ChatterBank8 mins ago
Should Lesbian marriage be legalised?
41 Answers
Two British women who were married in Canada have gone to the High Court in a test case to win legal recognition for same-sex couples who marry abroad.
The University professors Sue Wilkinson and Celia Kitzinger, who live in north Yorkshire, argue that UK laws which validated their union as a "civil partnership" do not go far enough.
I saw this today in the paper and thought how the world was so much simpler in the 1960s and 70s.
Do you approve of gay marriages? I mean on an equal footing to normal marriage?
Answers
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by David Black. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.
For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.
Aye; it was much simpler in the 1960s; before 67, consensual homosexuality was a crime worthy of a five or six year sentence in prison. Very sensible.
As for approving, sure, I'm all for it as a concept.
I've yet to hear a sensible argument why some adults shouldn't have the same right to marriage as others. If people want to, then go ahead. And if they don't, then fine.
In fact, I feel about it exactly as I do about straight marriage - it's up to the individuals. Certainly my marriage could be no more affected by gay people getting married than it could by straight people getting divorced (which affects it not one jot).
As for approving, sure, I'm all for it as a concept.
I've yet to hear a sensible argument why some adults shouldn't have the same right to marriage as others. If people want to, then go ahead. And if they don't, then fine.
In fact, I feel about it exactly as I do about straight marriage - it's up to the individuals. Certainly my marriage could be no more affected by gay people getting married than it could by straight people getting divorced (which affects it not one jot).
I "approve" of gay marriages in the same way I "approve" of straight marriages. I use inverted commas as the term "approve" implies they need our permission.
If two adults want to get married to each other why shouldn't they? What difference does it make whether they are straight, gay, bi or just plain ambiguous? More importantly, what business is it of anybody's other than the happy couple?
If two adults want to get married to each other why shouldn't they? What difference does it make whether they are straight, gay, bi or just plain ambiguous? More importantly, what business is it of anybody's other than the happy couple?
Lonnie I see marriage as a binding union between two people. I am not a Christian and do not believe that it was ordained for the creation of children. Others might disagree.
I am happy for any adult to marry any other adult regardless of their race, creed, colour or sex and admire the commitment they make to each other.
Yeah, certainly legalise gay marriage, whyever not? Heterosexual people do not have the monopoly on love and commitment, nor with the possibility of IVF and adoption do they have the monopoly on being parents, so why should the gay couples be any less defined in law than heterosexuals and why should their children have parents who cannot marry when they clearly wish to.
The world was simpler in the 60's, or rather more simplistic, ruled by white middle class men who didn't have to consider anyone's equality, women, black people, gay people, the working class... you name it, but simpler is not necessarily better and I'd hate to see a return to those days when people were discriminated against because of their class, colour, sex or orientation.
I think that the only problem some people may have is calling it 'marriage'. People can bogged down in the words rather than the definitions. I legally binding union with the same standing as heterosexual marriage is exactly what we should have. Whether some Christians want it to be called 'marriage' or not is something else, but I cannot think of a reason why anyone would want to disciminate against people on the basis of the sexuality with this issue.
Perhaps we should avoid the word marriage outside a religious ceremony for either gay or straight couples.
If we called it 'unioned' then it might stop Christians from getting upset. They can keep the word marriage and everyone else could use the word 'unioned'.
I absolutely welcome gay weddings...the only problem is that the gifts have to be more expensive and fabulous.
If we called it 'unioned' then it might stop Christians from getting upset. They can keep the word marriage and everyone else could use the word 'unioned'.
I absolutely welcome gay weddings...the only problem is that the gifts have to be more expensive and fabulous.
I tend to agree with sp1814. Maybe all marriages outside of the church should be 'civil partnerships' for both gay & straight couples..that way the religious types can keep their opinions to themselves, there would be no arguments about gay & straight rights & everyone would be happy?
I don't believe anyone should marry in church unless they are christians anyway..but the church doesn't care about that does it?
David
Okay...I see your point. To clarify, any religious union should be called a marraige, with all that entails.
Where a 'marriage' takes place with a civil ceremony, it can be called a union.
One unexpected benefit of this is that many people won't have to use the word 'marriage' which is surprisingly difficult to spell if you don't have spellcheck on your PC.
Okay...I see your point. To clarify, any religious union should be called a marraige, with all that entails.
Where a 'marriage' takes place with a civil ceremony, it can be called a union.
One unexpected benefit of this is that many people won't have to use the word 'marriage' which is surprisingly difficult to spell if you don't have spellcheck on your PC.
Do people of other faiths besides Christian have to have a registrar at their wedding?
If this is the case then they would surely have to have the 'civil partnership' ceremony followed by the 'wedding'. I know this happens in other countries (the 'wedding' is optional).
Are Muslim/Buddhist clerics licenced to perform marriages in the UK? just a thought..excuse my ignorance!
I think the word marriage is fine. It is not a word exclusive to a religious union, and this definition is what I recognise to be the most appropriate
Marriage is a relationship and bond, most commonly between a man and a woman, that plays a key role in the definition of many families. Precise definitions vary historically and between and within cultures, but it has been an important concept as a socially sanctioned bond in a sexual relationship. ...
I do approve.
There is so much Hate these days that anyone who is willing to love and commit to another person be they gay,straight, an alien lifeform etc should be able to get married and do so legally.
Perhaps I am biased as I have many gay friends and their relationships are just as wonderful and full of love as mine.
As for the whole religion aspect....the catholic church won't have it but when you have openly gay vicars etc in the C of E, how can the church then not offer marriage ceremonies to homosexuals?
Related Questions
Sorry, we can't find any related questions. Try using the search bar at the top of the page to search for some keywords, or choose a topic and submit your own question.