Why universal civil marriage is not the answer

Abstract

Universal civil marriage – in the sense of a single, state-ordained, statutorily-defined marriage ceremony that is the only route to a legally recognised marriage – is regularly proposed as a simple means of addressing a number of problems with weddings law in England and Wales. This article explains why universal civil marriage is not the answer. It shows that the number of couples getting married in a register office or on approved premises cannot be interpreted as evidence of couples making an active choice that they wish to be married in a ‘civil’ ceremony. It also questions the ‘universality’ of universal civil marriage, showing that only a minority of countries have adopted this option, that religious-only ceremonies continue to take place in such countries, and that many do not make provision for same-sex couples to marry. It acknowledges the force of the argument that only universal civil marriage is likely to ensure absolute equality for same-sex and opposite-sex couples, but shows that there is now room for optimism that a religious wedding is now a realistic option for many same-sex couples. Finally, it rejects the idea that universal civil marriage would be a simple and cheap solution, showing the additional costs that would be involved, both for the state and for couples marrying. It concludes by considering how the rules governing entry into marriage should be reformed to enhance their reach.