Abolir le mariage en faveur d’un PACS+?
C’est au fond la proposition de Peter Tatchell, un infatigable activiste des droits humains — et parfois fatiguant: il ne saurait se résigner à la victoire que représente l’égalité au travers d’un statut de partenariat enregistré donnant aux couples de même sexe les mêmes droits que le mariage pour les couples hétéros. J’en avais déjà parlé ici, et ici. Une idée que je trouve personnellement risible, mais qui a retenu l’intérêt Norman Geras.
Re: Peter Tatchell: Civil partnerships are divorced from reality (The Guardian, 19.12.05)
The tired comparison of the treatment of homosexuals (I’m one of them) with the racist segregation of black people is of course fallacious: the Government has not « prohibited » gay people from marrying; the Government (reflecting society as a whole) merely hasn’t granted them recognition as couples until now. One easily forgets that same-sex couples have emerged as a social reality only very recently. Starting from the liberation movement of the 60’s, recognition of gay couples in both public opinion and in law has happened incredibly quickly.
Either, as in Britain, you have a partnership for gays and lesbians which is the same as marriage for heterosexual couples. Or you have a system with two different legal frameworks, which can then both be opened up to straights and gays. Or you change the definition of marriage to apply to same-sex as well as opposite-sexes couples. All three ways are equivalent and achieve equality.
What Tatchell proposes is replacing both marriage and civil partnership by a loosely defined « civil commitment pact » between any two (or why not more) people. Well, if he can’t think of anything more worthy of a fight… The fact that many couples choose not to register for marriage or civil partnership is not a problem calling for a solution: it is their free choice, and now open to both gay and straight people. That is also equality.
COMPLEMENT TARDIF: Ma lettre n’a pas eu les honneurs de la publication, sans doute parce que le journal a eu l’embarras du choix…