‘Marriage-lite’ legal case against Govt moves step forward

Feb 26, 2015

A couple who believe marriage has “sexist trappings” have been granted permission to continue their legal bid for heterosexual civil partnerships.

Charles Keidan and Rebecca Steinfeld want the Government to go back on its decision last year to reject such unions.

Mrs Justice Elisabeth Laing has granted permission for the case to proceed, and ruled that the couple should have their costs limited if they lose the case.

C4M has previously warned that civil partnerships for heterosexual couples would be “marriage-lite”, because the relationships do not involve a life-long commitment.

There is also concern over the cost to the taxpayer as the change could cost the country £3 billion in public service pension rights alone.

However, Rebecca Steinfeld claimed the judge’s decisions mean there is now “no doubt” over the public importance of the case.

And Charles Keidan said “every social institution should be open to everyone, regardless of sex or sexual orientation”.

The pair have previously campaigned in favour of same-sex marriage and explained their complaint against marriage between one man and one woman last year.

“Our objection to marriage is partly to do with its history, a union in which women were exploited for their domestic and sexual services. There are still sexist trappings to weddings: there’s only space for the father to sign on the registry form”.

It was only in June that the Government rejected heterosexual civil partnerships, and the judiciary should heed the concerns about opening up the unions to all.

Even if we ignore the serious consequences for the public purse, the last thing we need is a marriage-lite free-for-all.