Against Sexual Minority Discrimination in South Korea, a U.S. Supreme Court ruled on an anti-discrimination law
The court admitted that explicit and implicit discriminations against sexual minorities have existed in South Korea. There’s a 2001 law in the country that says sexual orientation can’t be grounds for discrimination. The court stated that “Discrimination in public services also has no place to stand.”
KUHN: Tom Rainey-Smith is a gender rights campaigner with Amnesty International Korea. He says that his group called on South Korean authorities to drop the abusive requirements.
Rainey-Smith: When an individual is considering applying for legal gender recognition, you have to consider the fact that you may undergo forced sterilization. You may be forced to undergo surgery you do not want.
KIM: (Through interpreter) Because their legal gender doesn’t match with their perceived gender, they find it hard to get decent jobs. So we need an anti-discrimination law that prohibits discrimination based on appearance.
The person is named KUHN. Conservative politicians have successfully opposed an anti- discrimination law because civil society has pushed for it for a long time. Kim Kyeoul says that while many obstacles remain, the ruling gives her hope that South Korea is making slow but steady progress.
The Marriage of a Single Same-Sex Union Revealed in a New Jersey Appellate Court: A Critical Test of the Law’s Logic
A rush deadline is used for the creation of NPR transcripts. This text may not be in its final form and may be updated or revised in the future. Availability and accuracy can be different. The authoritative record of NPR’s programming is the audio record.
The National Health Insurance Service revoked the status of So Seong-uk, his partner Kim Yong-min, as a dependent, after he filed a lawsuit.
Same-sex couples in Korea like So and Kim are holding wedding ceremonies. Others have traveled overseas to get same-sex marriage licenses, or tried to register their marriage at local public offices even though they were probably going to be denied.
But when the media started to report the couple’s story, the agency annulled the decision, saying it was a “mistake,” and that So did not qualify. The lower court ruled that same-sex unions can’t be considered the same as heterosexual unions.
Kim said that they couldn’t find an official expression to describe their relationship when they first met Seong-uk. Our relationship is now acknowledged in the legal system.
A small number of lawmakers have tried to legislate laws for same-sex civil unions in the past decade, but no bill has even been formally introduced to in legislature because of fierce opposition.
Park Han-hee said that the ruling this week may not lead to expansion of other social benefits because of differences in legal interpretation. But Park is still optimistic that the verdict will serve as a “crucial evidence” in the fight for broader rights, including marriage equality.
If the court’s logic states that same-sex couples can’t be insured for health care, then also their exclusion from marriage should be seen as unjust.