In a paper ballot of the House of Commons this week, MPs approved sweeping changes to legislation dating back as far as 1285AD to avoid unintended consequences of the Marriage (Same Sex) Couples Act 2013.
MP David Burrowes prompted a ballot of the whole House of Commons, allowing MPs to support marriage as between one man and one woman.
In a series of votes on Wednesday (5th March), around 100 MPs rejected the proposals, whilst at least 360 MPs voted in favour of the changes.
Amendments
Amendments have been proposed to 36 Acts going back to 1859 and an additional 67 pieces of legislation dating back 729 years.
Under the proposals, references to mother, father, husband and wife will be amended, whilst a number of other laws, including the 1351 Treason Act, will be excluded from the new legislation.
This means that while it will remain high treason to have sexual relations with the wife of a future King, this will not be the case where adultery is committed with a King’s same-sex ‘spouse’.
The order makes clear that a man who ‘marries’ a King of Britain cannot not be referred to as Queen, and the same-sex partner of a future Prince of Wales cannot be entitled Princess of Wales.
“Mess”
The amendments, described by critics as a “complete mess”, extend to dukes, earls and other male peers in order to stop same-sex partners from becoming a duchess, countess or lady.
The term “widow” will also be removed or replaced with “surviving spouse” or in some instances with the “woman whose deceased spouse was a man”.
"Mumbo jumbo"
During the debate, Sir Gerald Howarth MP said the new laws were “mumbo-jumbo”, highlighting that “we are overturning centuries of tradition and messing about with the English language”.
Sir Edward Leigh MP added: “What we have here is something sinister. It is a mangling of the language. We are now seeing the truth come out”.
Amendments are even proposed to the Metropolitan Public Carriage Act 1869, which allows cab licenses of deceased husbands to be transferred to their widows by way of a London cab order.
A leading lawyer has pointed out that anomalies raised by the new legislation mean that the UK Government must admit that “equalness of same-sex marriage has its limits”.
"Legal confusion"
Commenting on the proposals, Andrea Williams of Christian Concern said: “The Government was warned time and again that its plans would result in legal confusion and do away with the common understanding of historic terms such as 'husband', 'wife' and 'widow'".
“We now have a situation where laws dating back 700 years must be revised and tampered with in order to accommodate the new legislation. Proposed amendments in areas ranging from cab licenses to royal titles show what a mess the Government has created.
“It is now attempting to disguise the absurdities thrown up by the move by rushing the changes through Parliament at a time when other high-profile issues are dominating media attention.”
A leading lawyer has pointed out that anomalies raised by the new legislation mean that the UK Government must admit that “equalness of same-sex marriage has its limits”.
Sources: