Humanist and Open-air Marriages (paragraphs (b) and (c) only).

STATES OF JERSEY

HUMANIST AND OPEN-AIR MARRIAGES

Lodged au Greffe on 15th June 2015 by Deputy L.M.C. Doublet of St. Saviour

STATES GREFFE

2015   Price code: C  P.65

PROPOSITION

THE STATES are asked to decide whether they are of opinion

1. to agree, in principle, that celebrants approved by the Superintendent Registrar and accredited by the British Humanist Association (or by similar  organisations  whose  principal  or  sole  purpose  is  the advancement  of  a  system  of  non-religious  beliefs  which  relate  to morality or ethics) should be permitted to solemnise marriages in Jersey;
2. to agree, in principle, that the current legislation be amended to allow the solemnisation of marriages in the open air, including public spaces such as beaches; and
3. to  request  the  Chief  Minister  or  Minister  for  Home  Affairs,  as appropriate, to bring forward for approval by the States the necessary draft legislation to give effect to the proposals.

DEPUTY L.M.C. DOUBLET OF ST. SAVIOUR

REPORT

The Council of Ministers are taking the opportunity to review our marriage laws following the equal marriage consultation. I want to add 2 further considerations which were not on the options paper: humanist weddings and open-air weddings. In terms of allowing humanist marriage this is a matter of equality and freedom of belief, and for open-air marriage it is simply sensible to consider it now while the laws are being worked on. This is an opportunity to really make Jersey's marriage laws the best they  can  be  in  terms  of  practicality,  choice,  fairness  and  opportunities  for  our economy.

Principle 1 – Legalise humanist weddings

1. Summary
2. The history of equal marriage consultation
3. Present position in Scotland
4. Other jurisdictions
5. The case for legal recognition for humanist weddings as marriages
6. Addressing arguments made against the proposal

Principle 2 – Legalise open-air weddings

1. Summary
2. History of marriage location legislation
3. Position of other jurisdictions
4. The case for permitting the solemnisation of marriages in the open air
5. Addressing arguments against the proposal

Appendix 1: Distinctive elements of a humanist marriage

Appendix 2: Testimonies from couples who have had humanist weddings Humanist Weddings

1. Summary

The proposal would allow humanist weddings to be recognised as legal marriages in Jersey, as they are in Scotland. In Scotland, the number of humanist weddings has increased sharply since legal recognition to over 3000 in each year, with many couples travelling from elsewhere in the UK to have a legally recognised humanist ceremony.

The recent consultation on equal marriage in Jersey found a significant amount of support  for  humanist  marriage.  Furthermore,  the  legal  recognition  of  humanist weddings is in keeping with the principles expressed in the Chief Minister's response to the consultation, which called upon the States of Jersey to support marriage in all its forms'. Humanist marriages are distinct from civil ceremonies, and would grant humanist couples the same choice religious people have of a meaningful ceremony composed  by  a  person  who  shares  their  values  and  approach  to  life.  The  legal recognition of humanist marriages would be just and fair, meeting genuine public demand and solidifying Jersey's reputation as a progressive, innovative jurisdiction.

2. History of equal marriage consultation

The States of Jersey's Equal Marriage and Partnership consultation was launched in 2014, attracting a response from roughly 1.5% of the population, and included a section on humanist marriages. It found that 54% of respondents were in favour of same-sex  marriage,  and  46%  against.  Half  of  respondents  explicitly  stated  their support for humanist marriage, while many left it blank.

The responses in favour of both same-sex and humanist marriage put forth similar arguments for their stance: most believed that the law should treat all couples equally, saw marriage as a loving, long-term commitment and could see no impediment to different kinds of couples making the same declaration. This applied to, in the first instance, sexual orientation and, in the second, personal beliefs.

Some opposed making humanist marriage legal on the grounds that civil marriages already existed, displaying some confusion over the distinction between secular and humanist ceremonies. The options paper, published in November 2014, displayed some of this conflation, concluding that since couples can already marry via a civil ceremony in Jersey, or via  a  humanist ceremony in another jurisdiction that has already introduced humanist marriage' there was no need to introduce it into Jersey. This was despite the fact that Senator Gorst has declared that his aim was to uphold marriage for all couples, all families and for the wider community.'

(Source - http://www.gov.je/News/2014/Pages/EqualMarriageReport.aspx)

Following the consultation, a commitment has been made to bring forward legislation which will allow same-sex couples to get married in civil and religious ceremonies by the end of 2017, but there are no plans for humanist marriages to be made legal.

3. The present position in Scotland

The  Registrar  General  for  Scotland  granted  temporary  authorisation  to  certain humanist celebrants to conduct legally recognised marriages in  Scotland in 2005, under  section 12  of  the  Marriage  (Scotland)  Act  1977.  The  Marriage  and  Civil Partnership (Scotland) Act 2014 broadened the "religious" category of marriage to "religious or belief" and so placed humanist bodies on the same footing as religious organisations in relation to the solemnisation of marriage.

The number of humanist weddings in Scotland has seen a sharp increase since it was legally recognised. In 2005, there were fewer than 100 humanist weddings, in 2009 this figure was 1,544 and in 2012 it rose to 3,052. The latest available statistics from Scotland's Registrar General show that, of 27,547 marriages in 2013, 3,185 were humanist.  The  number  of  humanist  weddings  has  now  overtaken  the  number  of Roman Catholic marriages in Scotland, of which there were 1,582 in 2013. The rise of humanist  marriages  has  come  despite  a  consistent  fall  in  the  overall  number  of weddings since humanist marriage was made legal.

The increase in the number of humanist weddings has far outweighed the decline in civil weddings, and since direct switches' from church weddings to humanist ones are highly unlikely, it would seem that, without humanist weddings, the overall total would  have  fallen  more  sharply.  Additionally,  humanist  weddings  have  helped maintain Scotland's marriage tourism market, as humanist celebrants report that up to

a quarter of the couples they marry travel from elsewhere in the UK to have a legally recognised humanist ceremony.

4. Other jurisdictions

In addition to Scotland, Ireland legalised humanist marriage in 2012. As a result, the number of humanist marriages there has increased rapidly from 209 in 2013, to 750 in 2014. Other jurisdictions which give legal recognition to humanist marriages include: Australia since 1973; New Zealand since 1976; Ontario, Canada; Norway since 2004; Iceland since 2013. In all nations they are popular and have contributed to increasing numbers of marriages.

5. The case for legal recognition for humanist weddings as marriages

1. It would be fair

Couples who wish to marry on Jersey have the option of a legal civil marriage. Religious couples also have the option of a legal marriage based on their deepest beliefs and values conducted by a person who shares those beliefs and values. But adherence to profound and life-shaping beliefs is not confined to those who profess a religion.  Humanist  weddings  are  deeply  significant  and  moving  occasions  but  at present they have no legal significance.

Since 2012, there have been 9 humanist weddings in Jersey, despite their lack of legal recognition.  The  evidence  from  Scotland  suggests  this  number  would  drastically increase following its legalisation, both from humanist couples resident on the island and those travelling from elsewhere.

The  legalisation  of  humanist  marriage  adheres  to  the  same  principles  of  equal treatment that impelled the Chief Minister to support same-sex marriage, which will directly benefit a similarly small number of people (an estimated 44). Moreover, the response  to  the  Equal  Marriage  and  Partnership  consultation  clearly  stated  that, regardless of the eventual number who benefit from reforms to marriage laws, all Islanders potentially benefit from living in a community which treats people with greater  equality'. The  legalisation  of  humanist  marriage  is  concordant  with these principles.

2. It would be popular

The consultation on equal marriage found that around half of respondents explicitly stated their support for the introduction of humanist marriage. The respondents saw recognition of humanist marriages as indicative of greater equality and acceptance of people's different philosophical beliefs.

In Scotland, the number of humanist marriages has increased from fewer than 100 to over 3000 per year since legal recognition. Polls in UK find widespread support for humanist marriage, with a YouGov poll finding four times as many people in England supported legal recognition of humanist marriage (53%) as opposed it (12%). An increasing number of English and Welsh couples have decided to travel to Scotland for a legally recognised ceremony.

In Jersey, it is already clear that non-religious ceremonies are more popular than religious ceremonies. In 2013 there were 341 civil wedding ceremonies compared to

148 religious ones. Allowing humanist weddings would give more options to those couples who would like to have a meaningful, non-religious wedding ceremony.

3. There would be an economic benefit in the form of marriage tourism

The latest Jersey Tourism report notes that the UK remains the dominant source market for tourism to Jersey. It also points out that the UK tourism market is highly competitive and consumer choice constantly increasing.

The popularity of humanist marriage among couples England and Wales has seen many couples elect to travel to Scotland in order for their ceremony to be legally recognised. Humanist celebrants in Scotland report a large number of couples elect to hold  their  wedding  outdoors  in  order  to  take  advantage  of  the  country's  natural environments. Jersey's appeal as an outstanding natural environment with stunning heritage sites and excellent hotels and restaurants makes it ideally placed to attract non-residents who wish to hold their humanist ceremony on the island, and contribute to an increase in tourism from the UK.

4. It  would  be  in  keeping  with  Jersey's  reputation  as  a  progressive,  innovativejurisdiction

Part of the justification given by the Jersey government for introducing same-sex marriage  is  to  uphold  Jersey's  reputation  as  a  progressive  jurisdiction.  Whilst introducing same-sex marriage is a welcome reform that maintains parity with reforms elsewhere  in  the  UK,  it  does  not  go  far  enough.  Scotland  introduced  humanist marriage a decade ago, while in Westminster the Law Commission has pledged to present its report into legalising humanist marriage by December. By withholding support for this reform, Jersey runs the risk of falling behind the rest of the UK.

5. Humanist weddings are excellent ceremonies of high quality

The  British  Humanist  Association  has  been  providing  humanist  ceremonies, principally funerals, for many decades. They set the highest store by the quality of the service they provide.

A rigorous selection process is carried out to choose those to be trained as celebrants. Training takes place in four stages and qualification is not automatic. Successful trainees are accredited as probationer celebrants subject to successful mentoring and observation.

Fully accredited celebrants are then monitored, insured and provided with support and continuing professional development. They are subject to a Code of Conduct and professional  standards  and  competencies  and  regulated  by  a  Quality  Assurance Committee of elected celebrants and lay members.

All clients are asked anonymously to assess BHA ceremonies and 98% of respondents give the maximum rating of 5 out of 5 for satisfaction. The testimonies in Appendix 2 are only the tip of an iceberg.

5. It will increase the popularity of marriage

The States of Jersey's response to the consultation on Equal Marriage and Partnerships displays explicit support for marriage. After the legalisation of humanist marriage in Scotland, the number of humanist marriages has increased every year and in 2013 accounted for 10% of all Scott ish marriages. Humanist marriages have  increased despite a fall in the total number of marriages. If we are truly committed to supporting the institution of marriage, legalising humanist weddings is a logical implication of this commitment.

6. It will cause no harm

The introduction of legal humanist marriages will not affect anyone adversely; it will simply allow those couples who are increasingly choosing to have a humanist wedding to have this as their legal ceremony.

7.  Addressing arguments made against the proposal

1. "There is no need to provide humanist marriages in Jersey, as couples can alreadymarry via civil ceremonies."

Humanist marriages would give nonreligious people the same choice that religious people have of a meaningful ceremony composed by a person who shares their values and approach to life.

A  humanist  ceremony  is  therefore  more  than,  and  different  to,  a  merely  secular occasion. A humanist wedding is not just a register office wedding with added music and poetry readings: after all, the registrar, however sympathetic, may well not share humanist values and may even be personally opposed to Humanism.

2. "Humanism is not a belief system it is a philosophy, so while there is a need for areligious person to have certain religious aspects to their ceremony there are no suchrequirements that need to be met for humanism."

Humanism is a belief system that provides for its adherents answers to so-called ultimate  questions'  in  much  the  same  way  as  religions  do  for  their  followers, providing  an  approach  to  understanding  the  world  and  a  framework  for  ethical judgement. It is not a negative response to religion but a positive belief system in its own right.

3. "In considering the extent to which law should be amended, it is important torecognise that there is a difference between providing all couples the means to marryand providing all couples the means to choose the manner in which they marry."

The law is not usually concerned with distinguishing between religious and non- religious  beliefs.  Indeed,  the  European  Convention  on  Human  Rights  mandates protection for freedom of belief'. Humanists are followers of a non-religious belief that qualifies for the same legal treatment under human rights and equality and non- discrimination laws as any religion. To legalise humanist marriage is only to afford humanist couples the same right to a marriage ceremony reflecting their own life stance  or  belief  system  as  are  those  who  have  religious  faith.  To  not  allow  the increasing numbers of people who are adopting  humanist beliefs and wish to be married in a ceremony that reflects this is a case of serious discrimination.

4. "Too few people will benefit from the change."

As  well  as  the  fact  that  there  are  indirect  benefits  for  the  larger  population  in engendering  a  more  inclusive  and tolerant outlook and  in allowing couples from elsewhere  to  travel  to  Jersey  for  their  marriage,  the  Council  of  Ministers'  own response  to  the  Equal  Marriage  and  Partnership  makes  it  abundantly  clear  that regardless of how many people benefit, however, it is legitimate to legislate in favour of minority groups, where it is in the interests of that group to do so and is not detrimental to the wider community.'

Additionally, all jurisdictions that have legally recognised humanist marriages have seen the number of couples requesting them increase to many times the number of requests prior to its recognition.

5. "Opening up marriage to non-religious beliefs would undermine the institution."

This  is  an  offensive  claim.  Humanists  place  the  highest  value  on  marriage,  as demonstrated by the testimonies of couples who have had humanist weddings, which are eloquent with the depth of meaning they find in the ceremonies. It is ludicrous to see humanist weddings as undermining marriage: indeed it is patent that humanist marriages are among the most carefully prepared and deeply felt of all. They represent the most solid sort of commitment that a couple could make to each other at the start of their life together – one based on their deepest shared beliefs.

There is potential for the Minister to include relevant safeguards in the proposed legislation (strongly endorsed by the BHA legal advisors as ECHR-compliant and justified on grounds of public policy) that will set high hurdles for any organisation wishing  to  be  recognised  by  the  Superintendent  Registrar.  There  could  be requirements for organisations to have been in existence for at least ten years, to be principally concerned with advancing or practising a non-religious belief, to have conducted ceremonies "rooted in" that belief already for at least five years, and to have in place written procedures for selecting, training and accrediting celebrants to conduct weddings of its own members. At present I believe the only organisations that would qualify would be humanist ones.

Open-air Weddings Summary

The proposal would allow outdoor weddings to be conducted in Jersey, administered in such a way as the Minister believes to be practical. Similar jurisdictions such as Scotland and New Zealand already allow this very successfully as well as many other locations worldwide. Giving couples more freedom to marry in a location of their choosing will strengthen marriage in line with the Chief Minister's statements. There is potential for huge benefits to Jersey's economy in terms of marriage tourism.

History of marriage location legislation

In Jersey, a couple can be married in two types of location; they may have a religious wedding in a church/ other registered religious building, or a civil wedding at the

registry office/ other suitable registered premises approved by the Connétable of the Parish.

In 2001, the Tourism Committee lodged an amendment to the Marriage and Civil Status  (Jersey)  Law  2001  seeking  to  legalise  open-air  marriage.  The  amendment failed, and 2 main reasons were given during the debate; (1) That the location of a marriage needs to be clearly identifiable so that the public can access it to express objections if necessary, and (2) That marriage is a solemn occasion and if outdoor locations are used it could reduce the solemnity of marriage. I will address these points presently and demonstrate that other jurisdictions have successfully overcome these perceived barriers.

Position of other jurisdictions

Scotland and New Zealand are two places where a couple can get married at an outdoor  location.  Both  places  use  a  common-sense  approach  in  their  marriage legislation and procedures:

Scotland:

• Local councils must approve the location of a wedding in a similar way to other events.
• It must be a safe and dignified' place.
• When applying to register their marriage, a couple must identify a reasonably precise area at the location so that the registrar is satisfied they could be easily sought out on the day.

New Zealand:

• It is recommended an alternative location should be named on the marriage license in case of bad weather.
• If a different location needs to be used the registrar must be notified.
• For weddings on council-owned land, couples are advised to book a time  and  date  with the  local council and will be given  a  printed receipt.
• Council permission may be required for things such as marquees etc.

Both Scotland and New Zealand maintain a register of approved celebrants, rather than approved premises as we do in Jersey. This is a more common sense approach and places the responsibility on the celebrant to perform the required checks and procedures with regards to locations and otherwise. In New Zealand, celebrants must pass  a  rigorous  interview  process,  are  required  to  make  sure  the  weddings  they conduct are done so within all legal boundaries, and as an accountability measure must refresh their registration yearly.

The case for permitting the solemnisation of marriages in the open air

1. It would give couples more freedom and choice in how they marry and result in lesspeople marrying off-island.

Deciding to get married is a major life decision and one which carries a lot of meaning for  each  couple.  The  popularity  of  the  heritage  sites  such  as  Gorey  Castle  and

La Houge Bie for wedding ceremonies shows how important it is to many couples that they cement their union in a significant Jersey location. However, many locations that hold a special significance for islanders are off-limits for weddings because they are not covered by a roof. For example, many couples who enjoy an outdoor lifestyle together on our beautiful beaches are forced to travel to another country for their ideal beach  wedding.  Opening  up  our  beaches  and  other  locations  would  give  Jersey couples the freedom and choice to celebrate at a far wider selection of locations, which have meaning for them.

2. It would strengthen the institution of marriage and possibly increase numbers ofcouples marrying.

This proposal could have a similar effect to the first in that it may increase numbers of marriage overall. This is in line with the stated desire to strengthen marriage following public  consultation.  If  the  process  of  marriage  is  more  relevant  and  meaningful, including more flexibility of location, then more couples may choose marriage over cohabitation.

3. It would increase wedding tourism to the island.

At a time when we are trying to diversify our economy and find innovative ways to boost income, this proposition would definitely help. Tourism in Jersey is changing and developing and wedding tourism is one sector where there is capacity for growth. We have a real wealth of stunning locations that many couples would surely travel to our  island  to  use  for  their  wedding.  This  would  benefit  many  business  sectors including  hotels,  restaurants/caterers,  photographers/videographers,  bakers,  florists, musicians  and  others.  The  average  UK  wedding  spend  just  for  venue,  catering, photography,  flowers,  cake  and  entertainment  is  £12,412  (source: www.bridesmagazine.co.uk). This does not include money which would be spent on hotel accommodation and other spending in shops, restaurants etc. by guests who may choose to extend their stay in the island either side of the wedding date. So as well as reducing the numbers of Jersey couples who take their money elsewhere when they marry, we will surely gain income from those who perhaps live in the UK and see that their dream beach wedding is only a short plane ride away on Jersey.

Addressing arguments against the proposal

1. "It would inconvenience members of the public."

Regulations could allow for this through requirements to apply to the Connétable of the Parish where the outdoor venue is located (in a similar way that Constables must currently approve the approved premises' within their Parish). For private land, the usual laws will apply in terms of noise levels etc. For public land, the decisions will remain entirely in the hands of the States of Jersey/ Connétable s as to what exact locations and times they will permit. This has not been a problem in Scotland – common sense prevails.

2. "Weddings must be open to the public and in an identifiable building/room."

Currently any marriage ceremony (either religious or civil) must be openly accessible to the public. This is to enable individuals to attend and state their objections if needs be (for example if one person is already married or to stop a forced marriage). This

would only be an issue for weddings on private land. In Scotland, this is overcome by individuals being able to report any concerns they have to the registrar in advance of the wedding, and the registrar would carry out the necessary checks on the identity of the couple and investigate the claim. If the claim is valid then the wedding will not be allowed. If the wedding has already taken place, it is nullified. Again, common sense prevails and straightforward procedures overcome any issues. It is possible, of course, that the Minister will decide to only allow for open-air weddings on public/accessible land, and this proposition does give scope to do that. In Scotland the location must be accurately  described  on  the  marriage  application  so  as  to  be  identifiable  (e.g. '10 metres in front of Hotel X', or the West side of the beach level with Café Y'.) Incidentally, this is not likely to be an issue in Jersey as in the last 6 years there have been absolutely no valid objections made against any marriages.

3. "Marriage is a solemn occasion and should be performed inside a building."

This is a very subjective statement. What to one couple is solemn and sacred may be perceived as ridiculous by another. The couple who is part of a faith community, having been baptised and brought up in the faith, attending services regularly with family and friends – may indeed place great meaning on being married in their Church building. But what of couples who spend their weekends walking Jersey's cliff paths, reading a  newspaper in one  of our public  parks,  exploring the  woods  with their children, waking beloved pet dogs on the sand dunes or enjoying our coastal waters in a kayak? Humans are by nature, diverse and we find meaning in a wide range of things. An outdoor wedding can be just as solemn and special as a Church or hotel wedding and many couples may find an outdoor location to be the most significant and meaningful  place  for  their  ceremony.  Once  again,  the  common  sense'   Scott ish requirements that outside wedding locations be safe and dignified' could be quite successfully applied in Jersey.

Acknowledgements

I want to thank Pavan Dhaliwal and Andrew Copson from the British Humanist Association for all their advice and support and the Superintendent Registrar for her time in answering questions and providing facts and figures.

Financial and manpower implications

It is difficult to estimate the precise implications but the net cost is likely to be neutral at the very least and most likely beneficial to the States of Jersey and certainly to Jersey's economy as a whole. Fees could be levied on celebrants and locations at levels which the Minister deems appropriate. If anything there may be a decrease in manpower requirements over time as belief celebrants become accredited.

Distinctive elements of a humanist marriage

Humanism is an ethical non-religious life stance. It counts fully as a religion or belief under the Human Rights Act and international human rights treaties.

Broadly speaking, a humanist is someone who:

• Makes their ethical decisions based on reason, empathy, and a concern for human beings and other sentient animals.
• Trusts to the scientific method when it comes to understanding how the universe works and rejects the idea of the supernatural (and is therefore an atheist or agnostic).
• Believes  that,  in  the  absence  of  an  afterlife  and  any  discernible purpose to the universe, human beings can act to give their own lives meaning by seeking happiness in this life and helping others to do the same.

Humanist marriages are distinct in the following ways:

1. The marriage is conducted by a celebrant who shares the beliefs and values of the couple.
2. The  marriage  is  conducted  by  a  celebrant  who  is  part  of  the  humanist community and spends time with the couple prior to the marriage itself, to know them better.
3. The marriage ceremony in general reflects specific humanist convictions e.g. that there is no supernatural side to this reality and that human beings in the here  and  now  are  the source  of  value  and  meaning –  these  are  specific philosophical/(non)religious/belief elements.
4. Beyond  the  general  reflection  of  humanist  values  that  underlay  each ceremony, the order of service is created in line with the specific beliefs and values of the couple. (This itself reflects a humanist conviction about the creation of meaning in human lives).
5. The  marriage  is  conducted  in  a  place  that  is  of  particular  meaning  or significance to the couple.

A humanist marriage is thus distinguishable from a civil marriage in that:

1. A civil marriage is conducted by a registrar who – quite properly – may be a follower of any religion or belief or indifferent to all religions or beliefs.
2. Their only contact with the couple may be the act of marrying them itself.
3. A civil marriage ceremony may be varied with poetry or music in some local authorities but runs  to a prescribed  form designed to be  generic  and  not distinctive of any worldview.

4. A civil marriage may occur only in register offices and approved premises (or at home in case of serious illness).

A humanist marriage is distinguishable from a religious marriage in that humanism is a non-religious worldview  not a religious one, but otherwise there are analogous features:

1. A religious marriage is conducted by one who shares the most fundamental beliefs and values of the couple.
2. A religious marriage is often conducted by one who already knows the couple but where it isn't, time is usually taken in advance to know them.
3. A  religious  marriage  consists  of  a  ceremony  reflecting  an  underlying worldview.
4. A religious marriage is conducted in a place that is of particular meaning and significance to the couple (almost always a place of worship, though not always.)

In  relation  to  4',  there  is  a  weaker  analogy  since  religious  marriages  follow  a doctrinal formula rather than being individually created. However, even here there is an analogy in that both the humanist and religious formulations reflect fundamental philosophical approaches, albeit contrasting ones.

It  was  the  analogies  between  a  religious  marriage  and  a  humanist  marriage  that allowed the Registrar General in Scotland to make an ECHR compatible reading of the law there and authorise humanist celebrants to conduct legal marriages by construing religion' as religion or belief'.

Testimonies from couples who have had humanist weddings

Philippa and Neil

"In the same way that a church marriage for a Christian couple is important, we wanted  to  get  married  in  a  setting  that  reflected  our  beliefs  and  things  that  are important to us. Having a humanist wedding allowed us to do this.

We were legally married by a registrar on the day before our humanist wedding ceremony. While the ceremony conducted by our humanist celebrant was moving, personal and memorable, the registrar ceremony felt clinical and rather too much like a one size fits all' option. That is why we feel that our wedding day was the day of our humanist ceremony, the day we got married and the anniversary we will celebrate hopefully for many years to come.

The register office procedure was something we had to do, not something we wanted to do. It would have been wonderful not to have to do this simply to satisfy the legal requirement as it meant nothing of significance to us and was an additional expense and inconvenience.

We remain in contact with our humanist celebrant and feel like he was an important part of our wedding day and will continue to be interested in our life as a married couple. How many people can say that about their registrar?"

Ali and Helen

"From the outset we found it difficult to understand how legally a humanist marriage can be any different to a church wedding or indeed one carried out by the state, especially when in Scotland it would be legal. We wanted to be married in a way that reflected our beliefs just like any person with a strong Christian background would. However with the current system we had to go through a legal' marriage to meet the archaic  demands  of  the  English  marriage  system.  Humanists  should  not  be marginalised, and neither should those of any other religious faith or background."

Hazel and Andy

"We wanted a personal non-religious ceremony which all of our friends and family could attend.

Having a humanist ceremony chimed with our beliefs and perspectives on life and most importantly gave us the freedom to design the ceremony we wanted. If our ceremony had been in Scotland, it would have been legal and our day would have been less complicated and less time pressured with no need to visit the register office in the morning, as we had to do. . . [A] family member commented that we weren't really getting married' in the humanist ceremony, but at the register office in the morning, which was frustrating for us as it was the humanist ceremony that was the most important".

Jonathan

"We were married in the eyes of the law on Wednesday 3rd August 2011 . . . and we were truly wed on Saturday 6th August. The humanist ceremony provided by Ros was perfect; the choir sang the songs we'd chosen, the main ceremony was indoors with our own words, readings and vows and then we moved outdoors for a hand-fasting ceremony as suggested by [the celebrant], which satisfied Eve's desire for an outdoor wedding. We had many devout Christians amongst our guests, several of whom made a  point  of  telling  us  how  much  they  had  enjoyed  the  ceremony,  particularly  its openness, sincerity and the inclusion of a pause for personal reflection or prayer – I had  wondered  if  some  of  them  might  question  the  validity  or  credibility  of  our ceremony, but the feedback was quite the opposite.

I think the saddest thing for me is that I have already had to give the date of our marriage on a couple of forms and each time I am reminded that the official records don't reflect our true wedding day; future genealogists will have no clue that we had a Humanist ceremony, nor that we actually married days after the legal record was made."

Lisa and Max

"We did not meet the registrar until the day of the wedding . . .; this service alone would not have made our day special enough for us. With respect to the Humanist celebration, we had met our celebrant twice before the wedding and had emailed back and forth many times to decide exactly what we wanted from the ceremony. We really felt that our celebrant had got to know us by the end of the preparation and this was really important for us and made the service feel like our service rather than a generic wedding service. I guess that a similar bond may form between priest and a couple wishing to be married in a religious ceremony; as we are non-religious, this was not an option for us.

We feel very strongly that every couple, religious or not, should be able to personalise their wedding to be most suitable for them – undoubtedly, this can only go on to strengthen a marriage.

For a non-religious couple to achieve this we feel a Humanist ceremony is really the only option and, as such, this form of marriage should be legally recognised."

Nadine and Eoghan

"For us, that day is our wedding anniversary and is indeed the date inscribed on our wedding rings.

But actually it's not our wedding anniversary; at least not in the eyes of the state. To be legally married we were required to visit a registry office where we did not have anything like as much freedom to choose words and music that would be special for us. It would also have been impossible to make our vows in front of all of our guests as registry offices generally can't accept that many people. We weren't prepared to take the path that many other non-religious people take when marrying in a church, with everyone turning a polite blind eye to the nonbelieving elephant in the living room. Instead we had the pleasure of getting to know a celebrant who, in the course of preparing  the  wedding  ceremony,  was  interested  in  learning  more  about  us:  our

history, our values and our hopes for the future. We had a moving and memorable wedding – we just wish it could have been legal."

Adam

"I got married twice in a week.

My first marriage was conducted by someone who had interviewed my wife and me twice, at length, before the wedding; who spent hours (and several emails) exploring the  key  elements  of  the  spiritual  connection  we  wished  to  celebrate  during  the ceremony; and who offered her own guidance when we requested it, based on her knowledge of us as individuals and as a couple.

My second wedding – to the same woman, I should hasten to add – happened 2 days later. It was conducted by an official who had met us for the first time minutes before, and was conducted with the polite efficiency of a market research interview.

My first wedding was conducted by a Humanist Celebrant; my second by a registrar. Needless to say, when I think of my wedding, and the vows I committed to, the second set I gave that week rarely cross my mind."

Jodie and Matt

"Our choice was based on us making a commitment to each other in front of our friends and family not in front of any deity or god so we wanted to be married in a place that reflected who we are.

This didn't include a church or registry office where our choice was religion or a cold unromantic setting.

Our wedding was a fantastic day, everyone who came still comments on how unique and beautiful it was. I'm so glad our celebrant . . . was able to help us create a day that truly represented who we are and what we wanted. My only regret is that we had to sign our legal paper work prior to the wedding so on paper my wedding day is not the same as the day I got married. I feel that it took away from the power and significance of the day . . . [it was] quite a sad part of what should be one of the happiest days of your life.

I can't speak highly enough of the humanist ways and beliefs and how respectful the whole process was."