England’s Roman Catholic Church broke with the Vatican May 26 and endorsed the idea of legal recognition of same-sex relationships.

In a 103-page document detailing the views of the church in England and Wales on a number of moral and controversial issues, church head Cardinal Cormac Murphy-O’Connor and the other bishops stated: “It must be quite clear that a homosexual orientation must never be considered sinful or evil in itself. ... It may be necessary ... to remedy by law unjust situations in which the bonds of friendship are improperly disregarded (for instance, being excluded from appropriate consultation regarding medical care or from funeral arrangements). In such cases the right to justice is founded on the dignity of every human being and citizenship and not on sexual activity or orientation.”

The Vatican, on the other hand, recently declared: “Those who would move from tolerance to the legitimization of specific rights for cohabiting homosexual persons need to be reminded that the approval or legalization of evil is something far different from the toleration of evil. When legislation in favor of the recognition of homosexual unions is proposed for the first time in a legislative assembly, the Catholic law-maker has a moral duty to express his opposition clearly and publicly and to vote against it. To vote in favor of a law so harmful to the common good is gravely immoral.”

Neither the Vatican nor the English bishops approve of gay sex, which is a “mortal sin” that condemns one’s “soul” to “Hell”.

The government of Australian Prime Minister John Howard plans to insert the words “man” and “woman” into the Marriage Act to avoid having to recognize the marriages of same-sex couples who get married abroad.

Three Australian same-sex couples who married in Canada have filed with the Family Court for recognition of their marriages.

“I realize in public life what you do sometimes offends some people,” Howard said. “It’s not designed to do that. But I equally don’t apologize for putting to the law the simple proposition that a marriage is a union between a man and a woman, hopefully for life. That doesn’t in any way prevent people having same-sex relationships. It doesn’t express a view on whether they should have same-sex relationships.”

The legislation, to be introduced in Parliament by Attorney General Philip Ruddock, also will prohibit gays from adopting children from overseas. At the same time, it will expand gay rights by allowing a same-sex partner to inherit his or her partner’s retirement pension without paying the 30 percent tax that presently applies to any beneficiary other than a spouse, de facto spouse or child.

“The Howard government is clearly using homophobia to divert attention of the Australian public from more serious issues that should be concerning the government,” said Somali Cerise, spokesperson for the GLBT lobby group Equal Rights Network. “Howard is using equality as a political football to create a crisis where one does not exist.”

The group welcomed the proposed changes to superannuation (pension) legislation, calling them “long overdue.”

“It is a case of give with one hand and take away with the other,” said ERN’s Matthew Loader. “The fact that they have suddenly decided to act upon superannuation now, just before a federal election, seems opportunistic. There has been ... legislation in parliament supported by Labor, Democrats and the Greens since 1998 on this issue and the Howard government has refused to act.”

Leading activist Rodney Croome, of the Tasmanian Gay and Lesbian Rights Group, said the government may have bundled superannuation reform with the antigay measures to increase the likelihood the latter will pass.

“The fact that the government has had many opportunities to support this reform since 1996 and has knocked it back every time strongly suggests that its current superannuation reform proposal is about sweetening a legislative agenda which is otherwise bitterly sour with prejudice,” he said.

Same-sex marriage is allowed in Belgium, the Netherlands, the U.S. state of Massachusetts and the Canadian provinces of British Columbia, Ontario and Quebec. Only Canada has no residency requirements for marriage.

Fifty-eight percent of Canadians think homophobia is as bad as racism or anti-Semitism, a new Leger Marketing poll has found. Five percent say it’s worse while 24 percent believe it’s not as bad. The remainder of those surveyed had no opinion.

British Columbians are most likely to say homophobia is equally nasty (65 percent); Albertans are least likely (47 percent).

Pollsters asked: “Personally, do you think that being homophobic is worse than being racist or anti-Semitic; as bad as being racist or anti-Semitic; or not as bad as being racist or anti-Semitic?”

About 1,500 people were questioned and the results are supposed to be accurate within 2.6 percentage points 19 times out of 20.

The survey also found that 43 percent of Canadians approve of same-sex marriage and 47 percent do not, the Globe and Mail newspaper reported. Quebeckers are most receptive (51 percent) and Albertans least supportive (36 percent).

Courts have given gay couples access to full marriage in British Columbia, Ontario and Quebec, and the federal government plans to open up the institution nationwide. The premier of Alberta, Ralph Klein, has promised an all-out fight to prevent same-sex marriage in his province.

On another matter, 74 percent of respondents said gays should have the same rights as straight people, 20 percent support gays having fewer rights and 6 percent had no opinion.