership ceremonies in religious establishments. 
The Secretary of State for the Home Department and Minister for Women and Equalities (Mrs Theresa May): In June 2010, the Government published “Working for Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual and Transgender Equality”, which made a commitment to talk to interested groups about what the next step should be for civil partnerships, including on this issue. The Government have held a number of meetings on the topic with various groups, including those representing faith groups, lesbian, gay and bisexual people and the registration service. We will announce the next steps in due course.
Bob Blackman: I thank my right hon. Friend for that answer. Many religious groups are openly hostile to the concept of civil partnerships because it offends their religious doctrine. Lord Alli’s amendment in the other place would permit ceremonies within religious establishments. Will my right hon. Friend confirm that the Government do not intend to introduce compulsion to religious organisations that do not want to have civil partnerships in their buildings?
Mrs May: My hon. Friend raises an important point. This was a significant part of the debate when Lord Alli’s amendment to the then Equality Bill went through in the House of Lords before the general election. It is clear in his amendment that this is a permissive power, and that is the basis on which the Government are operating. We have no intention of introducing any element of compulsion. It will be for religious groups and faith groups to decide whether they wish to take up this opportunity.
Chris Bryant (Rhondda) (Lab): I do not think anybody wants a form of compulsion that forces churches to do anything they do not want to in this field. That is a bit of a red herring. The right hon. Lady has said that the Government are considering allowing the use of religious rituals, ceremony and symbols at civil partnerships. If she is going to do that for civil partnerships, may I urge her to do it for civil weddings? Many people do not want to get married in church but would none the less like to have some religious readings or music.
Mrs May: In response to the hon. Gentleman’s first comment about no compulsion, I am grateful that he supports Government policy on that issue. He is right that extending the ability to have religious elements to a civil partnership ceremony or to hold such partnership ceremonies on religious premises raises an issue about the equality with civil marriage. We are taking steps as regards the Lord Alli amendment and we will make announcements in due course.”