If you need urgent support, call 999 or go to your nearest A&E. To contact our Crisis Messenger (open 24/7) text THEMIX to 85258.
Take a look around and enjoy reading the discussions. If you'd like to join in, it's really easy to register and then you'll be able to post. If you'd like to learn what this place is all about, head here.
Comments
Why does it matter to so many married people anyway? Jeaolousy? Fears that a change might "undermind the institution of marriage"?
Well marriage quite obviously is undermined if you allow other people to have the same rights as a married couple but call it something else. If there is some kind of dual route to getting the recognition marriage brings the status of marriage itself is devalued.
I support same sex partnerships and I do not believe they undermine marriage in any way, since the definition of marriage excludes same sex couples – and without same sex partnerships same sex couples could not receive the rights a heterosexual couple can achieve through marriage, same sex partnerships end the previous inequality. But there's no need to extend that to heterosexual couples unless you want to remove the status of marriage altogether.
Marriage can be in a civil context as well as through the church, synagogue, mosque, etc. A secularist rejecting marriage and demanding something else with the same name because of the religious connotations of marriage is pretty much equivalent to some idiot demanding the renaming of Christmas because of the religious background of Christmas. (The annual spectacle of dozy left wing councillors trying to rebrand Christmas as Winterfest, ban Christmas trees and secularise Nativity plays and the subsequent tabloid outrage is mildly entertaining however).
I'm not. I'm not holding a gun to your head saying that you have to get married.
All marriage is is the signing of a legal document conveying certain inheritance tax rights and next of kin rights to your spouse. If you make it more then that's your choice- I did- but when it boils down to it the legal status of my marriage is nothing more than a slip of green paper saying that GWST is my spouse and I want her to have rights on my property.
What do co-habitees want? The right to sign a bit of green paper saying that their spouse has next of kin rights, and has right to their property should they split? They already have that opportunity.
There should be no default assumption of rights in this matter. If I do not want my girlfriend to be my next of kin I should not have to opt out of her being so. If I do not want my girlfriend to have rights on my house I should not be forced to give her them. If I don't want her to have my pension why should I have to go out of my way to make sure she doesn't get it?
If you want to keep your spouse protected you either sign a document giving her those legal rights, or you don't. You either draw up a will or sign a bit of green paper to give her those rights.
I'm not preventing anyone from doing that.
Oh, and by the way, to get married you don't need to change your name or wear a ring. Changing your name is an option should you wish to do so, but you can carry on with your maiden name if you want. You don't even need to tell anyone you're married if you don't want to.
How is it "unjust and discriminatory", when it is your choice?
I'm not. You can get married or not, it really depends on your personal choice.
When making that choice, like with any choice, you have to weigh up the pros and cons. The pro is, well I'm not sure what benefit there is in not getting married to your partner, the con is that you don't have automatic next of kin rights. It's you choice, feel free to make it.
1. You want the same rights, the declare a legal connection. It's what confirms those rights on your partner.
2. Who said you must wear a ring and change your name?
Just out of interest, what is so wrong with marriage anyway?
My partner and I and countless others should have the same rights the rest enjoys, and we should not have to get married to do so.
Simple as.
Yes you should because you are removing the rights of your parents to be next of kin, legally. Therefore you should legally declare that someone else has those rights.
But I wasn't born with those rights, I made a legal declaration.
You might as well complain that you aren't allowed to drive because you haven't passed a test, or that you don't have a degree because you haven't done the course, or that you cannot vote in the US because you aren't a citizen.
Personal experiences and historical conjecture aside, what is wrong with making an official declaration of your relationship in return for the rights you are demanding?
I can see where you started from and you are right, the sentiment behind marriage has changed hugely and rightly, which is why I am surprised about that last comment.
But it is your choice, and as I have said there are pros and cons to that choice.
Question you might want to ask yourself. Was it the legal attributes of marriage which cause the problem, or the relationship bewteen individuals?
If it was the legal aspect, then how would that change if those people had the same rights, without the "marriage" part?
Oh, I do, hence the question.
But you have to accept that you are making a choice.
But they aren't. What they are saying is that you can chose to bestow rights on your partner. It seems to me that the problem here is a word, it's because it's called "marriage", rather than "partnership", which is in fact all it is.
By getting married I'd be doing something I don't want to do and don't believe in. The law must change.
All it needs is a simple declaration to be registered to prove it is so and then all parties are happy. why be intentionally difficult and refuse to, just because you dont like marriage or the idea of signing something? It isnt even to do with marriage, it would just be a document for records.
As an example of the disparity of the current situation someone could get married and not live a single day of their lives under the same roof, with the husband living with someone else but coming round every weekend to beat up his wife for a laugh for 30 years, and at the end when one dies the other inherits anything.
And next door to the wife lives a devoted couple who have loved and looked after each other for 3 decades, and yet when one partner dies the other is left in the gutter.
What justice is in that?
The more I think of it, the more I see marriage as the easy way out. One easy "committment" (namely losing one day of your life attending a ceremony and saying a few vows) and you are set up for life even if you don't see your spouse ever again or if you treat them like shit.
Some "responsibility" that is. Actually marriage doesn't sound such a bad idea after all :rolleyes:
And more to the point you're completely ignoring the actual dilema of the LEGAL NECESSITY for said loving 3 decade couple to declare their feelings. No-one can prove love, what you can prove in a court of law is the validity of a legal document.
There is no injustice here. If you are "penalised" then it is through your own actions and choices.
Erm... this is what wills are for. You can will all of your posessions to anyone. Without a will then next of kin becomes an issue.
As I asked earlier, how many years is enough?
At what point should that legal distinction be made? Day One, after a month, a year? At what point should the state assume something? Why shouldn't you take responsibility for your future and that of your partner and tell them what you want?
It is our house, our pension, our (potential) children, and nobody else's. And if one of us dies, it should go entirely and fully to the other one without argument or delay.
And no, we shouldn't have to enter the instution of marriage to receive such basic fundamental human rights.
I thought you were an advocate of freedom and rights... but frankly on this issue you seem closer to 1984 and Big Brother.
Well the proposed legislation is suggesting two. I think that's a bit too long, but it's certainly better than nothing.
No, an injustice would be if you had made a legal declaration and still not been given those rights.
Joint names means no problem. If it's your pension that you would like her to get then make a will or marry her. Otherwise it goes to your next of kin because that is the parental right until you decide otherwise and declaree so in a legal format.
Not an issue. Surviving parent has certain rights...
Seriously, this is why I cannot understand your concerns about marriage. You want legal right, which is what the legal ceremony gives you. I cannot understand, because it's never been explained, exactly why it is considered an "institution".
It's legal protection. Which you want.
I do believe in rights. Which is why I am protecting your parents rights
Purely subjective though, isn't it? I mean, you can get married after a few weeks...
Well who said romance was dead?
Everything in life is subjective. Common sense can be applied though.
What if I don't want to get married?
Why should I have to get married to for me and my partner to enjoy rights that should be rightfully ours anyway?
The current situation is wrong and breathtakingly unjust.
I thought I knew very well what it was but apparently it turns out to be little more than a quick tax-saving legal formality.
What I'm most surprised about is that I've learnt this from people who are actually married.
Whatever happened to "the most important day in one's life"?
Unfortunately wills don't cover everything do they? You cannot, for instance, decree parternity rights on a will. In some cases for instance, if a man gets together with a single mother and the man raises the child as a loving parent for years and the woman then dies, the woman's mother would probably have a better legal claim to custody of the child than the man.
Or if a couple cohabitate for many years and then they split up, one partner can find themselves on the street, with no job, no house and no mainteneance whatsoever.
What do you propose to do about them???
How pitiful.
Except we can't, which is why it is necessary to go through a legal proceeding (at it's most cold) or a full blown marriage and wedding ceremony (at it's most beautiful) to make it abundantly clear what your intentions are.
What exactly is your problem? Because right now, you're talking an awful lot of complete garbage.