Same-sex Civil Ceremonies

[ianess]

I may have got this wrong but am I right in thinking that the only partnerships that don't have any legal protection are those of opposite sexes who don't want to go through a marriage ceremony?
Is anyone about to start a campaign for equal rights for "opposite sex" relationships?
My apologies if this has already been asked but I had a look around before posting it.

[bernardo]

No - the only partnerships which do have protection are (heterosexual) marriages and (gay) civil partnerships. Those who have not got married or partnered do not have such protection.

[Grunty]

For protection to be given to couples, a dividing line is required between committed and casual relationships. How do you define a relationship that is committed and permanent? The tried and tested dividing line is marriage. It only costs a small fee, half an hour in a register office and a few bottles of beer, so the problem is easily solved. The new civil partnerships give similar benefits to homosexual couples.

[january_bug]

Hear hear to those two who answered!

This seemingly homophobic question seems to have been well answered, but I just wanted to state my agreement and to note how well bernardo has, as ever, responded!

[ianess]

january_bug.....The term homophobia means an "irrational fear of homosexuality or homosexuals". I can assure you that I most certainly am not homophobic. I have friends and relations who are homosexual and I have no problem with that but I do find it strange that a certain group of heterosexual people who have made a committment to each other are now still excluded from legal protection.
As Grunty asks, just exactly how do you define a relationship that is committed and permanent? In Scotland there used to be what was called a "common law marriage" whereby couples living together could be classed as man and wife with all the legal protection that goes with it. I do not know if this still exists but it strikes me as strange that this section of society still seems to be excluded. WHY?
I agree totally with bernardo's reply but my original question remains unanswered.

[rojash]

I have been in a heterosexual civil partnership for 26 years. In other words, we got married in a registry office. This is not significantly different from the new option available for same-sex partnerships; it just happens to have the same name (marriage) as its religious counterpart. What exactly is it that you think gay people are being offered which is not available to heterosexual couples?

[bernardo]

It is quite right that the new Civil Partnership law should not apply to heterosexual couples - the whole point of the law is to allow gay couples to be as close as possible (legally) to the benefits of marriage. If the CP law were to apply to heterosexual couples as well as gay coupls, it would negate the whole point of the legislation and relegate a CP to a second-class status. It would then lead to gay people campaigning to be allowed full marriage. That's the point I was trying to make in my first answer.

[yummymummy]

Trying to put it simply:

Heterosexual couples can either choose to get married or choose not to.

Now, so can homosexual ones (civilly partnered rather than married though!).

It just means that both now get the choice, there will still be heterosexual couples who choose not to so get no legal protection, and there will still be homosexual ones who choose not to as well so they won't get any legal protection either.

No-one is now getting more than anyone else, just means that everyone has got the choice.

[january_bug]

Did you seriously need someone to explain that to you!?!

Thank god yummymummy was able to do it succinctly and eloquently!

The answer being "now everyone has a choice"....

[Drisgirl]

Can anyone explain why then if you are in a partnership e;g living together-perhaps bought a house together in Scotland this is recognised legally as a Common Law Marriage and as such you have the same entitlements as if you were legally married.If there is an article in a newspaper partners are referred to as Common Law wife or husband.I accept Scottish law is different but could this policy not have been adopted or even adapted to include everyone?

[simonthecat]

Hmm... I was actually searching for some other info on civil partnerships, and came across this thread.

I wonder if people might find this website useful in answering the questions raised? http://www.handbag.com/family/legaladvice/commonlaw/

(As this is my first ever post here, I have no idea if this forum will accept HTML to hyperlink that, so I'll just post the URL).