GarryP

Well, I don't think that same sex marriages should be allowed.

But then again, I don't think ANY marriages should be allowed; not under the current system.

We know, for an evidential fact, they are a bloody mess. Despite it supposedly being "for ever and ever amen" - in half the cases it's for a short while, till the divorce gets agreed. And then you have and acrimonious and destructive divorce proceedings where just the lawyers win, and the warzone it makes of the lives of all concerned. If marriage were a drug, it would be classified as class A, banned, and those taking it pitied for the risk they were taking with their lives. "Marriage f**ks you up".

So what's needed is to reconstitute marriage as something that can actually work, and doesn't risk destroying lives. A lot of obvious characteristics need to be changed, but the first and most important question is 'what's it for'? Half the problem comes because there are so many views on what it's to do - so competing world views clash.

One of these clashes is between the predominately religious and bigoted, saying that only their selected people should get the benefits (eg "it's ordained by god, it's obviously only between a man and a woman"), and those that think it's an expression of 'luv' (eg "showing a loving committed relationship"). Neither is a particularly convincing case for why the state should sanction something or give it tax breaks - so basically both need to be put to the side whilst people work out what it's actually for.

When they've done that, same-sex marriage, polygamy, etc. fall out as either or , depending on how they meet that purpose(s).

Personally I think there are a bunch of different types of marriage, and you'd need to be recognising that in your reformation - but I also think they are all going to have to recognise that "for ever and ever" is out, as anything other than a wish.

eddie007

Amazulu

Jeez, how were you people raised in the UK? Weren't you taught common courtesy?

I'm glad my son isn't growing up there if this is the standard of politness

I'll still need that magic word.......

eddie007

I'll say it...."please"

But you don't have to tell me your reasons... We are ALL entitled to our opinions...and don't have to justify them

TheCreature

That's what puzzles me when this subject is raised... isn't that the case already?
I'm fairly sure it was in the UK before they passed legislation allowing 'gay marriage', so I can't see what actually changed.

Somebody, somewhere, will bring legal action against a church that refuses to marry them... but I can't see the point.
Why would you want to force, via legislation, a church to perform something that they are fundamentally opposed to?
How does that make your wedding a 'happy occasion'?

moneypenny20

Well someone left their sense of humour under the pillow when they got up. I'm more of the opinion that there are some questions that don't need answering regardless of please or thank you. This is one of them. However I guess the concept of forums would die a quick death if we all followed that line of reasoning.

Amazulu

Exactly but hebi can't see that

GarryP

Apparently they aren't quite the same thing. Pension rights are different, international recognition is different (even for those countries who accept it), adultery isn't a valid reason for divorce, etc.

However I think their major issue is that civil partnership isn't allowed for hetrosexuals, and isn't marriage. Therefore on forms 'marital status' tends to give away sexuality, and in any case it isn't seen as 'same and equal', but 'less than' and 'fake' by the bigots.

paulry

A good point about lots marriages not working. I know in the months leading up to my wife and I getting married we had weekly meetings with the pastor at the church we were getting married at who dealt with what it means to be married and the depth of commitment that we are would be making to each other. He even encouraged us to change our minds before it's too late. Fortunately we didn't and we went on to exchange our vows. Almost 20 years later we are still together and going strong. Many good things indeed have been the result of my marriage - it's everything but defunct.

But of course it doesn't work for everyone. Sometimes it was a mistake from the start or people change or shit just happens. But it doesn't mean it's broke for everybody.

lesleys

I can agree to that

Alternatively keep religion out of marriage. Make it a civil ceremony in law for everyone so everyone is equal. Religious types could have their religious rites conducted as they wish afterwards. Births and deaths are primarily civil with religious options to follow. It would reinforce the fact that civil law comes first in this country.

rasen78

It's not marriage that is the problem. It is the people in the marriage. If the relationship breaks down, it is not the fault of the 'marriage', it is a problem between the two people who happened to be married. To blame marriage is rather ridiculous IMO.

It's not the marriage's fault if one half decides to have an affair nor is it the marriage's fault if one half decides they no longer love the other and want to take the other for all they can get. It is the individuals in that marriage and how they either work, or not work at that marriage who are responsible for what happens.

And not all marriages end acrimoniously. I know of several marriages that ended amicably and where both parties have become friends.

You have obviously had a very bad experience which has embittered you towards marriage (and from your previous posts, towards women). Marriage still works for many people. It's not always easy and it takes a lot of work, but it still works.

Hebe

And where did you get the opinion that hebi can't see that? I asked a question -- what was your reason for not agreeing to gay marriage. - you are the one who has made this an issue by saying that I should say please when the question didn't warrant it. I know very well when to use please and thank you but this was not one of those situations.

moneypenny20

From my pov only, your initial post to Zulu came across as quite rude and aggressive. Granted I'm sure that was not your intention and may well not have read that way to others, just that it did to me. The joys of the written word, very easy to misinterpret.

berserk

I think the only solution is to abolish the lawful recognition of all marriages.

Amazulu

Then no reason will be given

Your call turbo