Marriage (Same Sex Couples) Bill

[mushroom25]

Missing from the Queen's Speech -
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/10043571/Queens-Speech-plain-cigarettes-snoopers-charter-gay-marriage-laws-missing.html
are the conservatives running scared of UKIP, or their own dissenting members? Or just pragmatism in the face of a very full legislative year?

[Gromit]

// yhe ladt threee years //

Damn iPad. Damn drunken finger!

[mikey4444]

Why does AB attract so much uninformed and bigoted drivel ? What possible business is it of anybody if two men or two women want to get married ? People who oppose same-sex marriage can never seem to explain their opposition...if pushed they mumble about it "undermining" heterosexual partnerships, but are unclear exactly how that happens. In a world where two men or two women can adopt children and give them a good life, how can it be wrong if they want to get married as well ?

[ToraToraTora]

most are not against it mikey it's just so low on the priority list that no one's really bothered about getting it done.

[sp1814]

ToraToraTora

If it's such a low priority, why do the right wingers spend so much time and effort trying to block it?

And if the sanctity of marriage is so important to them...why don't they redirect their efforts in repealing the divorce laws, making it much more difficult for couples to separate.

I think I know why...

[jim360]

The thing is, it's just this one bill that seems to raise the waste-of-time argument. People should just be honest and say they are opposed to the content, rather than hide behind a the meaningless "better things to do".

[mikey4444]

I would be obliged if someone who is opposed to same sex marriage could explain why they are against it, in a logical and rational way, if possible.

[modeller]

mikey I'm against same sex marriage because the word marriage for thousands of years means a man and a woman setting up home together and bringing up children, who take their parents as role models.
Men and women see and experience the world in different ways, physically,
and emotionally. In a same sex marriage these different attributes are absent.
As an ex teacher I saw the difference in the behaviour of children brought up by single parents so I know how important a mum and dad is in their lives.
With all the love and affection that a same sex marriage may offer I don't believe it's a substitute for the real thing. I only knew of two same sex families and remember the chidren were treated differently by their peers.

[mushroom25]

//marriage for thousands of years means a man and a woman setting up home together //

.... and Man and dead brother's widow (Genesis 38:6-10)
.... and Man and wives and concubines (Gideon, Nahor, Jacob, Eliphaz, Abraham and Caleb (2 each), and solomon (loads)....)
.... and Man and rape victim (Deuteronomy 22:28-29)
.... and male soldier and prisoner of war (Numbers 31:1-18)

etc....

[whiskeryron]

I think the time would be better spent in trying to get couples who ''shack up'' together, to marry. There was a time when it was regarded as ''normal'' for couples to get married & commit to a happily married life together rather than living over t'brush.
(Waiting for brickbats addressed to ''old fuddy duddy'')

WR.

[modeller]

mushroom I dont know what you are trying to prove !
Do you deny what I said about the traditional meaning of the word marriage.
//marriage for thousands of years means a man and a woman setting up home together //

[mushroom25]

my point is that whilst detractors of same-sex marriage often quote a "biblical" definition of marriage, there are other marriages (other than man + woman) described or defined in the bible.

one man + one woman may be the "traditional" interpretation of the word marriage, but it's never been the only definition, nor can any one religious following claim a particular ownership of any interpretation.

today, enlightened societies recognise and embrace the validity of same sex relationships, and reference to an oft quoted but inaccurate interpretation (allbeit one considered by some to be "traditional") should not be used to deny same sex marriage.

[modeller]

The man/woman relationship has proved to be the normal , most stable
relationship to bring up children, throughout the world, even polygamy is successful in some societies but that is still a man/woman relationship.
I don't know of any society where same sex families have ever been considered normal. Had there been we wouldn't be having this discussion.

[mushroom25]

//I don't know of any society where same sex families have ever been considered normal.//

historically, probably true; but times and attitudes change. same sex liaisons have been legal in europe for many years (starting in Denmark in 1933) and the first civil partnership legislation was passed in 1989; same sex adoption was first legalised more than 20 years ago.

[jim360]

I don't really think you can claim that one man, one woman has been "proven to be the most stable relationship" when in particular two-men or two-women relationships haven't really been tried yet. There's never been a real study, and you couldn't do that anyway.

The best environment for children is a loving, stable one. That can, I would think, come just as easily from two men or two women as one of each, or indeed just a single parent. For single parents, perhaps the challenge is harder as they may have less time to give, but you can't really make generalisations about this, I don't think. Every family works, or doesn't work, on its own merits because of the specifics of the people involved, rather than anything general about them.

[modeller]

I sincerely hope it works. I not against any legal partnerships. It's the children that concerns me and as they grow into adults. I fear their social lives will be affected. I knew children who were picked on because their parents were different , odd , minor disabilities , behaviour or mannerisms etc. I'd lay money on it children of same sex parents will try to hide the fact. I hope I'm wrong.

[askyourgran]

I agree with you modeller. I have no quarrel with same-sex partnerships, the fact that there are children, through no fault of their own being subjected to the same-sex relationship must be confusing and at times worrying for a young child. Being the odd one out at school, visiting a friend with a father and a mother, maybe watching fathers and sons reacting to one another. Can we know how they really feel? It's Ok to say times are changing, things are viewed differently now. It is only the perpetrators who are hoping things are changing to their view. David Cameron I think is back-pedalling a little about this, his need to show his support of something - anything at the time, but face the EU question this was the answer to his prayer, it was not fully thought out there are still questions.

[jim360]

You may be right modeller, and certainly over a social change as big as this one could be we need to be sure that the children involved are not affected. However again it may just be a short-term thing -- were not children of mixed race or mixed heritage bullied in the past? Some still are, probably.

There are several stories going around the internet, if you look, of young children reacting with complete indifference to all sorts of things that some adults have a problem with -- gay parents, transsexuals, people with disabilities and so on. With care, children can very easily accept what we might think of as different. On the other side of the coin, of course, children can also be extremely nasty, so some of those with a different background of any sort will undoubtedly suffer.

I don't think that's a very good argument against change, though, since it takes nothing at all for some children to be mean. Glasses, spots, strange choice of clothes, you name it.