What's The Point Of Straight Couples Entering A Civil Partnership?

[sp1814]

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-42916294

If civil partnerships are exactly the same as a marriage - why not just get married?

[New Judge]

It was perhaps justifiable when gay couples could not get married. Now they can - or choose a civil partnership. No such choice is available to straight couples so they are clearly discriminated against on the basis of their sexuality. That would not be tolerated if gay couples were the victims so the position needs to be remedied. The ideal cure would be to abolish civil partnerships as they are no longer necessary.

[woofgang]

I think the issue arises when for me when the longstanding partnership are related but lose out legally because they aren't married or in a civil partnership. I remember Nigel Hawthorne saying that his long term partner had no legal rights because they couldn't register their relationship...also even if not related, the couple in question may not wish to be thought of as being in a sexual kind of relationship or to "marry" but again, miss out on legal advantages.

[New Judge]

"it was designed as marriage wivout da lardy daa - Latin mass, kyrie eleison, smells and bells - tinga ling."

No it wasn't, Peter. It was designed as a form of marriage for people who could not get married. Now they can, so civil partnerships are redundant.

[pixie374]

That's what i meant, cloverjo. I would never have guessed that in a million years. The world is mad.

[DTCwordfan]

love is more thicker than most ABers forget
more thinner than any of us recall
more seldom than an ozzie wave is wet and with ed
more frequent than many a bachelor Jim fail to bed

it is most ttt mad and mooney
and less it shall unbe
than all the boaty sea which only
is deeper than barmaid's Dover sea

love is less always than a stokey win
less never than minty alive
less bigger than the mazie's garden begins
less wounded than ummm's left leg gives

it is most Pedant sane and New J sunly
and more it cannot R&S die
than all the wendi-defined sky which only
is higher than the AB Earthly sky

[sp1814]

NJ

You wrote:

//The ideal cure would be to abolish civil partnerships as they are no longer necessary.//

Yep...couldn't agree more.

CPs were introduced as a way for gay people to have their relationships put on a legal footing.

Now that same sex marriages have been enshrined in law, CPs have little use.

I think they should be scrapped.

[youngmafbog]

Personally I dont think there is any need for civil partnerships for anyone. It should be removed and everyone should be allowed to marry whom they like with no religion or with religion.

[Old_Geezer]

Probably as much point as gay couples insisting there should be such a thing as gay marriage and entering into it.

[emmie]

because many don't want to, this would entitle them to the benefits of being married without being so. I totally understand the need.

[mikey4444]

NJ is right here....civil partnerships are now redundant.

[emmie]

i we had had a civil partnership i might not have been left with a partner with no money at all, Mr Em didn't want to get married so we could have done it that way,
but he passed away so no good looking back i suppose.

[dave50]

If couples want a civil partnership because they dont want the full commitment of a marriage, then it begs the question, why are they together at all if they are so apprehensive of 'commitment'?

[dave50]

And another thing. Couples buy a house together, have children then say they dont want to get married because they dont want to spoil things. I have heard it said many times. It's illogical, why would it spoil anything? They are the same people the day before they get married as they are the day after. It doesnt make any sense.

[bednobs]

i dont get what a cp can give you that you can't get by other means. Whar ARE the legal advantages?

[woofgang]

https://www.citizensadvice.org.uk/family/living-together-marriage-and-civil-partnership/living-together-and-civil-partnership-legal-differences/