Summary

Ian Farlam Fourie and Another v Minister of Home Affairs and Another (2004)

It is likewise demeaning to couples who commence such a relationship at an age when they no longer have the desire for sexual relations. It is demeaning to adoptive parents to suggest that their family is any less a family and any less entitled to respect and concern than a family with procreated children. I would even hold it to be demeaning of a couple who voluntarily decide not to have children or sexual relations with one another; this being a decision entirely within their protected sphere of freedom and privacy.
Source: Wikisource

Ian Farlam Fourie and Another v Minister of Home Affairs and Another (2004)

The message is that gays and lesbians lack the inherent humanity to have their families and family lives in such same-sex relationships respected or protected. It serves in addition to perpetuate and reinforce existing prejudices and stereotypes. The impact constitutes a crass, blunt, cruel and serious invasion of their dignity. The discrimination, based on sexual orientation, is severe because no concern, let alone anything approaching equal concern, is shown for the particular sexual orientation of gays and lesbians.
Source: Wikisource

Ian Farlam Fourie and Another v Minister of Home Affairs and Another (2004)

It is whether government action, embodied in common law, and statutes, meets the charter rights that the applicants possess. ... It is a unique institution, and the court has to decide whether to change marriage forever. ... The purpose of marriage has nothing to do with excluding the applicants. That is an effect, but the purpose of marriage, outside the law, at its roots, was to define an institution that would bring together the two core aspects of our humanity; our maleness and our femaleness, because at its essence this is the basis for humanity.
Source: Wikisource

Get perspective with Kwize: daily news enlightened by great literature