Mister M Posted February 7, 2013 Share Posted February 7, 2013 No it's nobody else's damned business. It's a shame that those who interfere and criticise others' relationships don't invest as much attention in their own. Perhaps then marital discord and divorce rates wouldn't be as high as they are. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
buck Posted February 7, 2013 Share Posted February 7, 2013 Accepted by whom ?I dare say you will find a reasonable mix of those who approve and those that don't. Don't use SF poll figures to prove your point. They aren't representative enough, leaning more toward grads and undergrads than old farts lke me and my fellow oldies but goodies. We have a voice too. Ask some Grandma what she thinks of her grandaughter marrying her girl friend, then stand back with your fingers in your ears. In any case our opinions are as valid as anybody elses, be they a minority or not. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RootsBooster Posted February 7, 2013 Share Posted February 7, 2013 A civil partnership is formed once both individuals have signed the civil partnership document in the presence of a registrar and two witnesses. It can be done before or after a religious service but not at the same time. So they can have a full blown white wedding if a church will conduct such a wedding, but the actual signing of the documents can’t form part of that wedding, but can be done before or after. Exactly, they can't have the same wedding that a man and woman can have Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
maxmaximus Posted February 7, 2013 Share Posted February 7, 2013 Exactly, they can't have the same wedding that a man and woman can have Well no, because during a wedding words like this are said. Do you bob take sue to be your lawfully wedded wife, do you sue take bob to be your lawfully wedded husband. It wouldn’t quite work in a gay marriage so inevitable they will be different but equal. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RootsBooster Posted February 7, 2013 Share Posted February 7, 2013 A question for those who think making gay marriage available is a huge waste of time, money and resources because they already have civil partnerships (as already mentioned many times on this thread)... Do you not think it was a bigger and more pointless waste of time, money and resources for them to invent a new, different relationship status (civil partnership) complete with it's own registration system and rules in the FIRST place, instead of just making the existing marriage system more inclusive? AFTER spending lots of time, money and resources debating and arguing about it before hand? No because it removed any conflict Yes... of course.. it removed the conflict it allowed gay people to have the same rights as everyone else with upsetting a very large percentage of society. Almost the same rights It was a reasonable but not ideal compromise. It was a waste of time, money and resources which, as shown by the current situation, solved nothing In your opinion which you are entitled to, but calling something crap just because you don't understand it doesn’t make you appear smart. It's my opinion that it's crap, but it's fact that saying something is equal when it isn't, is nonsense. What makes you think I'd be concerned about looking smart? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alien52 Posted February 7, 2013 Share Posted February 7, 2013 I dare say you will find a reasonable mix of those who approve and those that don't. Don't use SF poll figures to prove your point. They aren't representative enough, leaning more toward grads and undergrads than old farts lke me and my fellow oldies but goodies. We have a voice too. Ask some Grandma what she thinks of her grandaughter marrying her girl friend, then stand back with your fingers in your ears. In any case our opinions are as valid as anybody elses, be they a minority or not. As well may have been the case about your hero Rosa Parks in 1955. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RootsBooster Posted February 7, 2013 Share Posted February 7, 2013 Well no, because during a wedding words like this are said. Do you bob take sue to be your lawfully wedded wife, do you sue take bob to be your lawfully wedded husband. It wouldn’t quite work in a gay marriage so inevitable they will be different but equal. I was thinking more along the lines of what you said before, they can't have anything religious going on while they sign the documents, like a blessing or a passage being read, or hymns being sung. They can't even have any religious symbols present. They are being denied this and no matter how trivial you think it may be, it is discriminatory. ---------- Post added 07-02-2013 at 21:01 ---------- There you go again. "This is a tale told by an idiot, full of sound and fury, signifying nothing" That quote you just gave, who is it from? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mister M Posted February 7, 2013 Share Posted February 7, 2013 I dare say you will find a reasonable mix of those who approve and those that don't. Don't use SF poll figures to prove your point. They aren't representative enough, leaning more toward grads and undergrads than old farts lke me and my fellow oldies but goodies. We have a voice too. Ask some Grandma what she thinks of her grandaughter marrying her girl friend, then stand back with your fingers in your ears. In any case our opinions are as valid as anybody elses, be they a minority or not. So what if a few old farts disapprove of gay weddings, big deal - it's none of their business. Weddings are supposed to be one of the happiest days of a person's life. Why should the happy couple have to take the feelings of an embittered few into acount? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
buck Posted February 7, 2013 Share Posted February 7, 2013 As well may have been the case about your hero Rosa Parks in 1955.She is and was my heroine. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
andygardener Posted February 7, 2013 Share Posted February 7, 2013 Jesus H. If the mods removed every post not by a) a homosexual wishing to marry or b) a religious person objecting to them marrying in their place of worship would there be any posts at all? Why this level of argument over an issue which is nothing to do with most of us? Let the gays marry, let the religions not let them on their turf if they so wish, move on to something more interesting for the rest of us. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.