Under the
Civil Partnership Act, a civil registrar can go to prison for up to six months
for refusing to officiate at a same-sex civil 
partnership ceremony on
conscientious grounds.
A court in Saskatchewan this week
took a more nuanced approach than our Government. So did gay rights supporter,
John Culhane [1].
The
court considered whether a civil registrar could refuse to officiate at a civil
partnership ceremony under any and all circumstances, and if not that, could a
registrar appointed before the civil partnership law came into being do so?
The
court answered ‘no’ and ‘no’.
However,
it suggested that if another question was asked, namely could a civil registrar
decline to officiate if another civil registrar would do the job instead, the
answer was, maybe. Unfortunately the court was not asked this question.
As
it happens, this was the compromise supported by The Iona Institute, and by
senior representatives of the Church of Ireland.
John
Culhane writing on the website, 365gay.com agrees with the court, and by
extension, with our approach.
He argues that a civil registrar must do their job if there is
no-one else able to do it. At the same time he writes:
“I’ve argued [2] that a behind-the-scenes approach
to the problem might be best, but only if it can be done without offending the
dignity and equality rights of the couple. The court agreed, suggesting that
one approach might be to furnish applicants with different lists of available
commissioners, depending on the identity of the marrying couple. (The court
didn’t bless this approach, but only intimated that it could possibly pass
constitutional muster.)
“In other words, if
there’s a way to protect the dignity of the couple while also respecting the
religious beliefs of the commissioner, I’m OK with that.”
Our
Government, however, was not OK with that. Instead it adopted an extreme and
obnoxious position that gave no quarter whatever to religious sensibilities in
this regard.