This site uses cookies. By continuing, your consent is assumed. Learn more

130.4m shares

Hetrosexual civil partnerships

opinion

A s a retailer of attempts to amuse, this is going to do me no favours. In my view, it would have been funnier to vote Leave — as a piece of geopolitical slapstick, a massive Hetrosexual civil partnerships pratfall.

So my vote was not a humorous Hetrosexual civil partnerships, and therefore it was outside the remit of comedians, and straying offensively into the purview of human beings. Hetrosexual civil partnerships, I would be the last person to claim to be a human being.

And how could I possibly know for sure? Or at least, I think I have. Or at least I think I do. Here comes the opinion. Apologies in advance for all the offence caused. If God exists, that is.

Accessibility links

To my mind, a marriage is a standard contract. What a wedding means about two people, and the promises it involves them making to one another, are always broadly the same.

Across religions, cultures and an unimaginably vast expanse of "Hetrosexual civil partnerships," it has meant a very similar thing. To me, that very uniformity of intent is what gives the act of marriage, whether made in a religious or nonreligious context, its ineffable significance. There is the glorious multiplicity of contract law to accommodate all the other sorts of arrangements two or more parties might wish to make with each other.

As the law stands, same-sex couples can have civil partnerships or marriages, but heterosexual couples can only get married. I was vaguely aware of this campaign bubbling "Hetrosexual civil partnerships" in various courts and my instinctive reaction was that it was a waste of time.

It seemed like a pedantic point on which to insist on equality — like a lacklustre attempt Hetrosexual civil partnerships a sequel to the triumph for civilisation of equal marriage. I mean, I still think that equal marriage is a triumph for civilisation. A triumph and Hetrosexual civil partnerships salvation, because how can a society credibly claim that it sincerely accepts homosexuality if it excludes gay couples from the ancient institution by which two people have always proclaimed their love?

The Conversation

They want new general terms, a new off-the-shelf deal without the atavistic legacy. Just as many gay couples longed to be admitted to the "Hetrosexual civil partnerships" institution, so heterosexual ones should have a way of publicly rejecting it while, equally publicly, proclaiming their togetherness. If marriage matters, then that matters too. You can only dismiss both, or neither, as irrelevant. Topics Civil partnerships Opinion.

Access one Premium article per...

Hetrosexual civil partnerships Gay marriage Religion comment. Order by newest oldest recommendations. Show 25 25 50 All. Threads collapsed expanded unthreaded. Loading comments… Trouble loading? So what exactly are civil partnerships? Here's Those in a civil partnership benefit from the same rights as married couples in terms of tax benefits, More about Marriages same-sex marriages Divorce Heterosexual adultery.

The UK's Supreme Court decided on 27 June to make civil partnerships available for heterosexual couples as well as same-sex couples.

Same sex couples can Hetrosexual civil partnerships into a civil partnership Hetrosexual civil partnerships obtain the same legal rights as married couples, but heterosexual couples cannot have a.

MORE: Homosexuality and civilization

MORE: White label dating revenue share partnership

YOU ARE HERE:
News feed