Gay marriage - what do you think?

[fhain29 10]

Later this year, it will be possible for gays and lesbians in England and Wales to form a "civil partnership". From what I have heard, there is little difference to marriage, so that people are calling it "gay marriage". Considering it was a big issue in the US, what do you think: Yes, No, not bothered?

 

In my opinion this is a good thing. At the moment for example a couple may have been together for years, but are not next of kin. In case of illness, access and information may be denied to the other partner, inheritance is not secure, tenancy rights are not secure. Plus, two people in loving relationships are for the first time able to say to the wider community that they are a family, with all the rights and obligations that entails.

[Kristian 11]

Absolutely, although I can see a fight looming for me about who gets to wear the dress...

 

K x

[DaBouncer 13]

If two people gay or straight feel that strongly about their relationship that they want to committ to each other this way (i.e. marriage) then why not?

 

I think it's about time society in the UK starts to move forward and become more open minded about things.

 

I love my wife, I married her because I wanted to - why shouldn't it be the same for two people of the same sex?

 

I rest my case.

[Swan_Vesta 11]

Totally agree with same sex marriage. Gay & lesbian couples should benefit from the same rights that straight couples take for granted. In my opinion anything else is unacceptable.

 

If two people want to celebrate their love for each other by getting wed, then fair play to them.

 

If certain friends of mine ever get married then I can't wait to see their ceremony - It'll be a right shindig!! They'll both be tearing each others hair out when the play here comes the bride.

[JonJParr 10]

Originally posted by fhain29

Later this year, it will be possible for gays and lesbians in England and Wales to form a "civil partnership". From what I have heard, there is little difference to marriage, so that people are calling it "gay marriage". Considering it was a big issue in the US, what do you think: Yes, No, not bothered?

 

In my opinion this is a good thing. At the moment for example a couple may have been together for years, but are not next of kin. In case of illness, access and information may be denied to the other partner, inheritance is not secure, tenancy rights are not secure. Plus, two people in loving relationships are for the first time able to say to the wider community that they are a family, with all the rights and obligations that entails.

 

Not really too sure. I'm not heavily religious but I do believe that a biblical concept shouldn't be something that those in homosexual relationships (which the Bible itself deems immoral) should hijack. Before you run to grab the hot tar and feathers let me just clarify what I actually mean. I'm not in any way discriminatory towards people that are homosexual- I see them as equals and individuals who should be able to live their lives as they see fit. Personally it's not a life choice or value I would adopt but who am I to judge. What I take issue with is the alteration of what is fundamentally a Biblical concept. Tax and legal concessions I have absolutely no problem with whatsoever- in fact I think they should have come sooner! But I object to it being called a "marriage" because in the sense that word was intended - a homosexual relationship isn't a marriage.

[nick2 10]

I see marriage as a religious ceremony, for that reason alone I would not/will not get married, the legal rights would be nice though.

[Kthebean 10]

Jon makes a good point. I'm heterosexual, pretty much, and I think I wouldn't want to get married because I'm not religious. Perhaps some kind of civil union thing could be introduced across the board for gay and straight couples, to show commitment love and legal rights, but not marriage in the eyes of god?

[DaBouncer 13]

Originally posted by kathythebean

Perhaps some kind of civil union thing could be introduced across the board for gay and straight couples, to show commitment love and legal rights, but not marriage in the eyes of god?

They already so - it's called a civil ceremony.

It's still marriage (since I have a marriage certificate) but when I married my wife it had no religious reference what so ever.

 

No I promise before God or anything - which was what we wanted cos I'm not religious.

[JonJParr 10]

Originally posted by DaBouncer

They already so - it's called a civil ceremony.

It's still marriage (since I have a marriage certificate) but when I married my wife it had no religious reference what so ever.

 

No I promise before God or anything - which was what we wanted cos I'm not religious.

 

No but you were a man and a women and made certain vows to one another. As such it is a "marriage".

[DaBouncer 13]

Originally posted by JonJParr

No but you were a man and a women and made certain vows to one another. As such it is a "marriage".

Of course it is a marriage (and we are not were a man and woman ) - I dont despute that, maybe I'm just open minded enough to appreciate the benefits of this legislation being passed rather than focussing on outdated beliefs which create negatives.

[JonJParr 10]

Originally posted by DaBouncer

Of course it is a marriage (and we are not were a man and woman ) - I dont depute that, maybe I'm just open minded enough to appreciate the benefits of this legislation being passed rather than focussing on outdated beliefs which create negatives.

 

I don't think you can argue that religious beliefs are outdated. You certainly have no right to challenge me about being open-minded as I'm someone who does not inflict their own religious values on others and I don't discriminate against those who choose to adopt certain lifestyles. But it is rather hypocritical for someone who is homosexual to try and adopt marriage in their own relationship when the foundations of "marriage" as a concept are in religion!

 

It's like rewriting the Bible or Koran to say "homosexuality is welcomed and accepted by God". Rewriting religion to suit your own lifestyle is wrong!

[DaBouncer 13]

Originally posted by JonJParr

I don't think you can argue that religious beliefs are outdated. You certainly have no right to challenge me about being open-minded as I'm someone who does not inflict their own religious values on others and I don't discriminate against those who choose to adopt certain lifestyles. But it is rather hypocritical for someone who is homosexual to try and adopt marriage in their own relationship when the foundations of "marriage" as a concept are in religion!

 

It's like rewriting the Bible or Koran to say "homosexuality is welcomed and accepted by God". It's wrong!

I apologise if you took my last comment as a challenge on your openmindedness - I believe however that I was referring to myself and not you in the slightest.

 

I can argue religious beliefs are outdated when you can't prove to me that what rewligion preaches is real?

 

To quote the OP:

Originally posted by fhain29

Later this year, it will be possible for gays and lesbians in England and Wales to form a "civil partnership". From what I have heard, there is little difference to marriage, so that people are calling it "gay marriage".

Note people are calling it "Gay Marriage" but it is in actual fact a "Civil Partnership" so you're getting you're manly boxers in a knot for no reason. If wanted to call my civil ceremony a "Ding Dang Do Union" or a "Marriage" I'm perfectly allowed - it doesn't mean it was performed under "god".

 

And who are you to say this Civil Partnerhsip between two people is wrong? Do you know God? Do you know the people who wrote the transcripts in the bible know God? Do you know God wants this or this for certain? How do you know god hasn't changed it's mind?

 

Think about it - open your mind