Quizzes & Puzzles3 mins ago
Civil partnerships for heterosexual couples
Sorry, can only find old news link
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-11625835
A couple local to us are fighting their case this week for civil partnerships to be made legal for hetero couples. As it stands CPs are only recognised for same sex couples.
Have they got a case? or not really because they could get married. Are CPs a good compromise for people who want to commit but not neccessarily do the whole married thing?
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-11625835
A couple local to us are fighting their case this week for civil partnerships to be made legal for hetero couples. As it stands CPs are only recognised for same sex couples.
Have they got a case? or not really because they could get married. Are CPs a good compromise for people who want to commit but not neccessarily do the whole married thing?
Answers
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by Booldawg. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.
For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.
Seriously though Loftie,I suppose we were being a bit rebellious when we were young,(well,in those days it was) and then everyone we knew who had got married were divorced in the eighties,and we looked upon the whole thing as a waste of time.Now that quite a high percentage of the population don't marry and we've never bothered.No doubt we will one day if we feel we have to,(even though I think it's even more daft in our fifties),just for financial reasons when it comes to retirement.That is,unless the law changes.I'm still shy of ceremonies though so let's hope I don't vomit on the Registrar-that'd be a day to remember wouldn't it??
LOL ganesh. As long as your partner and you have drawn up a legal agreement regarding finances etc. to cover yourselves if anything should happen, then there is no need to marry. But that will take longer and be more ardous than getting married and will cost a lot.
We had, as I have said, a really low key wedding. Ours is one of the few that lasted. I like like ceremonies or fuss either and noone would have got me in a bloomin' wedding dress. I was rebellious too when I was young. I still can be!!
As long as we are hurting nobody else, we should live how we like. It's great that people can live together now without being accused of 'living in sin'!!!!
We had, as I have said, a really low key wedding. Ours is one of the few that lasted. I like like ceremonies or fuss either and noone would have got me in a bloomin' wedding dress. I was rebellious too when I was young. I still can be!!
As long as we are hurting nobody else, we should live how we like. It's great that people can live together now without being accused of 'living in sin'!!!!
Lottie,
I agree with you.
I have been to several Hetero marriages in a Registry Office,AND to two male gay Civil Partnerships in the same Registry Office.
The only difference I can see is in the wording of the ceremony.
Civil Patrnerships have the same divorce laws covering them as "marriages".
Why not just call all marriages outside of a church Civil partnerships,and leave the word marriage for the relgious services?
If Gay people want to marry in church then they need to wait until the larger relgions change their beliefs,OR get married in a Gay friendly Christian church,there are some.
I agree with you.
I have been to several Hetero marriages in a Registry Office,AND to two male gay Civil Partnerships in the same Registry Office.
The only difference I can see is in the wording of the ceremony.
Civil Patrnerships have the same divorce laws covering them as "marriages".
Why not just call all marriages outside of a church Civil partnerships,and leave the word marriage for the relgious services?
If Gay people want to marry in church then they need to wait until the larger relgions change their beliefs,OR get married in a Gay friendly Christian church,there are some.
Yes LL,we got a bit of that and 'when are you gonna make an honest woman of her?'too.a very sexist remark don't you think?.
What I really find 'sinful' are guys that get married,supposedly making THE committment,are totally unfaithful,have a couple of kids meantime and then bugger off(a la Jeremy Kyle chavs!)
What I really find 'sinful' are guys that get married,supposedly making THE committment,are totally unfaithful,have a couple of kids meantime and then bugger off(a la Jeremy Kyle chavs!)
It'd be a lot easier if instead of government interfering with how folk choose to live their lives, there was a box on the tax form to nominate a "partner", regardless of what relationship you had with them. And whoever is nominated, spouse, friend, sibling, great aunt twice removed, stranger, they become the designated legal "special" individual.
Recently two straifht guys near me entered into a Civil Partnership.
Why you may say.
Well, they have never been married,had relationships with ladies but not long ones,and had no children.
They are both very comfortably off.
They have dispersed family who they don't get on with (either of them) and do not want to leave their money to them,or to charity.
So by becoming Civil Partners their wills are practically guaranteed to be carried out,that is leaving their money to each other.
It's odd really,they are like a gay couple,except they don't live together or have sex with each other.
It's one way of making sure where your money goes,I hope?
Why you may say.
Well, they have never been married,had relationships with ladies but not long ones,and had no children.
They are both very comfortably off.
They have dispersed family who they don't get on with (either of them) and do not want to leave their money to them,or to charity.
So by becoming Civil Partners their wills are practically guaranteed to be carried out,that is leaving their money to each other.
It's odd really,they are like a gay couple,except they don't live together or have sex with each other.
It's one way of making sure where your money goes,I hope?
