Posted on 02/21/2017 6:29:28 PM PST by markomalley
A heterosexual couple have lost their legal battle to enter into a civil partnership.
Academics Rebecca Steinfeld, 35, and Charles Keidan, 40, wanted to secure legal recognition of their seven-year relationship by entering into a civil partnership, rejecting marriage as they claim it carries “patriarchal baggage”. However, they have been prevented from doing so because the Civil Partnership Act 2004 stipulates that only same-sex couples are eligible.
In November the couple, who have a seven-month-old daughter, challenged a decision by High Court judge Mrs Justice Andrews to dismiss their judicial review action. But on Tuesday their challenge was in turn dismissed by the Court of Appeal, the Telegraph has reported.
Addressing Lady Justice Arden, Lord Justice Beatson and Lord Justice Briggs, Karon Monaghan QC advanced the argument that barring the couple from entering into a civil partnership was incompatible with Article 14 of the European Convention, which relates to discrimination, taken with Article 8, which refers to respect for private and family life.
(Excerpt) Read more at breitbart.com ...
If fags can get married. Then couples can get fag marriages.
It only makes sense.
er that is discrimination, but of course straight while people are never discriminated against.
Carr-Razy.
The right attorney would resolve this silliness.
They may not have the money for one though. It’s such a private matter, they probably could not find a lawyer to work pro bono. Most straight couples find it difficult to become fully angry about such injustice. Someone else will need to fight the obvious discrimination.
It would be funny if the notorious Gloria Allred took their case, as she would be able to sue the city and or county. I think.
Separate but equal?
Some are more equal.
We should have a “contractual household” provision that applies to homosexual couples, heterosexual couples, siblings, parent-child, benefactor-client, friends ... anyone who wants to establish a household under fixed legal provisions.
THAT would be equal protection under the law.
Patriarchal baggage? Why is she with a man?
This is in the UK. Allred is only a US lawyer at best. Even if she wanted to I don’t think she could take the case.
Equal protection?
I agree. And have been saying so for years.
Is common-law marriage no longer recognized in the USA?
Dr. Ben Carson brought up the same concept in one of his books; the CD passed around my prayer group a few years ago. I hope it gains traction.
People should be able to gain a consistent legal status for their households, regardless of the basis for forming a household. Maybe it’s matrimony. Maybe it’s grandparent-grandchild. Maybe it’s “just fell into cohabiting because he/she needed a place to live.”
A common-law marriage requires that the participants publically declare themselves to be married. People with a beef about patriarchy probably aren’t going to do that.
S-Group. Heinlein envisioned them 50 years ago.
L
He was a thoughtful prognosticator.
LOL - so you can’t say that marriage is only for husbands and wives, but you can say that civil partnerships are only for same-sex couples.
Demonstrates the utter dishonesty of the whole same-sex “marriage” debacle being about so-called “equality.”
How consenting adults choose to order their lives can be handled by ordinary contract law. Other than that the state should have no say in it.
Best,
L
But couldn’t one of the partners just say they ‘identify’ as the opposite of their biology and it all be just fine ?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.