Should we extend the definition of marriage to encompass same-sex partnerships (Civil Partnerships)?
It is impossible to provide a single definition of marriage. However, one thing is for certain, and that is marriage is not a union between two people of the same sex (at list for now). Even though lack of a single definition of marriage has been said to be a reflection of religious, cultural and ethnic diversity , however regardless of how far we have advanced socially, marriage still is and arguably should be one of the most important institutions in the society . With this in mind, in the course of this essay it will be argued that extending marriage to homosexual couple is to infringe religious concepts of marriage upon which sanctity of marriage is enrooted , and this might lead to a political turmoil more profound than imaginable. On the other hand, it will be appreciated that if marriage was to be extended to homosexual couples that would undoubtedly achieve greater equality and uniformity. Nonetheless, the costs of such an extension outweigh its advantages.
In Ghaidan v Mendoza , Lord Millet following Hyde v Hyde defined marriage as a union of a man and a woman. However, such a blanket exclusion of same couple was argued to be unjustifiable. Baroness Hale in the same case suggested that instead of focusing on sexuality, marriage should have a defacto meaning based on its essential quality in light of intimacy, stability, social and financial dependency. Nonetheless, English law still holds that for a marriage to be valid its content should be that of a man and a woman .
Such a stringent condition of marriage was thought to be denying homosexual couples with equal rights as heterosexual couples . To address this problem in 2004 the Government enacted the Civil Partnership Act 2004 which aimed at achieving a degree of equality between same-sex couples and heterosexual couples. The Act enables homosexual couples to enter into a civil partnership which eventually as stated by Baroness Hale in SSWP v M, grants them same legal recognition that the law grants to heterosexual couples. As voiced by Anderson the Act is a generous invention with loud political and social message. He argues that by giving homosexual couples the same legal status as married couples the government has made it possible for homosexual couples to obtain full social recognition.
Nonetheless, the argument that civil partnership is nothing but second rate marriage is somewhat incorrect and undermines the significance of CPA. Baroness Hale writing extra-judicially unequivocally suggested that civil partnerships ‘are marriage in all but name’ . This idea of equality between civil partnership and marriage was echoed in Wilkinson v Kitzinger . In Wilson v Kitzinger it was explicitly voiced that civil partnership and marriage are almost equal save the name. This argument can be supported by the fact that the CPA accords to same-sex relationships effectively all the rights, responsibilities, benefits and advantages of civil marriage save the name. However, despite all the glimpse of equality between civil partnership and marriage, one can still argue that civil partnership is inferior to marriage. As pointed by( ) couples in civil partnership do not enjoy the same universal recognition as married couple. This is evident in Kitizinger case where a Canadian married homosexual couple was failed to be recognised as husband and wife in the UK. However, that reluctance to equate civil partnership with marriage is justified on religious, sociological and cultural factors to be discussed later.
Nonetheless, the question remains whether we should extend marriage to same-sex couples. Without sounding homophobic this part of the essay will focus on pressing arguments against such a call.
Marriage is sacred and regardless of the religious beliefs, for decades British have largely agreed on the sanctity of marriage. Since the ancient times, marriage has always been viewed as a union between one man and one woman to the exclusion of all others . This union is important not only to the parties themselves but to the society at large . On one hand the union brings rights and responsibilities to the parties but on the other-hand, it is important for reproduction, and child rearing . Therefore extending marriage to gay partners will undermine the everlasting portrayal of marriage and this can be said to cause ‘cultural genocide’
However, the above concerns are somehow obsolete. First, to equate a legal meaning of marriage to a religious one is dangerous considering the disparities in religious beliefs, and also the fact that some religious groups support gay marriages . Further, the argument on heterosexual marriage as a mechanism for reproduction and child rearing is outdated. In the modern society, homosexual couples are as well equipped to engage in child reproduction due to advances in technology, notably assisted reproductive technology and the emergence of surrogate mothers. However, my biggest concern still is whether these technological advances uphold and conform to our laws of nature?
Although, many among being Baroness O’Cathain are of the view that it is just wrong to ‘create a parody of marriage for homosexual couples’ , it can however be argued that extending civil partnership to marriage can achieve greater equality. I am of the view that homophobia, male dominance and gender imbalances are not legal but sociological and psychological problems whose remedies lie in the society itself. Unless we challenge the traditional views that a man should marry a woman and in most cases live in a subordinate relationship, we can never eradicate these problems. It is about time we shape the notion of marriage not on sexuality but on commitment, love, equality, and respect. Thus, by according same sex couple with the right to marry, we shall be moving a step closer to a society where sexuality does not dictate authority in the family, and gay people are to be regarded as not two men/two women doing immoral acts but rather be viewed in the same perception as heterosexual couples, that is ‘two people who love, and respect each other, and who have committed their lives to each other, till death do them part’.
Nonetheless, my question is, should we really throw all that our society has forever embraced- that is marriage is a respectable union between a man and a woman responsible for reproduction and child rearing, so that a few minorities can claim equality and uniformity? Or we should rather uphold to our strongest values, but yet respect the privacy of others (homosexual couples) as well as granting them equal rights as heterosexual couples?
Undoubtedly, equality has already been achieved by CPA. The Act has created the best of both worlds for Government in appeasing both the gay and anti gay lobbies. To extend this situation might lead to political problems more profound than imaginable. We should always remember, as argued by Lynn Wardle, the union of two persons of different gender creates a union of unique potential strengths and inimitable value to society. As such, as poignant as it may sound, such gender difference is still prevalent in today’s world, and cannot be masqueraded by equating a union of two people of the same sex with a civil marriage between a man and a woman.
EURO Downfall
The euro touched the lowest level in five weeks against the dollar and
the yen on speculationEurope’s spreading debt crisis will curb economic growth
and pressure the region’s central bank to ease monetary policy.
The 17-nation currency maintained this week’s slide versus the greenback
before Spain auctions up to 4 billion euros ($5.4 billion) of bonds today and
France sells as much as 8.2 billion euros of debt. European Central Bank
President Mario Draghispeaks in Frankfurt tomorrow.
The Dollar Index reached the highest since October as economists forecast a
U.S. report today will show manufacturing activity increased.
“We are seeing diverging trends with the U.S. economypicking up
and the European economy headed for recession,” saidRichard Grace,
Sydney-based chief currency strategist and head of international economics at Commonwealth Bank of Australia.“Those diverging economic
trends and the likelihood of further ECB rate cuts are going to gradually weigh
on the euro.”
The euro fell to $1.3422, the lowest since Oct. 10, before trading at
$1.3475 as of 1:07 p.m. in Tokyo from $1.3463 in New York
yesterday. The common currency declined to 103.41 yen, matching the lowest
level since Oct. 10, before trading little changed from yesterday at 103.78.
The yen was at 77.02 per dollar from 77.06.
The Dollar Index, which IntercontinentalExchange Inc. uses to track the
greenback against the currencies of six major U.S. trading partners, reached
78.467, the highest since Oct. 10 before falling 0.2 percent to 78.228.
European Debt Sales
Spain will
auction bonds maturing in 2022 and France will sell as much as 7 billion euros
of notes and 1.2 billion euros of inflation-linked debt today.
Italian 10-year bond yields fell six basis points to 7 percent
yesterday. The ECB purchased larger-than-usual sizes and quantities of the
nation’s debt under its Securities Market Program, according to two people with
knowledge of the trades. An ECB spokesman in Frankfurt declined to comment.
U.S. banks face a “serious risk” that their creditworthiness will
deteriorate if Europe’s debt crisis deepens and spreads beyond the five
most-troubled nations, Fitch Ratings said
yesterday.
Rising bond yields from the Netherlands to Finland and Austria suggest
European officials are struggling to convince investors they can stem the
crisis. The euro-area economy is heading toward a “mild recession” by the end
of the year, Draghi said on Nov. 3.
Downward Trend
“The euro is in a clear downward trend,” said Marito Ueda, senior
managing director in Tokyo at FX Prime Corp., a currency margin company.
“Europe’s situation hasn’t changed at all and its crisis has yet to be behind
us.” The euro may fall below 100 yen by year-end, he said.
Europe’s shared currency slid 1.6 percent over the past six months versus
nine developed-nation peers tracked by Bloomberg Correlation-Weighted Indexes.
The yen gained 8.9 percent and the dollar rose 4.1 percent, the best
performers.
The yen tends to strengthen during periods of financial stress because
Japan’s export-reliant economy doesn’t need foreign capital to balance current
accounts -- the broadest measure of trade. The dollar benefits due to its
status as the world’s reserve currency.
“The bottom line would be to stay defensive,” said Bilal Hafeez, global
head of foreign-exchange research in Singapore at Deutsche Bank AG. “The best
currency for me is the yen.”
Hafeez expects the yen to appreciate toward 70 per dollar in the next
three to six months, strengthening past its postwar record of 75.35 set on Oct.
31.
Japanese Intervention
Japan has sold
yen in the foreign-exchange market three times this year as a strong local
currency reduces the competitiveness of its exporters.
Japan’s “approach over the last year or so has been to do periodic
one-day interventions, often extremely large, and I think they may continue
with that,” said Hafeez. That method of market operation “isn’t really the type
of intervention that will turn the currency trend around.”
Demand for the dollar increased before a report forecast to show
manufacturing in the Philadelphia region expanded in November at the fastest
pace in seven months, a sign U.S. factories may provide more support for the
recovery.
The Federal Reserve Bank of Philadelphia’s general economic index
increased to 9 from 8.7 last month, according to the median estimate of
economists surveyed by Bloomberg News. Readings greater than zero indicate
expansion in the area covering eastern Pennsylvania, southern New Jersey and
Delaware.
The pound touched the lowest level in four weeks against the dollar
after the Nationwide Building Society said its index of U.K.
consumer confidence fell to a record low in October as Europe’s crisis and the
unemployment outlook worsened. Retail sales including fuel slid 0.2 percent in
October, following a 0.6 percent gain the previous month, a separate report is
projected to show today according to economist estimates.
“The U.K. economy continues to struggle,” said Commonwealth Bank’s
Grace. “The pound is probably going to underperform. The Bank of England has made
it clear that they’ve got an easing bias.”
The currency was
little changed from yesterday at $1.5730 and earlier touched $1.5691, the
lowest since Oct. 20.
Valuation of Used Motor Vehicles -TANZANIA
| Abbreviations used · CIF – Cost Insurance Freight (Taxable Value) · I/D – Import Duty · EXA – Excise duty for vehicles aged more than 10 years · EX – Excise Duty · VAT – Value Added Tax · CV – Cost of Vehicle · CRP- Current Retail Price · PM- Profit Margin · P – Profit · VBD – Value Before Depreciation TAX RATES
STEP. 1 CALCULATION OF THE COST OF MOTOR VEHICLE WITHOUT PROFIT · P = CV*25%=CV*0.25=0.25CV · CRP=CV+P · CRP=CV+0.25CV · CRP=1.25CV · CRP/1.25=CV STEP.2 CALCULATION TO OF PROFIT MARGIN PM=CRP – CV STEP.3 CALCULATION OF CIF VALUE BEFORE DEPRECIATION We remove the tax element from Cost Value · VBD = CV/1.25/1.18 for vehicles with less than 1000cc · VBD = CV/1.25/1.05/1.18 for vehicles with more than 1000cc but not exceeding 2000cc · VBD = CV/1.25/1.05/1.18 for vehicles exceeding 2000cc STEP.4 CALCULATION OF DEPRECIATION
Depending age of the motor vehicle and basing on the given depreciation rates in the table above the depreciated value will be calculated as follows DEPRECIATION VALUE = VBD * RATE CALCULATION OF TAXES a) Motovehicles with Import duty and VAT only · I/D = CIF * 25% · VAT = (CIF+I/D) * 18% b) Motovehicles with Import duty and VAT but aged more than 10 years · I/D = CIF * 25% · EXA = (CIF+I/D) * 20% · VAT = (CIF+I/D+EXA) * 18% c) Motovehicles with Import duty ,Excise Duty and VAT Vehicles with more than 1000cc but not exceeding 2000cc rate is 5% Excise duty, and those with more than 2000cc rate is 10% · I/D = CIF * 25% · EX = (CIF+I/D) * 5% · VAT = (CIF+I/D+EX) * 18% d) Motor vehicles with Import duty ,Excise Duty and VAT but aged more than 10 years Vehicles with more than 1000cc but not exceeding 2000cc rate is 5% Excise duty, and those with more than 2000cc rate is 10% · I/D = CIF * 25% · EXA = (CIF+I/D) * 20% · EX = (CIF+I/D) * 5% · VAT = (CIF+I/D+EXA+EX)*18% | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)