About Me

My photo
I have a burning need to know stuff and I love asking awkward questions.

Tuesday, December 20, 2005

Scotland starts Civil Ceremonies

From The BBC:

Seven same-sex couples are taking part in the first civil partnership ceremonies in Scotland. The Civil Partnership Act, which came into effect earlier this month, gives gay and lesbian couples the same legal rights as heterosexual couples. Couples will benefit from a major change in next of kin status and inheritance tax and pension rights. But registrars in the Western Isles Council area are refusing to offer ceremonies on moral grounds. Four of the ceremonies were being held in Edinburgh and one each in Aberdeen, Dumfries and Galloway and Glasgow.

The first couple involved in Edinburgh were John Maguire and partner Laurence Scott-Mackay, who went on to be blessed by Bishop Richard Holloway. Mr Maguire and Mr Scott-Mackay have been together almost 14 years after meeting in a bar in Edinburgh in January 1992. They are both originally from Scotland - Mr Maguire, from Bathgate, West Lothian, while Mr Scott-Mackay is from Dornoch in Sutherland - but currently live in Washington DC in America, where they work for an IT firm. Male homosexuality was still a crime in Scotland, when they were born in the early 1970s and was not decriminalised until 1981.

Mr Maguire said of his big day: "It's absolutely incredible. For the first time in our relationship and for the first time in the history of the lesbian and gay movement, our government and our country is saying 'you're valid, your relationship is worth something. "'It's got to be rewarded, it's got to be encouraged. Here's the benefits, here's the rights, here's the responsibilities - but you're equal'. "There's definitely a sense of history about it, there's no mistaking that. "It's an incredibly awesome experience. It's mind-blowing and breathtaking.”

But the Roman Catholic Church in Scotland - and others - have said that "gay weddings" undermine the importance and unique status of marriage which they believe is best for individuals, society and children. Every council is obliged to register civil partnerships, although accompanying ceremonies are discretionary. The Registrar General has guaranteed that every couple will be entitled to registration and a ceremony anywhere in Scotland.

Comhairle nan Eilean Siar (Western Isles Council) in the staunchly religious Outer Hebrides has agreed to support registrars who will not offer ceremonies although it will meet its legal obligations to register civil partnerships. Western Isles MSP Alasdair Morrison said: "What the local authority is quite responsibly doing is what it's obliged to do under statute. That is allowing people to register their partnerships but what it's not doing is providing the all-singing, all-dancing ceremony. They're not obliged to do that under any act or any piece of legislation, so why should they do that?"

Green MSP Patrick Harvie has submitted a motion in parliament urging all MSPs to condemn the council's position. More than 140 couples in Scotland have already indicated that they want to register civil unions and many more are expected to follow. The registrar general has confirmed that same sex couples who have already tied the knot abroad in a country where the law is recognised, such as Scandavian countries, are automatically registered in Scotland.

7 comments:

JR said...

I was reading about all the hullabaloo on this on one of the news services. The religious opposition to this shocks me. I do think they have the right to believe what they want, but they continuously act like they're at a smorgasborg with their beliefs. So they think same sex marriage isn't moral, is bad for families and society. If they believe the parts of the bible that say homosexuality is a sin, do they also believe they have the right to stone the sinners? If they believe they should be supporting family values as found in the bible, then should children and wives be beaten when disobedient, should men have multiple wives? There's so much in the bible that is absolutely ridiculous that even devout people recognize as such and don't follow, that you have to wonder why they choose to pick out some things to practice and say that's what God wants, yet ignore other things God also supposedly wants. Am I making any sense here? Sometimes I just ramble. :-)

CyberKitten said...

It is true... So many Christians have a 'pic 'n mix' attitude to the Bible. It makes me laugh and feel sad at the same time. I guess that the news services are giving them air-time in the name of 'balance'.

But at least they didn't get their way on this issue.. & I see they lost (again) in Dover too... See next Blog for details...

Random said...

"I was reading about all the hullabaloo on this on one of the news services. The religious opposition to this shocks me."

Indeed. Tolerance it seems is only supposed to go one way - when gay activists interrupt Christian ceremonies (http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/77536.stm) it's merely free speech, but when Christian activists interrupt gay ceremonies it's apparently shocking bigotry.

"If they believe the parts of the bible that say homosexuality is a sin, do they also believe they have the right to stone the sinners?"

Absolutely not. If you'd ever troubled to read the bible instead of just attacking it, you would have come across the story of the woman taken in adultery (John 8:4-11) where Jesus actually prevents the stoning of a sinner on the grounds that we're all sinners and have no right to sit in judgement on others unless we're prepared to be judged ourselves. Where the New Testament and the Old contradict each other, it is the New that is authoritative for Christians. And the New Testament is clearly opposed to the use of violence for settling private disputes (and for that matter, both Testaments clearly regard polygamy as sinful).

JR said...

I have read it, and I don't believe it. But it's a great manual for controlling the masses. I believe any God intelligent enough to create this world and all life wouldn't need one of his/her creations interpreting devine intentions. To me it's just one more way for humans to make sense out of this world, and for one group of people to put themselves above others, whether its males having the upper hand with women or whites being chosen by God over blacks, etc. Sorry if I offended you, but I really do have a lot of problems with the inconsistencies in both the Old and New Testaments and I attended church, Sunday School and even took Bible study classes for many years. I devoutly believe in God, but not the word of man. Sorry. :-)

John said...

Hi,

I live on the Western Isles. My own thoughts - as a resident - on how the media has dealt with this issue are on my blog here:

http://silversprite.typepad.com/

CyberKitten said...

Thanks for that Silversprite - and welcome. I'll check you out soon.

CyberKitten said...

Interesting. Thanks for the 'inside scoop'. As always it pays going to the source. Thanks for the input & the link - which I can recommend to anyone interested in the issue.