NORWAY LEGALISES SAME-SEX MARRIAGE
Norway has become only one of six countries in the world to offer gays and lesbians full marriage rights.
The Stortinget, the European nation’s parliament, approved a bill on Wednesday which will allow same-sex couples to marry.
At the moment of the legislation being passed those in the gallery applauded and burst out in cheers.
The new law was opposed by the country’s Christian Democrats and Progress Party. It nevertheless passed overwhelmingly with 84 members of parliament voting for the bill while 41 voted against.
The bill effectively changes the definition of marriage in the law from being between a man and woman to gender neutral partners.
Same-sex partnerships were previously recognised in Norway as civil unions, but LGBT activists argued that this was not sufficient and lobbied for full marriage rights.
Those who have registered their relationships under the earlier law will be able to convert their civil unions to full marriage.
The new legislation will also allow churches, including the Church of Norway, to bless same-sex marriages should they wish to do so. It also facilitates same-sex couple adoption.
Same-sex marriage is also legal in South Africa, Canada, Spain, Belgium and the Netherlands. A smattering of other countries and territories, such as the UK, also allow for civil-unions or legally recognised partnerships between same-sex couples.
same sex marriage. NO
SAME SEX MARRIAGE IS NOT LEGAL AND EQUAL IN
SOUTH AFRICA
APARTHEID STILL EXIST FOR GAYS AND LESBIANS
NOT EQUAL RIGHTS FOR GAYS OR LESBIANS WHO GET ‘MARRIED’
ONLY MIXED MARRIAGES ACCROSS THE COLOUR BAR IS NOW ALSO EQUAL !
SO AS LONG AS STRAIGHT PEOPLE OF ANY COLOUR HAS EQUAL RIGTHS THE ANC IS HAPPY !!!
ONLY CIVIL UNIONS ARE ALLOWED AND WITHOUT THE EXACT SAME RIGHTS AS MEN +WOMEN !!!!
dead right. I agree, although sans the capitals.
The Civil Partnership Bill is a poor excuse for marriage. If parliment was really fully behind equality they would have changed the wording in the marriage act, or scrapped it.
Apartheid has shown us the danger of having separate laws for different segments of society.
Mambaonline Reporter’ should get his/her fucking facts correct. that’s absolutely true. South Africa doesn’t have same-sex marriages, it has civil-unions. the so-called ‘Mambaonline Reporter’ should get his/her fucking facts correct
Idiot. You are the one that needs to get your “fucking facts correct”. Read Jabba’s post to see that we do have FULL marriage rights in SA. You can choose to either be classified as married or be in a civil union. Get clued up on your own rights…
Correction. I’m afraid you’re all wrong. The Civil Unions Act creates a category of legal partnerships called civil unions, under which there are two sub-categories: ‘marriage’ and ‘civil partnership’. These two sub-categories are identical in substance and only differ in name.
The same rights, privileges and responsibilities of the Marriage Act all carry over into civil unions and couples can choose to register their civil unions either as marriages or civil partnerships (if, for example, they don’t believe in the idea of ‘marriage’ and want only the legal protections without the historical baggage of the concept).
So all the Civil Unions Act did was create a gender-neutral legal partnership category (which couples may choose to have registered and recognised as ‘marriage’) thus enabling same-sex couples to get married.
Of course, the continued existence of the Marriage Act is an anomaly coz it’s redundant and discriminatory but that just means it still needs to be repealed and it doesn’t take anything away from the Civil Unions Act.
Unless one is willing to initiate a public campaign to advocate for the repeal of the Marriage Act, get petitions, make parliamentary submissions, etc, it might be useful to tone down on criticism before getting the full facts.
Of course you are right Jabba.
No one is disputing that the both civil unions and marriages offer the same protection to partners as they stand now. But there is a danger in having two laws in place. This is because:
a. The Civil Unions Act could potentially be repealed (although the likelyhood of this is small) without affecting the Marriage Act, and
b. Disparities could arise if ammendments are made to either act.
We have to ask why the a whole new bill was passed instead of the the definition of marriage simply being changed. The reason is simply because the utopian views of the constitution aren’t shared by most South Africans. The only reason the Civil Unions Bill was passed was because ANC MPs were forced to pull the party line.
Separate is, after all, never equal.
True. I agree that the motivation behind having two seperate laws is suspect, but the article never went into that. The reality is that gays and lesbians can legally marry (and yes, we can legally call it marriage) and have all the benefits of marriage. Therefore the writer of the article is entirely accurate. I would suggest reading the book To Have and to Hold to get more insight on the issue of same-sex marriage in SA.