Same Sex Marriage, Oh What A Tangled Web Has Been Woven?

[anotheoldgit]

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/10654305/Men-banned-from-becoming-Queen-as-700-years-of-law-redrafted-ahead-of-gay-marriage.html

/// “This is yet another attack on those who opposed the redefinition of marriage, or believe that equality is not just about destroying the institutions that have helped to bind us together for centuries for the sake of political correctness.” ///

[jim360]

Something I meant to include in my first post but missed out: If same-sex marriage is the right thing to do, then it's worth spending the time to get it right in law. The debate on the principle was lost, already, so picking this new battle as the Coalition for Marriage is doing is a wasted effort. This had to happen once the principle was accepted.

[andres]

Yes boxtops. I forgot about all those'' next in line''.

[mushroom25]

//If same-sex marriage is the right thing to do, then it's worth spending the time to get it right in law. //

but our incompetent government couldn't even do that, Jim.

http://www.theguardian.com/society/2014/jan/24/gay-couple-sue-uk-same-sex-marriage-civil-partnership

[jim360]

Well, yes, but then the idea of the government not getting something right is hardly surprising either!

[Zacs-Master]

In reference to AOG's original question, it would seem the web was already pretty tangled and the proposals seek to prevent further entanglement.

[pixie373]

I thought "spouse" was already used in law more than "husband" or "wife" and the rest is just common sense.

[mushroom25]

I'm waiting for the first legal challenge to the CofE's exemption, on equality or HR grounds. How soon will it come?

[sandyRoe]

Didn't monarchs in the olden days have 'favourites'? They saw no need to formalise the relationships.

[Khandro]

"Separate guidelines last year made clear that some other pieces of legislation would be read in such a way as to allow the term “wife” to apply to men and “husband” to women."
The thing really being re-defined is the English dictionary, mine says ; 'Husband, - a married man'. and that's how I shall continue to use it, if some people have trouble knowing what they are, then that is their problem, not mine.

[Baldric]

///Men are to be banned from becoming Queens///

With reference to marriage,
are they not just a little late with that one?

[whiskeryron]

It's all getting out of hand & rather tiresome. There have always been men & women who amalgamated in marriage & more often than not produced offspring for the continual perpetuation of the human race. We now have a situation where same sex couples want the same status that has always applied to man/woman couples. This surely cannot be, it would be sensible for Homosexual ( I refuse to use the word Gay) couples to stick to what they have already achieved ( officially recognised civil partnerships) & leave holy matrimony to the established man/woman partnership status. I know that my views will upset quite a few on here, but so be it.

Ron.

[Baldric]

Should have read "gay marriage" ^^^^^^^

(even the laptop rejected it!)

[naomi24]

Ron, //leave holy matrimony to the established man/woman partnership status. //

But marriage isn’t always ‘holy’ and that which is cannot exist without the involvement of civil law. That said, the fact remains that men and women are not the same and in their efforts to ensure equality I think the legislators are going to find themselves climbing up their own bottoms and meeting themselves coming back.

[whiskeryron]

Quite so naomi.

Ron.

[anotheoldgit]

Khandro

/// The thing really being re-defined is the English dictionary, mine says ; 'Husband, - a married man'. and that's how I shall continue to use it, if some people have trouble knowing what they are, then that is their problem, not mine. ///

Give them time Khandro, they are changing the definition of words all the time, I can quite see the word 'ENGLISH' dictionary, being redefined, all in the name of PC.

[sp1814]

whiskeryron

You wrote:

"it would be sensible for Homosexual ( I refuse to use the word Gay) couples to stick to what they have already achieved ( officially recognised civil partnerships) & leave holy matrimony to the established man/woman partnership status."

But marriage won't change for straight couples. It will be exactly the same as it always has been for straight couples, surely?

[naomi24]

//But marriage won't change for straight couples. It will be exactly the same as it always has been for straight couples, surely? //

Not if the words 'husband' and 'wife' are redefined.

[anotheoldgit]

sp1814

/// But marriage won't change for straight couples. It will be exactly the same as it always has been for straight couples, surely? ///

They are strange words coming from you, are you saying that homosexual couples are bent?

[jim360]

I'm not sure how anyone could think that there wasn't going to need to be a whole set of minor changes to existing law after this. It's going to be tricky, certainly, but it was bound to be necessary. The Marriage (Same sex Couples) Act constitutes a legal redefinition of marriage -- and so, every single law in existence that refers to marriage in any manner would have to be looked at and, if necessary, amended to reflect the new definition. Not exactly the officials' faults, and someone had to do it.

[sp1814]

naomi24

But that still won't actually change anything.

Practically speaking.