Published on May 10, 2019.
This essay questions whether systems granting marriage celebration payments to same-sex couples are consistent with Article 24 of the Constitution of Japan, and argues that the issue should be addressed first through open debate on constitutional revision rather than by letting institutions move ahead on their own.
It points to the danger of changing practical operation without changing the foundation, and urges advocates of same-sex marriage to join the movement for constitutional revision itself.

2019-05-10
If that is so, then those who promote same-sex marriage, too, should join shoulders with the Liberal Democratic Party and rise together in order to realize their own position. Is not the foundation more important than anything else?
The following is a continuation of the previous chapter.
Promotion of Same-Sex Marriage That Constitutes a Constitutional Violation.
This old man is a petty fellow who does nothing but speak ill of others, but lately even that has become harder and harder to restrain, and if this keeps up, I am certain to become a runaway tribe of abuse, and in the end to fall into the hands of the authorities.
If that time comes, I write here to ask my readers for their help.
And so, with peace of mind, here I present this latest round of abuse.
In the Sankei Shimbun dated November 18, Heisei 29 (2017), perhaps only in the Osaka edition, there was an article like the following.
In order to avoid misunderstanding, I quote it exactly as written.
Namely: “On the 17th, Takarazuka City in Hyogo Prefecture announced that, regarding the 50,000-yen marriage celebration payment provided through the employee mutual aid association, it had from this month begun a system under which same-sex couples would also receive payment in the same way as marriages between men and women. The aim is to create a workplace environment considerate of sexual minorities (LGBT).”
I was astonished.
It is a story in which an older man and another older man get married, or an older woman and another older woman get married, and because that is recognized, the mutual aid association of a local public body gives out a celebration payment.
If that is so, then, for example, two men with no romantic feeling whatsoever could conspire, claim that they are a couple, and live together, thereby obtaining 50,000 yen.
All they need do is present “a certificate issued by a public institution certifying them as partners,” and because legal entry into the family register cannot at present be made, such a certificate would be easy enough to obtain.
And then, after putting on the appearance of cohabitation, they need only separate.
Indeed, a few years later, one could conspire with another man and say, this is a remarriage, and another 50,000 yen would likely come rolling in.
Would this not mean, by simple logic, that such a thing could easily be done any number of times?
And according to the previously cited newspaper, this foolish system exists not only there, but “similar systems exist in Setagaya Ward in Tokyo and Seki City in Gifu Prefecture as well.”
I would like to ask whether they are serious.
Even if persons of the same sex, that is, man and man, or woman and woman, were to claim the establishment of a marriage, under the present law it can absolutely not be recognized.
Its legal basis lies in the Constitution of Japan.
Namely, read Article 24, Paragraph 1 of the Constitution. Is it not written there as follows?
“Marriage shall be based only on the mutual consent of both sexes and it shall be maintained through mutual cooperation with the equal rights of husband and wife as a basis.”
Then in Paragraph 2 of the same article, concerning the various legal matters of married persons, it states as follows.
“Laws shall be enacted from the standpoint of individual dignity and the essential equality of the sexes.”
In other words, both Paragraph 1 and Paragraph 2 of Article 24 of the Constitution stipulate, through such phrases as “the mutual consent of both sexes”… “husband and wife”… “the essential equality of the sexes”… that marriage is conditioned upon equality of rights between men and women.
Search however and wherever you may, nowhere is marriage between persons of the same sex recognized.
That means that Takarazuka City, as well as Setagaya Ward in Tokyo and Seki City in Gifu Prefecture, are in violation of the Constitution.
If that is so, then for the mutual aid associations of local public bodies to issue celebration payments without cause under a condition of constitutional violation would amount to improper expenditure to such an extent that one might even call it embezzlement of public funds.
On this point, the three local public bodies mentioned above should present a clear reply.
I am waiting, so answer firmly and accurately.
If, however, one absolutely wishes to establish same-sex marriage, there is a way.
That is, to amend Article 24 of the Constitution cited above.
If the Constitution recognizes same-sex marriage, then there would be no problem at all.
The persons concerned in the three local public bodies mentioned above should by all means launch a movement toward constitutional revision so that this may come to pass.
That is the proper course.
However, though my knowledge may be limited, I have not heard that any such movement is being carried out.
That is not good.
If they believe it is right, is not carrying it out precisely what those on the left call “the rights of citizens”?
At present, through an initiative from the Liberal Democratic Party, steps have begun toward constitutional revision in order to define the position of the Self-Defense Forces.
This is perhaps a once-in-a-century opportunity.
If that is so, then those who promote same-sex marriage, too, should join shoulders with the Liberal Democratic Party and rise together in order to realize their own position.
Is not the foundation more important than anything else?
As the ancients said, once one moves that root of the tree, a hundred branches, the many branches, will all respond.