Article

2005-12-06 Britain

Gay couples prepare to get hitched in Britain

Archived material is restricted to Rantburg regulars and members. If you need access email fred.pruitt=at=gmail.com with your nick to be added to the members list. There is no charge to join Rantburg as a member.

Posted by Fred 2005-12-06 00:00|| || Front Page|| [1 views since 2007-05-07] Top

#1 Personally I don't care what they do aa long as they don't try and force anything down my throat

Posted by Cheaderhead 2005-12-06 08:49|| 2005-12-06 08:49|| Front Page Top

#2 that was bad CH LOL

I bet Andy Sullivan dresses up in his new Manolos in celebration today!

Posted by Frank G">Frank G 2005-12-06 09:41|| 2005-12-06 09:41|| Front Page Top

#3 I bet the divorce lawyers are thrilled by this.

Posted by mmurray821 2005-12-06 10:31|| 2005-12-06 10:31|| Front Page Top

#4 Same-Sex only.

I guess some "exclusionary" laws are acceptable after all. Hypocrite bastards!

Posted by DepotGuy 2005-12-06 10:45|| 2005-12-06 10:45|| Front Page Top

#5 Next: hetero same sex marriages so everyone else can get the financial and governmental benefits previously reserved for those who propagated the species in order to continue the society.

Posted by Cravitle Elmeremp2989 2005-12-06 11:23|| 2005-12-06 11:23|| Front Page Top

#6 and I thought married people were only producing children because they wanted them and because of their numbers got some "pork".

Can you send your child round on tuesdays to do the dishes?

The answer, of course, is to set the tax system up so no group or individual is priviledged and everyone takes responsibility for their own actions (AMAP).

Posted by Bright Pebbles 2005-12-06 12:21|| 2005-12-06 12:21|| Front Page Top

#7 Next: hetero same sex marriages so everyone else can get the financial and governmental benefits previously reserved for those who propagated the species in order to continue the society.

Financial and governmental benefits to parents are *additional* to the financial and governmental benefits that all married couples share.

In most of the western world it's been a long while since lack of children (or inability to have such) was considered grounds to pronounce a marriage invalid AFAIK.

But let me ask if the complaint you voice is really the point of your objection: would you for example disagree with having these civil partnerships apply to those homosexual couples that *do* agree to either adopt children or have them via other means (artificial insemination, etc, etc)?

DepotGuy> Same-Sex only. I guess some "exclusionary" laws are acceptable after all. Hypocrite bastards!

Don't play dumb. That "civil partnerships" was established for same-sex couples, instead of simply extending "marriage" to such, was not something that the gay rights community desired. The gay rights community would very much prefer if "marriage" was applicable to both gay and straight couples.

The "separate but equal" attitude that this civil partnership law portrays is merely an improvement of the old attitude of "both separate and UNEQUAL".

Posted by Aris Katsaris 2005-12-06 19:41|| 2005-12-06 19:41|| Front Page Top

#8 troll

Posted by Red Dog 2005-12-06 19:58|| 2005-12-06 19:58|| Front Page Top

23:34 Alaska Paul
23:08 whitecollar redneck
22:50 Thotch Ebbomoque7223
22:48 Ptah
22:41 xbalanke
22:38 CrazyFool
22:36 Rafael
22:23 phil_b
22:20 JosephMendiola
22:16 remoteman
22:14 Robert Crawford
22:08 Eric Jablow
22:03 Shieldwolf
21:56 JosephMendiola
21:48 Slomogum Spavise8242
21:47 Frank G
21:45 Edward Yee
21:38 Shieldwolf
21:36 spiffo
21:36 Edward Yee
21:34 JosephMendiola
21:33 Asymmetrica Triangulation
21:32 Edward Yee
21:31 Edward Yee