The Straight Gay Wedding

  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Nov 25, 2009 12:06 AM GMT
    In the UK, it is possible for two people of the same sex to get a Civil Partnership which are except in name identical to marriage [with the proviso that foreign countries may or may not recognize them as marriages -- but then even if they were called marriages it is dubious whether they'd be recognized as marriages by other countries such as *cough* the USA].

    What is NOT possible is for two people of different sex, who are eligible for "marriage" to get a civil partnership.

    One man-woman couple is taking the UK Government to the European Court of Human Rights to challenge this.

    I completely support them. If I were straight, I would far rather have a partnership untainted by the misogynistic stench of religion. [I completely support other gay people's right marriage]
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Nov 25, 2009 6:27 AM GMT
    It's clever. I saw this story earlier
    http://www.pinknews.co.uk/2009/11/24/straight-couples-civil-partnership-application-rejected/
  • Tiller66

    Posts: 380

    Nov 25, 2009 8:08 AM GMT
    Yea I seen this on the advocate site and I think it's a good way to say look if you really want to try and say civil unions are good enough for gay people then why is'nt good enough for str8 people.I hope that they are successful.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Nov 25, 2009 8:12 AM GMT
    In California they allow senior citizens to have civil unions because it prevents people from losing certain federal benefits they would lose if they were "really married" It is kind of like "marriage light" Ironically is shows that marriage and civil unions are not the same.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Nov 25, 2009 8:21 AM GMT
    Yay next stage of the fight! icon_biggrin.gif
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Nov 25, 2009 8:41 AM GMT
    Since it won't help pay the mortgage, it's so not on my agenda, of things to worrie about.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Nov 25, 2009 11:34 AM GMT
    jprichva said
    Pattison saidSince it won't help pay the mortgage, it's so not on my agenda, of things to worrie about.

    More proof that everything on the planet is really about you.
    As if proof were needed.


    Since one has never considered the planet re voled around me, I'm flattered you do!

    Sunshine you give yourself the right to an opinion, no matter how hatful it be, yet you feel you have the right to deprive others of the right of an opinion; many would call that being a dictator. So once you have paid off my mortgage, we then will talk about you living my life.

    But you have already been married, haven't you!icon_rolleyes.gif
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Nov 25, 2009 11:54 AM GMT
    Patticakes. JP is simply acknowledging what the rest of us already know. It really IS all about you. Why does his acknowledgement trouble you so?
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Nov 25, 2009 2:30 PM GMT
    Darn and here I thought the universe all revolved around me. I am so disappointed now to find out I am just one of the millions of little people. .icon_sad.gif

    Oh and I support the idea of a civil union open to everyone. But if that happens will that allow people to marry their sisters or dogs or cats or buggies?
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Nov 25, 2009 2:37 PM GMT
    ActiveAndFit saidIn California they allow senior citizens to have civil unions because it prevents people from losing certain federal benefits they would lose if they were "really married" It is kind of like "marriage light" Ironically is shows that marriage and civil unions are not the same.

    That was one of the issues argued here in Florida, regarding the state's anti-gay constitutional amendment, which passed in 2008. As it reads, NO ONE can have a legal living arrangement except under marriage. It was expected to inadvertently disadvantage a number of senior citizens who live together to share expenses and save money, but who do not choose to marry. I haven't heard any follow-up as to whether any negative consequences for this group have actually developed since enactment of the amendment.
  • grnranger99

    Posts: 225

    Nov 26, 2009 8:36 PM GMT
    Civil unions would be a great start, especially for all those who need insurance or have sick or dieing partners. (Many can't wait for everyone else to come around)
    We would still call it marriage, and over time the term would just be accepted to include all of us. Words are only words and only have power or meaning when you give it to them.