9th December
2012, Washington, U.S.A. Jessica Lee and Ashley Cavner said “I do”,
completing their wedding vows – but do these words also ring true
when it comes from a gay couple? They are the state’s first lesbian
couple as Washington joined Connecticut, Iowa, Maine, Maryland,
Massachusetts, New Hampshire, New York and Vermont in legalising
same-sex marriage in the U.S.
For every U.S. state
legalising such marriages, there are others that prohibit it. Indeed
on the same day, Tory MP David Davies labelled the UK government’s
gay marriage plans as “barking mad”. Gay marriage is legal in
eight European countries.
In light of such
statements, why is gay marriage illegal in Malta? Another,
controversial issue - Divorce – was only introduced last year. In
March 2012, then Nationalist MP Jeffery Pullicino Orlando proposed
the legalisation of gay marriage, which set alarm bells ringing among
conservatives. Perhaps the wording of the proposal was what struck at
Malta’s religious core. Rather than calling it a civil partnership
or cohabitation, JPO called it ‘marriage’.
In 2010, Elton John and
his civil partner David Furnish had a son, Zachary, through a
surrogate mother. The singer has admitted that even though he has
“never seen such a contented child”, his son will struggle with
bullying because he doesn't “have a mummy”.
Indeed, when asked about
gay marriage many people say they are not against the partnership per
se, but mostly the after-effects such as adoption and rights.
What is interesting is that without the couple being officially
recognised as such, it is perfectly legal for one-half of a gay
couple to adopt a child, and then raise it together. Would this
automatically become illegal if the couple were recognised?
The Malta Gay Rights
Movement has been critical of several legal changes effected during
2012. This includes the cohabitation bill that does not recognise
cohabiting partners on the same level as families bourne out of
marriage. The movement claims this discriminates against gay couples
in the absence of gay marriage.
All in all, one has to
wonder why questions such as gay-marriage seem to be avoided by both
parties. Could it be the influence of forces such as the Church, both
on party members themselves or their voters? It would be difficult to
expect MPs to ignore those who vote them into power, or indeed the
teaching of the Church they subscribe to. However, isn’t it about
time that matters of faith and matters of society found their
rightful place? If two atheist gay persons want to marry, why should
the vote of an MP with Catholic views prevent that?
One has to consider what
such persons will do, should gay marriage not be legalised. Just
because partnership is not recognised, it certainly does not mean
such persons will not cohabit. These persons will be living together,
but without any of the benefits enjoyed by married couples.
Another point to consider
is that it is legal for an individual to adopt, but what if that
individual is in a gay partnership and then passes away? The other
partner – who would in effect have co-raised the child – will
have absolutely no right on the child whatsoever. How would this be
handled? Could one of the partners effectively leave the child in
their will? What would happen if the partner dies intestate? Several
things still need to be discussed, such as the ethical ground behind
leaving a human being in a will.
With
an election looming, one wonders whether any time spent discussing
this issue will instead be allotted to electoral campaigns. One hopes
that this and other important issues will make it on the agenda of
whoever is elected later this year.
[View comments here.]
[View comments here.]
No comments:
Post a Comment