The most unfortunate consequece of the 2004 GRA is the requirement for trans-affected marriages to be terminated before the trans person can obtain legal rights in the new gender. There is the alternative of forming a civil partnership but just imagine how a hitherto wife of a trans person would feel having to publicaly identify as lesbian when she was not and having to break wedding vows when the couple had stayed together in a difficult situation!

Government do not seem to understand the difference between sexual orientation and gender identity. The former is who you fancy and the latter is who you are.

So, why not allow the affected couple to end their relationship (the marriage) but retain the existing rights enjoyed during the marriage?

This would be a simple amendment to the Equality Act to give protected status to such a couple. Contact me for details.

Why is this idea important?

If the above process (a legacy relationship) could be entered by re-affirmation of wedding vows, couples would not be breaking their vows and this is key to many. The relationship in all important respects could continue. There would be no need to publicly identify as lesbian when one is not. The State would incur God's wrath by casting the relationship asunder!

Now that case law has established that the sexual orientation of a civil partnerhip is not heterosexual, it seems that there is a lot of discrimination going on against trans folk, on the basis of their sexual orientation. This is about to poduce a number of legal challenges. Why can't the government at last do something to improve the miserable treatment that trans people have generally and married trans couples in particular? You do not ask black people to divorce to obtain human rights do you? The solution noted above would preserve marriage between a male and female and religious feelings thus unoffended.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.