No right to gay marriage under European Convention


European Convention on Human Rights does not include the right to marriage for homosexual couples, neither under Article 8 nor Article 12, the right to marry and to found a family.

A unanimous decision of the European Court of Human Right delivered earlier this week has found that there is no right to gay marriage under the European Convention on Human Rights.

The case of Chapin and Charpentier v France was brought originally to the Court of Human Rights in 2007.


This has been confirmed repeatedly by the EU - which is entirely separate from the ECHR - as well i.e. the drafters of the EU Charter of Fundamental Rights seemed to share the same view, when in the Explanations Relating to the Charter of Fundamental Rights, it was pointed out that the Charter Article providing the right to marry (Article 9) “neither prohibits nor imposes the granting of the status of marriage to unions between people of the same sex”.

So same sex unions are not considered to be a fundamental right under European law.


Thank goodness. Not of course that this will stop CAF posters - from the USA - bleating repeatedly about the fact that the EU is promoting gay marriage.


Well, when it was put the people to decide in CA at least, they voiced their opinion and voted NO…but we all see how that worked out! (prop 8)

Now, remind me why we are told our vote matters and voting is so important…?? lol


Guilty as charged - I am surprised by this. Pleasantly though. Hopefully you don’t have a right to an abortion under the European Convention?


“Despite a wide variation in the restrictions under which it is permitted, abortion is legal in most European countries. The exceptions are micro-states where it is totally illegal (Vatican City and Malta), micro-states where it is mostly illegal and severely restricted (San Marino, Liechtenstein and Andorra) and both Ireland and Northern Ireland (despite the latter being part of the United Kingdom), where great prohibitions on abortion exist. The other states with existent, but less severe restrictions are Finland, Poland, Iceland and the United Kingdom (excepting Northern Ireland). All the remaining states make abortion legal on request. Although nearly every European country makes abortion available on demand during the first trimester, when it comes to later-term abortions, there are very few with laws as liberal as those of the United States.”


Interesting. Can this be changed by a later decision or vote involving a majority of the members? :slight_smile:


I am honestly surprised to see that they ruled this way but I am surprised in a good way. Of course there is no right to “gay marriage”.


Nope, you don’t have a right to abortion either.

Through its various rulings, the Court explicitly declared that abortion is not a right under the Convention - there is no right to have an abortion:


(Application no. 25579/05)



16 December 2010

In the case of A, B and C v. Ireland,

The European Court of Human Rights

E.** The Court’s assessment

**1. Whether Article 8 applied to the applicants’ complaints

  1. The Court notes that the notion of “private life” within the meaning of Article 8 of the Convention is a broad concept which encompasses, inter alia, the right to personal autonomy and personal development…

213. The Court has also previously found, citing with approval the case‑law of the former Commission, that legislation regulating the interruption of pregnancy touches upon the sphere of the private life of the woman, the Court emphasising that Article 8 cannot be interpreted as meaning that pregnancy and its termination pertain uniquely to the woman’s private life as, whenever a woman is pregnant, her private life becomes closely connected with the developing foetus. The woman’s right to respect for her private life must be weighed against other competing rights and freedoms invoked including those of the unborn child (see the judgment in Tysiąc, cited above, § 106, and Vo, cited above, §§ 76, 80 and 82)…Article 8 cannot, accordingly, be interpreted as conferring a right to abortion…

This judgment, which is binding in 47 nations, was a clear pro-life victory and major setback for the pro-choice lobby that wanted the case to become a European version of US Supreme Court’s ‘Roe vs. Wade’ decision. The ECHR refused to give it to them.

In addition to these clear statements, the Court, in Maria do Céu Silva Monteiro Martins Ribeiro v. Portugal, declared inadmissible an application claiming a right of access to abortion on demand against the national legislation, which was deemed too restrictive by the applicant.

I hope this will make Americans reflect on their own legal system and ask themselves: is the USA really superior to “godless” Europe with our “social democracies” and “welfare states”?

The US Supreme Court has declared both ‘gay marriage’ and ‘abortion’ to be “rights”; the ECHR (not part of the EU) and the ECJ (the EU Court) have both pointedly refused to do so.

(To be fair to the USA though, Canada is by far the worst offender).


Perhaps. But maybe only when CAF posters - from outside the USA - stop bleating repeatedly about the Second Amendment and gun rights in the USA. :rolleyes:


The comparison is not accurate:

the ECHR and ECJ (the EU) do not, in point of fact, endorse liberal abortion/gay marriage laws or constitutionally recognise these as “inelianable rights”

the US Supreme Court and the Second Ammendment do recognise the right of citizens to bear arms as an “inalienable right” and the USA as a whole, culturally, does promote “liberal gun laws”.

So the American accusations about Europe are baseless but the corresponding European accusations about the USA are not groundless.


And the bleat goes on…


Simply stating a fact.


Family law is an area in which the EU has no competence to legislate. It is the Member States alone that can decide in situations that fall within their jurisdiction. This is the norm in matters for which there is no European consensus.

For that to ever change, the more socially conservative Member States (i.e. Malta, Poland, Hungary et al) would have to undergo an interior sea-change overnight and decide to relinquish control of family law (which is reserved to them) to the supranational level (along with all of the other states, 28 in all, acceding to the same loss of sovereign decision-making), for the ECJ to ever even consider doing that - and the judges would have to agree with the sea-change in opinion in their said nations as well.

Neither the consensus on this issue needed to confer the unanimity required to generalise ‘gay marriage’ laws across the EU or the political will on the part of both conservative/liberal Member States to cede anymore sovereignty to supranational EU institutions exists - and is unlikely to do so in the foreseeable future.

As you can imagine, such an outcome is therefore exceedingly unlikely and implausible.


Actually I remember this now - abortions in Europe after 20 weeks are very rare. I did learn that a few years ago - it was quite shocking to me. In the US, of course, we are up for late term partial birth abortions…(we don’t do anything by halves…nada - once you have a right to do something, look out)

Still, my guess is there are quite a few before 20 weeks, which is after all, 5 months, quite far along in terms of development of the fetus. I think abortion should be restricted to 12 weeks - hopefully then outlawed at some point in our human moral evolution, whenever we get there.


The USA has more liberal abortion laws than probably most, if not all, European countries.


DISCLAIMER: The views and opinions expressed in these forums do not necessarily reflect those of Catholic Answers. For official apologetics resources please visit