Marriage Bill passes Commons vote - same sex marriage set to go ahead

[Cerys]

unfortunately

we all know who wouldn't be here if people didn't disagree with that.



Anyway, it better pass tbh. It's about time they took real action on this situation

[GommeInc]

Seems promising. One interesting thing I've noticed is Clause 7 refers to the Marriage Act 1949 and "death bed" marriages.

Clause 9 of the Bill is an interesting read. It means that if a couple who have entered a civil partnership can change their partnership to a marriage, and in essence remove any evidence of a civil partnership by backdating to when the partnership happened. Meaning the past can be changed to what is current, a marriage.

Clause 12 is a lovely complicated area which describes how transsexual couples have to go about with their marriages. They cannot get married until their gender is recognised which involves a lengthy process of going before a Gender Recognition Panel and being issued with a gender recognition certificate in order to get married.

Either way, an interesting read. The parts about religious bodies are interesting, presumably they cannot be taken to court over same-sex marriages but the law is never concrete and discrimination will always be on either side.

It makes you wonder what the House of Lords will think. The Lords can be a tricky bunch and may deliberate on specifics. It doesn't necessarily mean it will become law any time soon, unless for once both the Lords and the Commons share the same opinions

[Aiden]

I was acc raving over this lol... I think this is pretty cool Its not really going to affect anyone (I dont think) so there should be no trouble ahaa

[FlyingJesus]

Clause 12 is a lovely complicated area which describes how transsexual couples have to go about with their marriages. They cannot get married until their gender is recognised which involves a lengthy process of going before a Gender Recognition Panel and being issued with a gender recognition certificate in order to get married.

Yeah there's still a huge long way to go for trans rights (with regards to everything not just marriage), it's one of the most overlooked social issues in the first world and there's very little in the pipeline to improve things. What's Clause 7 then? You said it was interesting then didn't follow it on lol

[GommeInc]

Yeah there's still a huge long way to go for trans rights (with regards to everything not just marriage), it's one of the most overlooked social issues in the first world and there's very little in the pipeline to improve things. What's Clause 7 then? You said it was interesting then didn't follow it on lol

I got bored writing and thought "sod it - hit Tab and Enter and be gone with it" Basically I found it fascinating they even thought of death bed marriages when drafting the Bill - quite a lot of thought has gone into it to go into specifics. It's strange how that little mention in the Clause has made me look into how deathbed marriages work, and the answer is: very little - they cause complications and rifts with inheritance and dividing up estates etc

As for Transsexual Rights... It seems like one of those areas of law which will always be difficult to make it work right. A person has to have a gender under the law, so while the process of change is happening a marriage has to be put on hold because of the line between what makes an individual a man or a woman. It's all subjective, but that's why the Gender Recognition Panel exists, much like a jury to determine the outcome from the facts. At least there is some recognition in this law.

EDIT:

Anyone interested in the key facts of this Bill, this blog is quite interesting and worth a read: Marriage (Same Sex Couples) Bill ~ Key features
And the official Bill is here: Marriage (Same Sex Couples) Bill (HC Bill 126)

[-:Undertaker:-]

In other news, MPs have today also voted to legislate that the sky is purple, hogwarts really does exist and that water flows uphill. As far as i'm concerned along with the hundreds of thousands who back traditional marriage, there's no such thing as gay 'marriage' - and legislation can't change that. On a personal level I find the idea utterly ridiculous and not anything near worthy of what marriage is.

But you know, in a way i'm glad. Because this issue again highlights just how useless the Unconservative Party is in that you have a supposed 'right wing' Government pushing through gay marriage, and the MPs of that 'right wing party' are split down the middle. Another nail in the coffin of a party that's half full of social democrats and centre left wingers, and half fall of conservatives and neoliberals.

I know grassroots Tory activists were resigning in protest over the past few months, i've no doubt it'll now accelerate over the next few days. Indeed, I wouldn't be surprised now if party membership has gone below the 100,000 mark - and bear in mind it was at 300,000 odd in 2006.

Tbh it just shows how many MPs are homophobic.

Whats homophobia exactly? you mean a disapproval of homosexuality don't you? now that's actually a rational point of view and is widely held, and if you want to debate it with those who think that then you're going to have to come up with better reasons than "its homophobic".

[Kardan]

In other news, MPs have today also voted to legislate that the sky is purple, hogwarts really does exist and that water flows uphill. As far as i'm concerned along with the hundreds of thousands who back traditional marriage, there's no such thing as gay 'marriage' - and legislation can't change that. On a personal level I find the idea utterly ridiculous and not anything near worthy of what marriage is.

But you know, in a way i'm glad. Because this issue again highlights just how useless the Unconservative Party is in that you have a supposed 'right wing' Government pushing through gay marriage, and the MPs of that 'right wing party' are split down the middle. Another nail in the coffin of a party that's half full of social democrats and centre left wingers, and half fall of conservatives and neoliberals.

I know grassroots Tory activists were resigning in protest over the past few months, i've no doubt it'll now accelerate over the next few days. Indeed, I wouldn't be surprised now if party membership has gone below the 100,000 mark - and bear in mind it was at 300,000 odd in 2006.

I'm interested in your reasoning here, why are gay people not worthy of marriage?

[-:Undertaker:-]

I'm interested in your reasoning here, why are gay people not worthy of marriage?

Well i've explained before that i'd ideally de facto legalise gay marriage by taking the state out of marriage (and provided Equality and Discrimination Laws were revoked at the same time to make this possible) - but on a personal level and a moral level, I just don't think it's worthy of the same status as a traditional couple and a traditional family (of which marriage is based on). I don't back these proposals because I have grave concerns that it's going to lead, under European and Equality legislation, to prosecutions for the types of views I hold personally.

So before anybody assumes i'm wanting to impose my personal opinions on anybody else, not at all. But my personal view is that I disapprove of it.

[Kardan]

Well i've explained before that i'd ideally de facto legalise gay marriage by taking the state out of marriage (and provided Equality and Discrimination Laws were revoked at the same time to make this possible) - but on a personal level and a moral level, I just don't think it's worthy of the same status as a traditional couple and a traditional family (of which marriage is based on). I don't back these proposals because I have grave concerns that it's going to lead, under European and Equality legislation, to prosecutions for the types of views I hold personally.

So before anybody assumes i'm wanting to impose my personal opinions on anybody else, not at all. But my personal view is that I disapprove of it.

But traditions change, just because something was a certain way for a certain amount of time doesn't mean it shouldn't be changed. I have no issue with gay people being on an equal level as me and my partner, they should have the same rights as I do. I'm sure many years time, people will look back and think 'What was all the fuss about?', pretty much like giving women the ability to vote.

Gay people marrying will have no effect on my future marriage. I understand that some people will be against it, and it's nice to see you actually construct sentences together unlike a lot of people I have seen online

[-:Undertaker:-]

But traditions change, just because something was a certain way for a certain amount of time doesn't mean it shouldn't be changed. I have no issue with gay people being on an equal level as me and my partner, they should have the same rights as I do. I'm sure many years time, people will look back and think 'What was all the fuss about?', pretty much like giving women the ability to vote.

Gay people marrying will have no effect on my future marriage. I understand that some people will be against it, and it's nice to see you actually construct sentences together unlike a lot of people I have seen online

Staying on the personal part, as i've stated the legal situation many times, I simply don't like this change on a personal level. I'm not at all favourable to it, and for example in my own personal life wouldn't attend a civil partnership or a gay marriage as I just don't agree with them from a moral standpoint. I accept though and have made clear, that me simply not liking something (which is the point I constantly try to get over in the gun and smoking debates) isn't a good enough reason to have it banned via legislation - so don't think i'm opposed to it on the grounds that "oh he doesn't like it".

Just clarifying the position.