For background info as to why some think it's not a good idea to have Gay civil marriage in the UK see posts 25 & 26.

Update Note: For those that don't believe that Civil Partnerships offer all the same rights, responsibilities & benefits as Marriage please visit your local Citizens Advice Bureau, (they can also tell you details on the very minor differences). Read this for a gay perspective on the topic: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2129479/Why-Britain-doesnt-need-gay-marriage-First-MP-civil-partnership-makes-brave-controversial-stand.html?ito=feeds-newsxml
There is an old saying - if it aint broke don't fix it. This was put up to let people know about this unnecessary change that will effect us all.
You can argue till the cows come home, about how bad or minor the effects will be & if your an optimist you can even legitimately suggest that some of the potential problems I have stated wont ever happen. However it's no use us all moaning about negative changes that eventually happen after this bill is past!

Those that think because I oppose this, I must be anti gay, your barking up the wrong tree. See post #59 half way through no 8.
I wont be posting any more on this topic as I think Ive said all I can on it. Perhaps others may like to continue the conversation, however I prefer to get back to my Amiga. Its been interesting.


The UK government plans to introduce Gay Civil Marriage at an estimated cost of £3.7 million. There are already Civil Partnerships, which provide all the same rights & responsibilities as marriage (they are commonly called gay marriages now anyway). Media Personality Christopher Biggins & many other gay people are happy with Civil Partnerships. In the small number of countries that have introduced Gay Civil Marriage, other odd issues & further legal changes that effect everyone else happen e.g. Spain has civil marriage & Spanish birth certificates now have to read ‘Progenitor A’ and ‘Progenitor B’ instead of ‘father’ & ‘mother’!

If you live in the UK & think the current situation is satisfactory & your taxes could be better spent on other things, please sign the petition at http://c4m.org.uk/#signpetition

p.s. the consultation period ends 14th June 2012

Last edited by Tpod on 14-Apr-2012 at 12:14 AM.
Last edited by Tpod on 29-Mar-2012 at 02:15 PM.
Last edited by Tpod on 29-Mar-2012 at 02:12 PM.
Last edited by Tpod on 28-Mar-2012 at 09:43 AM.
Last edited by Tpod on 26-Mar-2012 at 07:19 PM.
Last edited by Tpod on 23-Mar-2012 at 03:46 PM.

_________________
A1200+Mediator+Voodoo3+040+130mbRAM+0S3.9
A2000+Supra28mhz+9mbRAM+OS3.2.2, CD32 & WinUAE

@Tpod

I think its a good idea, ok fair enough when you think of finances its not the best time to quote figures, but then how much do you think we pay in taxes based on LGBT court cases, maybe this may help situations which would lead to expensive court cases.

_________________
Cross-developer on Windows, OS3, OS4, Linux; Current Projects:-
Nephele Cloud App OS4
UserProfile System OS4
AmigaOneXE OS4.1.6

TaoSoftwareBlog Youtube

@TheAMIgaOne

Your obviously an optimist. Unfortunately from looking into it a little, it seems far more likely to just open up a whole new can of legal worms.

_________________
A1200+Mediator+Voodoo3+040+130mbRAM+0S3.9
A2000+Supra28mhz+9mbRAM+OS3.2.2, CD32 & WinUAE

It`s nothing really compared to what`s spent on pretty much anything else I can think of, so I don`t mind much either way. I don`t see why it warrant any more difficulty with birth certificates than for same-sex couples who adopt already?
I suppose it SOUNDS a bit weird but I`ll soon get over it like everyone else.

_________________
Fraggle

- insert profound text here -

@Frags
Well if Civil Partnerships (estimated one off administration cost alone was 19.77 million will tables of other costs in millions I cant be bothered to add up) hadn't already been paid for a few years ago, I wouldn't be that bothered about my tax going on this either. There was a good logical argument for civil partnerships but this at a time when we are over £1 trillion in debt ...

Last edited by Tpod on 23-Mar-2012 at 07:55 PM.

_________________
A1200+Mediator+Voodoo3+040+130mbRAM+0S3.9
A2000+Supra28mhz+9mbRAM+OS3.2.2, CD32 & WinUAE

@Frags

In Bradford they have spent however many millions on a fancy fountain. To me that money could be spent on other things.

I don't know if this whole petition thing sounds a little on the iffy side. If two people, regardless of sex or ethnicity, are happy and they want to make a life long commitment to each other then why not. It would be money better used than some poxy fountain.

_________________
My personal blog - CritAnime.com

Admin at Commodore Gaming Wiki

Money well spent in my opinion.

This petition is a fruitless exercise anyway as it's going to happen regardless of opposition from the conservative right.

Better to just come to terms with it!

As an aside, £3.7m is a tiny amount of money in the grand scheme of things. I run a small team with a budget of just under £1m in a programme with a budget in the hundreds of millions.

£3.7 million equates to about 6p for each man, woman and child in the UK. Hardly gong to break the bank is it.

Just think about the time you've already spent arguing the case and equate that to what you would be paid for a similar amount of time, then work out how much you've wasted in the effort.

AndyC

Last edited by AndyC on 23-Mar-2012 at 09:50 PM.

There shouldn't be anything stopping anyone getting married. As long as both people are considered adult, of sound mind and consensual. Why 3.7M? Strange figure, presumably to cover the lobbying - it costs nothing to pass something through law - the MPs and Lords are there anyway - perhaps it is an estimation of the studies and whatnot, I don't care either way. Let people do what they want. As for the church they can do what they want too, but they should realise they are going to need all the congregation they can get as numbers continue to dwindle.

_________________
Amiga A1200, 3.1 ROMs, Blizzard 1230 MKIV 64MB & FPU, 4GB DoM SSD, Workbench 3.1

@A1200
The cost of implementing it is broken down like this:
General Register Office - Reform Register Online (RON) IT system £2 million,
Local Authorities - Familiarisation costs for registrars £190,000 – £670,000
Department for Work and Pensions - Reform IT systems £1 million
HM Revenue and Customs - Reform IT systems £100,000 - £250,000
Update guidance £100,000 - £200,000
Ministry of Justice - Reform court IT system £135,000 – 165,000
Amend court forms and leaflets £38,000
Office for National Statistics - Reform IT systems for recording marriage data £150,000 - £200,000

_________________
A1200+Mediator+Voodoo3+040+130mbRAM+0S3.9
A2000+Supra28mhz+9mbRAM+OS3.2.2, CD32 & WinUAE

@Tpod

Who cares how much it costs? It's a basic civil right that should be equal and available to all.

_________________

@Tpod

Again £24m was spent on fountains! That would have covered this twice over and with plenty to spare on other projects.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-leeds-17296838

£3.7m is nothing compaired to what the country already throws away on, what can only be descirbed as, rubbish. And I am only using these fountains as an example because it's been on the national and local, I live in wakefield in west yorkshire, news. But go back through it and you will see plenty more occasions where local governments and even national government waste money pointlessly.

To me the only people who are going to argue against this is the kind of people who have some issue with same sex couples getting married.

_________________
My personal blog - CritAnime.com

Admin at Commodore Gaming Wiki

@Gleng

Well I do, even if no one else does with my petrol cost going up etc, etc. As for basic human rights, that was what I thought Civil Partnerships covered, along with every other practical aspect of Marriage. Its only a word after all.

_________________
A1200+Mediator+Voodoo3+040+130mbRAM+0S3.9
A2000+Supra28mhz+9mbRAM+OS3.2.2, CD32 & WinUAE

@CritAnime

Quote:

To me the only people who are going to argue against this is the kind of people who have some issue with same sex couples getting married.

Bingo.

_________________

@Gleng

I have an issue with paying for it!

@CritAnime
I hear what your saying. I get pretty cheesed off with my local councils bright ideas, on how to waste my money, but I wont go on about that here too!

_________________
A1200+Mediator+Voodoo3+040+130mbRAM+0S3.9
A2000+Supra28mhz+9mbRAM+OS3.2.2, CD32 & WinUAE

@Tpod

You say that civil partnerships do the same job as marriage. But you are probably not someone who is in a same sex relationship who would beg to differ. As mentioned previously, we are all equal and should be treated as such. The 3.7M you mention is therefore a fine on the taxpayer for years of bigotry and hatred against a minority as it should have been law anyway.

_________________
Amiga A1200, 3.1 ROMs, Blizzard 1230 MKIV 64MB & FPU, 4GB DoM SSD, Workbench 3.1

@Tpod

Marriage should be form of union of two partners, regardless the sexual preferences, if they are adult.

Cost of marriage implementation should go to those who marry as tax,so I don`t see how do you get this financial basis.

Definition of marriage and who is applicable has changed over time,
and having gay marriage is not a destruction to opposite sex marriage,
it just better defines (legally) existing informal gay unions.

People that go against such basic human rights to pursue happiness,
should think how would their lives be if they were deprived of the same right.

_________________
Future Acube and MOS supporter, fi di good, nothing fi di unprofessionals. Learn it harder way!

When you hear the arguments being trotted out by the clergy in particular (CoE and RC), it's like they think they have the rights to the term "marriage" - like it's some kind of divine gift that only heterosexual couples have any right to experience.

Are they suggesting that marriage didn't exist prior to Judaism? I think not.

They also go as far to suggest that children being brought up by same sex parents will be disadvantaged, in a way that a child brought up by a single parent would not.

Totally ridiculous!

It's bigotry plain and simple - no different to arguing against civil rights for women, ethnic minorities, disabled people, transgender or otherwise.

I'm a Roman Catholic, I had a church wedding, and had all three of my children baptised. But I don't share any of the views of the church hierarchy in this and many other regards.

Thankfully we live in a society where the church has no real legislative power. Granted, there are clergy in the house of lords (which needs to come to an end) but their influence is, thankfully, on the wane.

@Tpod - can I just ask, is your opposition to this based on your religious views?

AndyC

@Tpod

Odd thread...

Ok ...their are obviously some out there whom are bothered about this nonsense but a marriage be it gay, straight, normal or whatever your care to call it or you choice is has nothing to do with anyone else and wahoos signing a petition trying to prevent others from having the same rights them are really just sad and petty...

Myself I don't believe in marriages of any sort, if you love your partner you don't need a bit of paper to prove it...

But if it's all about money, then there are countless other things that the taxpayers money is wasted on and perhaps folk should turn their attentions to those instead...

Of course if it's not about the money and it's about the disapproval of the way some folk choose to lead there lives then that's a whole different kettle of fish. myself I can't say I can understand why some people are gay but I aint gonna persecute them for being so as what they do in their personal lives has no affect on mine and more than that it's none of my business nor anyone else's...

_________________

@Franko

Quote:

Ok ...their are obviously some out there whom are bothered about this nonsense but a marriage be it gay, straight, normal or whatever your care to call it or you choice is has nothing to do with anyone else and wahoos signing a petition trying to prevent others from having the same rights them are really just sad and petty...

The point is that the government want to spend a large amount of money to force through a redefinition of marriage that very few people have asked for. A Government 'consultation' has been issued even though they have stated that they have already made up their minds about the issue. They have no political mandate to have done so! Not a single political party promised a redefinition in their manifesto before the last election! Marriage is woven into the tapestry of our national laws, traditions and culture and to redefine it would have far reaching affects that the liberal left would prefer not to think about. The stats say that countries that redefine marriage inadvertently devalue the marriage culture. If marriage can be redefined why not legalise polygamy for instance?

Guardian: Double standards as Canadian Courts reject case for polygamy

Children will be left with birth certificates with Progenitors A and B instead of mother and father;

Daily Mail: Forget mother and father in plans for gay marriage

Some equalities can't be achieved! A gay man will never be able to biologically give birth to a child. In the same logic; marriage the voluntary union for life of one man and one woman to the exclusion of all others, although open to everyone it can only be applicable if the person in question pledges a lifelong commitment to someone of the opposite sex! It really is common sense that marriage in its current form does society a great service as a cohesive glue that allows our nation's children a degree of stability (if the marriage vows are taken seriously). This argument has nothing to do with equality but is rather fuelled by an aggressive 'agenda' from a small minority of people that resent the traditional family unit and all the benefits it brings to society because they choose not to sign up to its core ideals and don't like the same sex alternative.

The petition now stands at 301,654! That's over 300,000 people that are happy with the current definition! In a democracy that should count for something! In polling; over 70% of the British public is against a redefinition;

Telegraph: 70% of public oppose gay marriage

To ignore that majority is extremely undemocratic and out of touch with the British public. We have Civil Partnerships and the attempt to redefine marriage is unwarranted. Very few homosexual couples have entered Civil Partnerships anyway.

Guardian: Civil Partnership figures

The same would be true of 'Gay Marriage' and yet would lead to a lot of litigation, needless redrafting of our laws and more erosion of our marriage culture.

Last edited by BigD on 24-Mar-2012 at 01:27 PM.

_________________
"Art challenges technology. Technology inspires the art."
John Lasseter, Co-Founder of Pixar Animation Studios

@BigD

It`s hard to believe that they`ll put `Progenitor A` and `Progenitor B` on the birth certificates. It simply wouldn`t be accurate for one thing.

I just don`t see what the big deal is at all or why one name on a marriage certificate changing gender affects the law in such a serious way?

At first glance I suppose it seems like an adopted child growing up in a same-sex marriage might have a confusing time but again, this issue exists already I think and in any case, they`d be growing up in a different world to the one we grew up in so I`m not sure it`d be an issue these days.

edit:

Furthermore, the difference between gay marriage and polygamy is that polygamy has victims - women. A woman married to a polygamous man does not get to enjoy the feeling of being the sole object of another`s affection and the man does. This is discriminatory and unfair.

They are not comparable in any way.

Last edited by Frags on 24-Mar-2012 at 03:16 PM.

_________________
Fraggle

- insert profound text here -