/// At present, gays and lesbians are allowed to enter civil partnerships, which offer most of the legal protections of marriage. But the term ‘marriage’ is not used.///
In a time when more important matters should be on politicians minds, why is the term 'Marriage' that important to homosexuals, that politicians find the need to change the law, specially to accommodate them?
They won't however be allowed to marry in church, as I believe the christian service specifically states that marriage is the joining of a man and a woman.
What wording?
A CP takes place in front of an Official........and there can be NO religious aspect to it.......no hymns, etc.
Some enlightened churches are willing to take part in a 'blessing' but that's a hell of a rigmarole to have to go through in order to feel that you have made a commitment to the person you love, in front of everyone else that you love....and for it still to fall short of what everyone sees as a 'marriage'.
It seems to me that anyone of the opinion that calling the ceremony a 'civil partnership' rather than a 'marriage' is discrimination, must have a strange idea of what discrimination is. As far as I am aware it is the same significance legally, but with a different name. But if that is not so I'd be willing to be enlightened. It's hardly something I'd studied.
There must be a reason to insist on having the same name for both ceremonies even though it adds nothing. I can only think it has to be to deliberately anger and upset those for whom marriage presently defines a relationship between the 2 genders; and who would consider a widening of the definition to include other relationships as a diminishing of it's meaning. Just seems to be to be a deliberate attempt to offend, and in particular to offend those who have religious viewpoints on the matter.
I know several gay couples who are equally as committed to their long-term partners as heteros - and not all committed hetero couples get married, anyway. To my mind, any commitment - legally acknowledged - should be a binding arrangements, recognised in law. Live-in hetero couples don't get equal rights - why can't it all be under one umbrella? then if people want a religious ceremony because it's right for the individuals, then of course they can, too. Or is that all much too simple?
I have two gay friends who are raising a perfectly lovely family and doing a very good job of it Doc, you don't have to be heterosexual to make good parents you know and as for whatever 'holy' book you subscribe to and got your ideas from that marriage somehow belonged to straight people, only those of your own persuasion care about that and that's certainly NOT the whole of the UK, so this accomodates everyone.Simple.