Reader comments · Humanist wedding amendment withdrawn over concerns of human rights convention breach · PinkNews

Enter your email address to receive our daily LGBT news roundup

You're free to unsubscribe at any time.


Humanist wedding amendment withdrawn over concerns of human rights convention breach

Post your comment

Comments on this article are now closed.

Reader comments

  1. GulliverUK 21 May 2013, 4:51pm

    A lot of the problems came from Tony Baldry, Tory, Second Church Estates Commissioner, who represents the Church of England in the House of Commons, who said the quad-lock protections were in place — he didn’t specify how, but said the Church’s support was based on those locks and if they were weakened then he didn’t know where that might leave things.

    He introduced doubt and fear.

    1. GulliverUK 21 May 2013, 4:53pm

      sorry, he said the quad-lock protections were in “doubt” – because they protect religious organisations, but it wasn’t clear that Humanists were a religious organisation – one amendment said they were, one said they weren’t, and it could jepodise support of the church because reassurances might not now be valid.

  2. That There Other David 21 May 2013, 5:02pm

    Not really surprising. The CoE are running scared that Humanists weddings might suddenly become the most popular in the country, further showing the church up as obsolete.

  3. Why was this discussed as part of same-sex marriage bill? Enough distractions already!

    1. Because not all homosexuals are religious and would like to get married without being wed by a religion they do not believe or worst, is hated by? like myself.

      1. That There Other David 21 May 2013, 5:41pm

        Are you seriously not aware that opposite-sex marriages already happen in non-religious buildings all over the country? Huge numbers of venues such as hotels have marriage licenses. You could even get married a museum, a railway station, or on a decommissioned warship if you really wanted. Whatever takes your fancy.

        1. This isn’t a question about the location, religious or non religious. Humanist is a belief system, a major ethical stance and it’s growing. So I would like my humanist beliefs, like thousand in Scotland, to be acknowledged through law.

          1. Humanist belief is a belief that there is no god. Civil ceremonies cater perfectly well in these circumstances.

            I see no purpose in aping religions in this.

            I speak as a humanist and secularist.

    2. Because not all homosexuals, like myself, are religious and are humanist. So to then go get myself married by a religious organisations would be dishonest.

      1. A civil marriage, is just that and not religious at all.

  4. Tim Hopkins 21 May 2013, 5:20pm

    Strangely, we’ve had Humanist marriages in Scotland since 2005 without any ECHR problems!

    1. Then Scots and Humanists have done the rest of a us a great disservice in keeping the details to yourselves. No one in England seems to understand what distinguishes a Humanist wedding from a civil ceremony. Without knowing that, this was always going to look like a spoiling action.

  5. GulliverUK 21 May 2013, 5:46pm

    They spent all this time talking about Humanist weddings and yet they have spend very little time talking about pension schemes, and how they have screwed us over for years, and don’t intent to fix the problem.

    We will always be second class citizens because our pensions will always be limited – because the last government didn’t fix it, and this government has no intention of fixing it.

  6. I’m a paid up Humanist, but had problems with this amendment.

    We’re after civil marriage, not religious marriage or even not-religious marriage.

    Humanism is about living without a god: we don’t need to create something that looks like religious ceremony when there’s no deity involved. The Civil ceremony is completely sufficient

  7. Common sense 21 May 2013, 10:11pm

    This is bonkers, why are they worried about Pagans or other groups? Scotland has been doing this for years and the sky has not fallen in. Surely it is up to the celebrants who officiates? Why must the state always meddle?

    1. Yes, and Pagan Weddings (aka Handfastings) are legal in Scotland too. And I haven’t noticed society collapsing there.

  8. And still no word on Pastafarian marriages. Infidels !

These comments are un-moderated and do not necessarily represent the views of PinkNews. If you believe that a comment is inappropriate or libellous, please contact us.