Clearly, civil partnerships didn't keep everyone happy.
Gay Marriage discussion
- Thread starter Miss Caphat
- Start date
Doctor Carrot
Marxist Henchman
Alright most people then.
spanglechick
High Empress of Dressing Up
if it's not exactly the same, then it's not equal. why does it need to be a separate thing? or even have a separate name?
it doesn't anymore.
spanglechick
High Empress of Dressing Up
yeah, I was responding to Doctor Carrot.it doesn't anymore.
captainmission
Well-Known Member
Why should we care whether religious bigots are happy or not?
Doctor Carrot
Marxist Henchman
Because, and I'm playing devil's advocate because I don't necessarily support this view, it changes the definition of marriage that's been around for centuries and centuries. It seems to me that civil partnership was a good compromise as it provided the exact same legal status as marriage. Would've been interesting to see polling data from gays as I don't recall seeing any? I've read that it's not a wholly supported change and a lot of gay people who were against it feel they weren't really heard in the debate and that a minority rail roaded it through.
Nine Bob Note
Self-Isolating before it was fashionable
Ha ha, some of these Christians playing victim are hilarious 
Nine Bob Note
Self-Isolating before it was fashionable
Do other couples require polling data to get hitched?
Doctor Carrot
Marxist Henchman
I don't particularly think its bigoted to be against it because your religion is against it. Is it batshit? Yeah of course but I don't necessarily think it's bigoted, although obviously some views are. As I said I just think a lot of voices, moderate voices, were crowded out of the debate and we're celebrating what is not much more than a change of wording.
Garek
Living n ADDled chaos
Though technically for it I can't help but feel a big meh towards this. Cameron made it clear that this is many ways a conservative act when he said,
“And to anyone who has reservations, I say this: Yes, it’s about equality, but it’s also about something else: commitment. Conservatives believe in the ties that bind us; that society is stronger when we make vows to each other and support each other.
“So I don’t support gay marriage in spite of being a Conservative. I support gay marriage because I am a Conservative.”
“And to anyone who has reservations, I say this: Yes, it’s about equality, but it’s also about something else: commitment. Conservatives believe in the ties that bind us; that society is stronger when we make vows to each other and support each other.
“So I don’t support gay marriage in spite of being a Conservative. I support gay marriage because I am a Conservative.”
spring-peeper
Well-Known Member
If the gays object to it, then they don't have to get married.
No one is forcing them.
it was a compromise with bigotry.
Doctor Carrot
Marxist Henchman
Nope, what's your point? As far as I know gay people could already get hitched it was just called a civil ceremony instead of a wedding....even though it was exactly the same thing.
spanglechick
High Empress of Dressing Up
a bit like apartheid.
Doctor Carrot
Marxist Henchman
How is providing the exact same legal protection apartheid?
would you say they rammed it down our throats?
Nine Bob Note
Self-Isolating before it was fashionable
If it was exactly the same it wouldn't have been called something else would it?
spanglechick
High Empress of Dressing Up
is a wedding just legal protection, then? i reckon on the great big list of reasons why i married my husband, legal protection was close to the bottom.
Doctor Carrot
Marxist Henchman
Nope, I think you're trying to paint me as something I'm not.
So language is important after all. Thanks for that.
Doctor Carrot
Marxist Henchman
Yeah fair enough, I dunno I think the whole institution of marriage is absurd anyway so I'm probably the wrong person to support it or be against it. Don't get me wrong I'm in favour of it I'm just a: Maybe underestimating the enormity of the change? I think civil partnerships were vastly more significant and b: Baring the topic of the thread in mind, would be a bit of a dull discussion if everyone just went 'yay, congratulations I'm all in favour.'
Doctor Carrot
Marxist Henchman
So is quoting in context and I'd appreciate it if you did that in future please, thanks.
farmerbarleymow
I'm Petee's spirit animal
Different but equal is not equal. Surely that much is obvious given history.
Marriage is a social construct (and most certainly not a religious invention), and has evolved over the years many times, so there is no one true definition of it. One part is love and companionship, the other is contract and social/family ties, and so on - it varies a lot between societies and within societies/individuals. But to say to one group in society that they must have something different, even with similar legal protection, is saying they are not part of that society. That is unequal and unjust.
what's the problem? they both mean the same thing don't they?
RedDragon
"I am not one of your fans!"
I think Stonewall estimated 10% of gays objected to the concept of marriage mainly based on a feminist rejection of a patriarchal institution.
I've been in a 17 year same-sex relationship and for the time being I'm perfectly happy remaining the 'gay bachelor' - just like lots of straight couples not wanting to marry.
but, obviously, I support the equality aspect and always felt Civil Partnerships were a fudge compromise.
Last edited:
Doctor Carrot
Marxist Henchman
Fair enough I can't find anything to argue with in this post, I haven't been able to find anything to argue against gay marriage full stop. I've just obviously underestimated the enormity of the change that's all because it didn't strike me as a massive one, and I dunno maybe it's not? It's still a change though I guess and that can only be a good thing.
Doctor Carrot
Marxist Henchman
No you quoted it to make it look like that was my opinion when if you read the original quote you'll see it isn't. You were being a sneaky prick and you know it.
Similar threads
