Marriage Recognition Act



  • Dearest colleagues,

    The Alliance of Liberals and Democrats for a Green Europe would like to introduce to you the proposal for a Marriage Recognition Act. The purpose of this piece of legislation is to ensure that any marriage or civil union formed in one European Union member state is also legally recognized in all other member states. What this act does not do is to affect the national legislation concerning marriage or civil unions in any other ways. Members are still free to decide whether they allow, for example, same-sex couples to be wed in their nation.

    As always, constructive criticism and improvement suggestions are more than welcome.

    Nadira Orcello
    Councillor of Pax Aurea

    ______

    Marriage Recognition Act

    Article I: Purpose and Definitions

    Section I

    This Act aims to ensure the recognition of marriages and civil unions formed in one European Union member state in all member states.

    Section II

    To clarify, this Act does not force member states otherwise alter their laws related to marriage and/or civil unions.

    Section III

    For the purposes of this Act, we define the used terms as follows:

    (i) marriage: a social union or legal contract between people called spouses that establishes rights and obligations between the spouses, between the spouses and their children, and between the spouses and their in-laws;

    (ii) civil union: a legally recognized form of partnership similar to marriage.

    Article II: Regulations

    Section I

    Member states of the European Union are hereby required to recognize tourists' marriages and civil unions formed in other EU member states when the marriage or civil union has been lawfully formed in the country of origin.

    (i) This does not obligate a member state to allow the same types of marriages and civil unions to be formed in their country.

    Section II

    **A member state may choose to place legal restrictions on married spouses or spouses in a civil union who are not citizens of the said member state.

    (i) Persons applying for citizenship in a member state cannot be ranked unequally based on their marital status.**

    Article III: Enforcement

    Section I

    All member states of the European Union are required to harmonize their national law(s) with this Act in 12 months of time from its approval by the European Council.

    Section II

    Violations of this Act may be tried in the European Court of Justice.

    Authored By: Nadira Orcello
    Presented By: Nadira Orcello

    End of Debate: Friday May 24th, GMT 6:52
    End of Amending: Monday May 27th, GMT 6:52 - Extended
    End of Voting: Thursday May 30th, GMT 6:52 - Extended


  • group:cid:2:privileges:mods:members

    It is great to see this ALDGE collaborative act make it to the council floor. This act is necessary and important for the transference of human and equal rights. It is also is a significant respect of the sovereignty every European nation holds. This adds to the pre-existing rights laid down in the UDoHR and as the committee this week has had members meet to discuss progression this can only add to it. I whole heartedly endorse an important act to ensure sovereign citizenship equality.

    Count Kairos Jelesniak



  • After a long debate,Red Croatia has come to a opinion that same-sex marriages should NOT be approved Considering that Marriage was and will be a holy part of both a woman's and a man's life and the only reason it was created is so they could express their feelings and form a family together,and ONLY because a couple of gay activists want to dress up in white dresses and run down the altar,we'd suggest that they forget it because it will harm the beliefs formed by religion by desecrating this holy wow and millions which are already a part of it.

    Jadranka Kosor
    Councilor of Red Croatia



  • Must a nation recognise what is called marriage in another country as marriage, or may they classify it as a civil union instead, and vice versa?



  • QUOTE (Angleter @ May 22nd, 2013 - 11:14)

    Must a nation recognise what is called marriage in another country as marriage, or may they classify it as a civil union instead, and vice versa?

    To answer to Councillor Keith's doubt, I think that it depends on the fact that if a civil union is legalised in the other countries or not.
    Still, as independent councillor I have to speak in the Parliament before expressing my country's opinion about this trivial issue. I shall express our consensus or our denial in 2 days.

    Nighel Faras
    Councillor of Kryuland to the European Union



  • What about homosexual marriages? Lets say Councillor Faras and I get married in Rhine Ruhr where same sex marriage is legal. Would the government of Red Croatia have to recognize our marriage under the provisions of this act?

    also I have an amendment:

    QUOTE

    Section II

    Member states of the European Union are hereby required to include the married spouses or spouses in a civil union of another member state to the same benefits than married spouses or spouses in a civil union of the nation in question.

    (i) Member states may choose to place legal restrictions to marries married spouses or spouses in a civil union who are not citizens of the said member states.



  • QUOTE (Pax Aurea @ May 22nd, 2013 - 7:52)

    Article II: Regulations

    Section I

    Member states of the European Union are hereby required to recognize marriages and civil unions formed in other EU member states when the marriage or civil union has been lawfully formed in the country of origin.

    First let me say that the Confederacy supports gay marriage for all its citizens. But in the context of this bill, doesn't this open things up for quickie marriages in localities, cities, and nations with no citizenship requirements to get married. People can get these while on vacation and then must have them recognized when they return home. Whether couples are going for gay or straight marriage this is an underhanded tactic. It is troublesome when any nation's laws on any type of marriage could be so easily subverted. I'm not saying that we have this but what if an area requires a blood test for spouses prior to giving out marriage licenses or some kind of counseling prior because they believe this to be good, non-discriminatory policy? This act allows citizens of said area or nation to work around these requirements. If the aim was to provide a loophole for gay marriages to be done and then recognized in places that don't allow them, let's show a little more conviction and make it legal for any two people regardless of sexuality to get married under local/national laws.

    QUOTE (Pax Aurea @ May 22nd, 2013 - 7:52)

    Section II

    Member states of the European Union are hereby required to include the married spouses or spouses in a civil union of another member state to the same benefits than married spouses or spouses in a civil union of the nation in question.

    (i) Member states may choose to place legal restrictions to marries spouses or spouses in a civil union who are not citizens of the said member states.

    When you are talking about non citizens in (i) are you referring to non-citizens of the EU or non-citizens of a particular member state within the EU. If the latter it kind of voids the whole purpose of the bill.



  • First to answer the question of Mr. Marshall with a reference to the words of Councillor Orcello

    QUOTE

    . What this act does not do is to affect the national legislation concerning marriage or civil unions in any other ways. Members are still free to decide whether they allow, for example, same-sex couples to be wed in their nation.

    Second North Europa agrees to the bill being discussed and I see no particular problem, moreover, the political gay marriages are legal in North Europa, but not approved by the Ecumenical Patriarchate of St. George religious gay marriages.

    Bent Jerrik Christiansen
    Councillor of North Europa to the European Union



  • May I point out to Councillor Christiansen that though the Act allows us autonomy on whether we should allow same-sex couples to get married on our own territory. The whole point of the proposal is that marriages and civil unions conducted in other EU countries are considered as such in our own countries - although I am still unsure about whether we're meant to recognise marriages as marriages and civil unions as civil unions, or whether recognising them as one of the two is fine.

    Regardless, what I see here is in effect an attempt at establishing a pan-European definition of marriage and civil unions, and a maximalist one it's sure to be, through the back door. Say Cllrs. Marshall and Faras turn up in Angleter and we have to recognise it as a marriage, then surely myself and Commissioner Montfort could go to court and say it's unfair that foreigners can have what we can't. Replicate for every scenario, and eventually every European state with something resembling equality before the law will have to legalise marriages and civil unions for every combination of spouses or civil partners that's legal somewhere in the Union. It's an underhanded trick and Angleter will not stand for it.



  • I think that a sort of amendment is needed to solve the problem pointed out by Cllr. Keith: as far as I think, we should make this act valid only in the countries which allow same-sex marriages or civil unions, this to safeguard each country's sovereignty.
    What do the other councillors think?



  • QUOTE (Rhine Ruhr @ May 22nd, 2013 - 13:40)

    What about homosexual marriages? Lets say Councillor Faras and I get married in Rhine Ruhr where same sex marriage is legal. Would the government of Red Croatia have to recognize our marriage under the provisions of this act?

    also I have an amendment:

    QUOTE

    Section II

    Member states of the European Union are hereby required to include the married spouses or spouses in a civil union of another member state to the same benefits than married spouses or spouses in a civil union of the nation in question.

    (i) Member states may choose to place legal restrictions to marries married? spouses or spouses in a civil union who are not citizens of the said member states.

    Red Croatia stands against this act,however we respect the opinions of other European countries,therefore we wouldn't deny the wows of a homosexual visitor/tourist even though it's not something we want for our own citizens

    Jadranka Kosor
    Councilor of Red Croatia


  • ECoJ

    I think Mr Faras's suggestion is a good one. Inimicus, for example, does not allow gay marriage, but does have the concept of civil partnership.

    On the whole, Inimicus does not favour this act, simply because it is, in my opinon, trying to legalise same-sex marriages throughout the union. And before you attack me on this point, we all know that Pax Aurea and most other ALDGE nations have legalised these kind of marriages, and will most probably want other nations to do the same.

    Nicholas Benfield



  • Only comment I have to make on Mr. Benfield's announcement is "Bravo".

    I honestly don't see the point of attempting to make such act effect the whole union while only those who agree with it already have legalized marriage within their borders.Such decisions should be handled within our national governments,not pushed towards us by other European states.

    Jadranka Kosor
    Councilor of Red Croatia



  • QUOTE (Pax Aurea @ May 22nd, 2013 - 6:52)

    Section II

    To clarify, this Act does not force member states otherwise alter their laws related to marriage and/or civil unions.

    May I point out to Cllr. Benfield this section of the act proposed by Cllr. Orcello? It perfectly stated the opposite you are saying, Mr. Benfield!



  • That only makes the situation a bigger pile of non-sense.
    If we wanted to legalize same-sex marriage within our national borders we would have done it already,without the European Union making it a major "issue" between the member states.

    Jadranka Kosor
    Councilor of Red Croatia



  • I think that this act does not aim at making compulsory to all countries to legalise same-sex marriages or civil union, but just at a mutual recognition of them in the whole union. Cllr. Orcello, can you correct me if I am mistaken?
    Though, I see your point. Sovereignty is a very important issue for Inimicus, Red Croatia and other countries: that is why I propose to well-known councillors to formulate an amendment that safeguards the issue of sovereignty. May I suggest CouncillorKeith, Roebruck or Marshall?



  • I appreciate that you understood the point I was trying to make and I agree with the suggestion that you have made.

    Red Croatia would be pleased if an amendment that protects our national sovereignty would be created,however this does not mean we agree with this act.

    Jadranka Kosor
    Councilor of Red Croatia


  • Mass Effect RP

    I would be wary of any "opt-out" clause, however tempting it may be. While we stand firmly against gay marriage, I think it would set a dangerous precedent. What would there be to stop Os Corelia, for example, tabling an amendment that pretty much excludes them from any regulation on the fishing industry? No, we can't allow European legislation to become a la carte. Its either all of it, or none of it, in this case at least.

    Now, on the bill in general, I can only agree with my Angleteric, Croatian and Inimican colleagues. This proposal is clearly an underhanded attempt to pressure governments to legalise same-sex marriages, and that is utterly unacceptable. If the government of Halsberg wants to introduce same-sex marriage, they will. But we will not be bullied into making such a sweeping change by a bill that would, as many have noted, give thousands of Halsbergian couples cause to take up a human rights legal case. Now I know I'm not usually one to congratulate the ALDGE, but this time, I really must applaud their ingenuity and cunning. This bill, should it be passed, would inevitably lead to nearly every European country being forced into legalising gay marriage, but of course, its only recognising them isn't it? With no explicit line calling for the legalisation of same-sex marriage, or any other type of marriage for that matter, the ALDGE's hands are clean. If they believe in their cause so much, why can't they come out, no pun intended, and propose something a tad more explicit? Surely, the ALDGE are above the underhandedness that this bill is so evidently a product of? I call on all UEC councillors, and indeed any other Councillors who want to keep this important issue in the hands of their governments, to join with me in strongly rejecting this bill.


  • Commission

    The Imperial Government of Davishire believes that the European Council should not legislate in this area and that any regulations on the recognition of a variety of different forms of marriage and partnership should be decided ultimately by national parliaments and not the European council.

    As a result when this bill comes to vote Davishire will not be supporting it, even in any amended form.

    Deputy Prime Minister & Acting European Councillor for Davishire
    Rt Hon William Hague MP


  • ECoJ

    QUOTE (Kryuland @ May 22nd, 2013 - 19:09)

    QUOTE (Pax Aurea @ May 22nd, 2013 - 6:52)

    Section II

    To clarify, this Act does not force member states otherwise alter their laws related to marriage and/or civil unions.

    May I point out to Cllr. Benfield this section of the act proposed by Cllr. Orcello? It perfectly stated the opposite you are saying, Mr. Benfield!

    This may be stated in this act, but, as the Os Corelian councillor said: "This act is necessary and important for the transference of human and equal rights". That quote suggests that nations who do not allow same-sex marriages do not hold human and equal rights highly. And therefore our nation, Red Croatia, Halsberg and many others should create these so-called equal rights by legalising same-sex marriages, hmm?

    Nicholas Benfield


Log in to reply
 

Looks like your connection to NS European Union was lost, please wait while we try to reconnect.