EU Court Denies UK Sisters Tax Benefits Granted to Homosexual Couples
By Gudrun Schultz
STRASBOURG, December 15, 2006 (LifeSiteNews.com) - The European Court
of Human Rights has rejected a claim by two elderly British sisters
that they should receive the same inheritance tax benefits enjoyed by
lesbian couples.
Joyce and Sybil Burden argued that their claim to legal recognition was
equally as convincing as lesbian couples, since they had lived together
all of their lives--Joyce is 88 and Sybil is 80.
Under the UK Civil Partnership Act introduced in 2004, same-sex couples
registered as civil partners enjoy freedom from taxes on inheritance,
on the death of one partner. The sisters wanted the same
protection--their family home will have to be sold to pay the
inheritance tax bill when one sister dies.
"This government is always going out of its way to give rights to
people who have done nothing to deserve them," Joyce, 88, told the
Daily Mail.
"If we were lesbians, we would have all the rights in the world. But we
are sisters, and it seems we have no rights at all. It is disgusting
that we are being treated like this. It is an insult."
The EU Court, in a 4-3 ruling, said the sisters were not entitled to
the same rights as homosexuals because they had not chosen to enter
into a legal commitment--their relationship was simply the result of
birth.
That argument was hypocritical, attorney Gwen Landolt, national
vice-president of REAL Women of Canada, told LifeSiteNews.com, saying
the court had forced itself to give preferential treatment to
homosexual couples over familial relationships.
"Same-sex couples are entitled to get special benefits because of their
relationship, but the family relationships are of equally important
value. [Relatives] don't have to live together either, but they choose
to, and the fact that they were born into a relationship is totally
irrelevant.
"It is simply hypocrisy. Aren't family relationships as important as
same-sex relationships? [The court] was really searching for a
response," Landolt said.
"Two sisters, or any sort of family relationship, is of enormous value
to society. The family is the best health, education and welfare system
we've got going. And yet to ignore that as being less than the
homosexual or lesbian relationship is very offensive."
Jill Kirby of the Centre for Policy Studies, told the Daily Mail, "Once
the decision was taken to extend rights beyond those who are married,
it is only reasonable it should be offered to couples in situations
like this."
"In a case like this, where their lives have been intertwined for many
years, it seems very unfair they are not afforded the same protection
as a couple who have registered a civil partnership but whose lives
have not been shared to anything like the same extent."
Ms. Landolt agreed, saying, "Logically and consistently, once you've
opened the door to relationships beyond heterosexual married
couples--because of companionship and other benefits--you have to grant
the same rights to everybody. You've changed the whole dynamic and
purpose of legal marriage, which is procreation.
"We know that lesbian and homosexual couples are not equal to
heterosexual married couples, because the purpose of the heterosexual
union is of course procreation. That's the only relationship the State
has a basic interest in--to promote and encourage the birth of
children."
Kirby pointed out that relatives who live together are now the only
living-partners who are left out of protection from inheritance
tax--non-related couples who live together at least have the option of
getting married (or entering into civil partnerships.)
The two sisters, who never married, live on their family farm near
Marlborough, in Wiltshire. Valued at =A3875,000, inheritance tax on the
property would cost the surviving sister =A361,000, a sum she would not
be able to pay without selling her home and the land she has lived on
for most of her life.
.
|
