A parliamentary
committee approved proposals for same-sex marriages in
South Africa on Thursday, clearing the way for the passage
of legislation that would be unique on a deeply
conservative continent. The compromise, reached after
heated public debate, upset religious groups,
traditionalists, and even some members of the governing
African National Congress, while gay rights activists
said it didn't go far enough.
''It's been a
very difficult time. It was a major challenge,'' said
Patrick Chauke, chairman of the Home Affairs Portfolio
Committee, which spent weeks touring the country to
gauge public opinion and received nearly 6,000 written
comments.
The civil unions
bill will go to a full session of parliament Tuesday.
Despite the unease in the ANC ranks, it is expected to pass
as lawmakers have been ordered to follow the party
line and told there is little room for maneuver.
In Africa,
homosexuality is still largely taboo. It is illegal in
Zimbabwe, Kenya, Uganda, Nigeria, Tanzania, Ghana, and most
other sub-Saharan countries. South Africa recognized
gay rights in the constitution adopted after apartheid
ended in 1994--the first in the world to
prohibit discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation.
But the government long opposed attempts to extend the
definition of marriage in court to include same-sex
couples in the mostly Christian country.
Married couples
currently have numerous rights still denied gay couples,
including the ability to make decisions on each other's
behalf in medical emergencies and inheritance rights
if a partner dies without a will. South Africa's
Constitutional Court ruled last year that the country's
marriage legislation was illegal because it discriminated
against same-sex couples. It gave the government until
December 1 to adopt new legislation.
The bill provides
for the ''voluntary union of two persons, which is
solemnized and registered by either a marriage or civil
union.'' It does not specify whether they are
heterosexual or gay partnerships.
But it also says
marriage officers need not perform a ceremony between
same-sex couples if doing so would conflict with his or her
''conscience, religion, and belief.'' That could leave
gay couples shopping for someone to perform their
ceremony.
Gay rights groups
welcomed the inclusion of the term ''marriage'' in the
legislation but said they were disappointed that same-sex
couples were being treated differently from
heterosexual couples because of the opt-out clause.
''Everyone should
be governed by one law,'' said Vista Kaupa of the
Triangle Project, which provides support for gays and
lesbians. ''Marriage should be for everyone. There
should be one encompassing umbrella for everyone.''
Jonathan Berger
of the AIDS Law Project said the wording implied
''something inherently problematic about same-sex
marriage.'' He predicted that the bill would be open
to challenge on grounds that it does not comply with
the Constitutional Court ruling for full equality
before the law.
Marie Fourie and
Cecelia Bonthuys, a lesbian couple from Pretoria, sued
the government for not recognizing their October 2002
wedding. The government lost the case as well as the
appeals.
Chauke, who put
aside his own religious convictions to steer the bill
through the Home Affairs committee, said the final
compromise was a ''wonderful'' product. ''We've
arrived at the point where we've met the
constitutional requirement that everybody is equal before
the law,'' he told journalists.
The main
opposition Democratic Alliance said it had ''serious
problems'' with the bill and complained that it was
rushed through the committee on the final day without
a vote and without time for adequate debate. ''One of
the problems is to call same-sex unions a marriage,'' Terius
Delport said.
Steve Swart of
the African Christian Democratic Party was visibly upset.
''It would be the first time that an African country has
same-sex marriage. This we cannot accept,'' he said.
(AP)