Same Sex Marriages.

[Margaret Pilkington]

and the tonic for the gin!

[garinda]

Originally Posted by Margaret Pilkington

I really do not care about what sexual orientation someone is.
And if they want to have some sort of religious ceremony, then that is fine by me.
What I do not agree with, is the wording of the draft bill which will change the denomination 'Husband and Wife' to 'Parties in Marriage' .
This is something that Stonewall is seeking for same sex marriages, because obviously there isn't (strictly speaking) a husband and wife.
They want to change something traditional, to the detriment of the many, for the benefit of the few.
Leave the husband and wife names as they are for heterosexual marriage, but allow same sex partnerships to assume the new format if they wish.
My husband is my husband...he is not a party in marriage.

Oh I quite agree Marg.

How stupid.

What are they going to say in the service?

'Do you Ethel, take Albert Aloysius, as your lawful wedded party?'

Daft.

[garinda]

Well, so far, making sense of the plethora of confusing options, only one in four seem to be opposed to same sex marriage.

[Less]

Originally Posted by garinda

Well, so far, making sense of the plethora of confusing options, only one in four seem to be opposed to same sex marriage.

Well, perhaps it would get a different result if such a thing was made compulsory rather than voluntary?

[garinda]

Originally Posted by Less

Well, perhaps it would get a different result if such a thing was made compulsory rather than voluntary?

Yeah sod that.

Well until they change the law...so you can marry the person in the mirror.

[mobertol]

Originally Posted by garinda

Yeah sod that.

Well until they change the law...so you can marry the person in the mirror.

Would not wish to marry myself ever -too hard to live with...

As to this poll , the "get out of jail free cards" mean that only 5 out of 22 voters actually agree with same sex mariage. 5 against, 12 in limbo.

My own answer was given glibbly out of general disillusion with that state, have nothing against it in theory.

Marriage in society has always implicated a sense of kinship = procreation.
Not all married couples have children, for various reasons, but perhaps this is the final knot that needs unravelling - same sex couples do not naturally produce the next generation.
I have nothing against adoption by same sex couples but i think this is what actually blocks a lot of people into seeing these legal (ie marrige) unions as equal to heterosexual marriages.

Just trying to put into words how i see where most prejudice comes from...

[garinda]

Originally Posted by mobertol

Oh, well will just have to wait till the next Leap year -4 years hence.

One might consider living in sin in the meantime...

I'll air the back bedroom then.

We'll have a civilised union.

[jaysay]

Originally Posted by garinda

Any overt, public displays of affection like that is in bad taste, in my book.

Regardless of whether the tonsil tickling participants had innie or outies.

I quite agree Rindi, can't say I've ever been in favour of watching people swapping spit in public, of any orientation, gay or straight, to me that is something which should be kept behind closed doors

[jaysay]

Originally Posted by Less

Nah, your right, most husbands would be found in the kitchen at parties, thats where the fridge with the beer is.

Um is there any other room at parties Less

[garinda]

Originally Posted by jaysay

I quite agree Rindi, can't say I've ever been in favour of watching people swapping spit in public, of any orientation, gay or straight, to me that is something which should be kept behind closed doors

Anyone who snogs the face off each other, in public places, seem to want to prove something.

It's not as bad in a nightclub, but you don't want to sit behind it on the bus, or facing you, over a table in a cafe.

Very often they're the ones that split up, a short time later.

[gynn]

Originally Posted by garinda

Anyone who snogs the face off each other, in public places, seem to want to prove something.

It's not as bad in a nightclub, but you don't want to sit behind it on the bus, or facing you, over a table in a cafe.

Very often they're the ones that split up, a short time later.

They're trying to prove that they are having a relationship. The trouble is theyare trying to convince themselves as much as everybody else.

If the relationship is worth anything, they don't have to do anything in public.

[accyman]

Originally Posted by gynn

If the relationship is worth anything, they don't have to do anything in public.

what if they are keen doggers lol

[mobertol]

Originally Posted by mobertol

Have to disagree -marriage should be abolished -live and let live!

( My own life sentence is up 19th March...)

Seems this comment may have caused some confusion - 19th March will be my Silver Wedding Anniversary! They won't be letting me out of prison just yet

[mobertol]

Originally Posted by garinda

I'll air the back bedroom then.

We'll have a civilised union.

Have booked flight Friday - should arrive "Chez toi" by taxi at 02-00hrs,( I know you'll be up).

Have v. simple needs, somewhere to plug in my laptop and a big box of tea-bags (Twinings Eng.Breakfast preferably)

You may be required to sit in my lap and let me stroke you from time to time when I'm missing my cats!

I'm very civilized but please remove the ironing board from the back bedroom -don't start thinking I'll be doing all the housework....

[jaysay]

Originally Posted by gynn

They're trying to prove that they are having a relationship. The trouble is theyare trying to convince themselves as much as everybody else.

If the relationship is worth anything, they don't have to do anything in public.

Nail on the head I think gynn