Anybody fancy a civil partnership??

Not that I give a flying f##k but they have a point. The government should never have interfered in what is fundamentally a religious ceremony.

 

Do you mean gay marriage or heterosexual civil partnerships?

 

Only a matter of time before it was challenged

 

They do have a point.

Not that I care 1 way or the other.

 

Can't see it making any difference imo. You'll still have a fekin law firm taking em for every penny they can squeeze out of em if they decide to split later in life whether it marriage civil or what the fek

 

I must admit that as a white, British, heterosexual male, I am beginning to feel an element of inequality...and it's made blatantly obvious to us through the term 'positive discrimination'? What a load of b*llocks that is, how does that promote any kind of equality?

 

Which is why I'm quite happy to be as I am.

Once bitten twice shy and all that.

Let them just get on with it. Not really bothering anyone, is it?

 

Exactly Ian
Not really bothered what people decide as to how they endure er sorry meant Enshrine their relationship if its not imposing on anyone else's freedom.

 

Don't get me wrong I was no supporter of the government interfering with marriage in the first place, as far as I was concerned it should be the right of the church to make such a decision. It was only a matter of time before this happened and the government have only got themselves to blame. Like you say some people or groups of people will challenge anything regardless of their actual need for what it is they want.

 

What do you mean "the government interfering with marriage" - it's a legal think which is the responsibility of the government. Should be left up to the church? What about all those people who are not C of E then? Should they not be able to get married?

 

That isn't even remotely close to what I said and you know it.

 

Can't we just ban marriage? Asking for a friend...

 

I sort of see their point

but if you go into it there's hardly a *** paper between civil partnership and marriage.

One or the other should be got rid of and the remaining one should be universal. As an atheist, my first reaction would be to bin marriage on the grounds that it stems from a religious principle going back to Abraham, however, being a realist it would make more sense to bin civil partnership because people would carry on saying they were getting married etc.

In the end its only a name and it makes things a damn sight easier to say "I love you, I want to marry you" rather than "I love you, I want to enter into a civil partnership with you", sort of loses the romance don't you think?

 

Likewise though the government shouldnt financially reward you for getting married in the first place

 

Actually, I think people who co-habit (or get married) should be financially rewarded. By living together they are making better use of scarce resources - principally energy consumption. In the same way that people who share cars to go to work are sometimes rewarded by having a lane on the road for them only.

 

They are already getting a financial benefit from living together, they're only paying one electricity bill, one mortgage, one council tax bill, one gas bill, one water bill etc. Why should they also get special rewards from the government? And why should they get rewarded for being essentially religious but two lads who are sharing a flat (and thus the same resources) because theyre skint get none of the government benefits?