Reader comments · Two years on, civil partners still face problems · PinkNews

Enter your email address to receive our daily LGBT news roundup

You're free to unsubscribe at any time.


Two years on, civil partners still face problems

Post your comment

Comments on this article are now closed.

Reader comments

  1. Robert, ex-pat Brit 6 Dec 2007, 3:03pm

    “Many gay people are confused at the correct language to use when describing civil partnerships and some are forced into revealing their sexual orientation in situations which required disclosure of marital or partnership status, according to Citizen’s Advice.”If CPs are equal to marriage as many on this website have pointed out before, then why aren’t they recognised as such and have one category….”marriage” for both married and civil partnered couples eliminating any confusion? Here in the USA in the state of New Jersey that provides civil unions for same-sex couples with all the rights and privileges of marriage, couples are also facing problems so much so that the state may be compelled to upgrade these unions to full marriage recognition. Separate but equal is never equal, just doesn’t add up.

  2. Totally agree with the comment above, seperate but equal hasnt been an acceptable legal defence for 50 odd years.The simple and correct solution to this problem is for the government to pass a law allowing marriage between any two persons and automatically uprgading all civil partnerships to marriage.And its not exactly romantic to ask someone to be your civil partner.

  3. Peter Rivendell 6 Dec 2007, 4:17pm

    The simple answer is to reject this ridiculous and discriminatory legislation. Problem solved.

  4. Robert, ex-pat Brit 6 Dec 2007, 5:45pm

    Peter, JoPaul, in Holland, Belgium, Spain, Canada and South Africa, marriage is gender neutral for both straight and gay couples, no difference, full equality, no exceptions. All of these countries had civil unions long before we in the UK ever contemplated them. The fact of the matter is, these very progressive countries realised that they were definitely not equal and had the common sense and the moral courage and conviction to do the right thing by opening marriage to everyone. That’s true democracy and full equality. If civil partnerships are supposed to be fully equal to marriage, then why not call them that? If they’re not, then they will remain what they are, a separate category or class of people who are treated somewhat differently than the majority. Separate but equal just doesn’t cut it.

  5. Of course civil partnerships aren’t equal they’re just a foot in the door, a undermining and demeaning foot in the door but a foot in the door none the less. You know Tony Blair apparently played down his religion during his election campaign because he was advised showing a religion would lose support, which is a fair statement in a democracy that is supposed to be secular, yet the government is still scared by religious bigots having temper tantrums over their precious marriage. One day the government will wake up and realise Britain is not a theocracy.

  6. Robert, ex-pat Brit 6 Dec 2007, 8:39pm

    David, the religious bigots in all the major denominations and cults think it is a theocracy, one of the major problems caused by state religion. I’m all for the abolition of state religion, its anachronistic and irrelevant in a secular democracy. Its a personal thing and a choice, its hould be kept in the home and out of the political arena altogether. Having said that, here in the States, religion is a litmust test for anyone running for office of the president. Its a rite of passage. An atheist would never stand a chance of winning any election. In a way it is a belief in nonbelief. Odd and hypocritical for a country that specifically defines in its written constitution that there is separation of church and state.

  7. here we go again…a load of people presumably NOT in civil partnerships determined to put down those of us who are and are perfectly happy about them! come on guys …robert…you and i have been through this so many times before….can anyone point out a single so called “problem” with UK civil partnerships that make them NOT equal to marriage? A single case when residency rights/inheritance rights/next of kin status or anything that is legally inherrent in “marriage” isn’t also in”civil partnerships” I don’t know about civil unions in new jersey they are obviously very different..jopaul you say it’s not very romantic to ask your boyfriend to be your “civil partner” …well unless he’s screamimgly camp ( no offence to camp men) it’s more romantic than asking him to be your wife! Robert you say people are confused about what “terminology to use” good… confusion makes people think..i refer to my civil partner as that. as my husband, as my boyfriend, lover, next of kin usually just by his name etc….where’s the problem..and yes thanks peter to “reject this ridiculous piece of legislation” as you suggest would have had my partner deported..nice to know that there are gay guys out there that want my relationship destroyed and my partner sent back to a country (the USA) where he has no desire to live….who needs homophobes? And David G, you’re right Britain isn’t a theocracy and i am an atheist so i didn’t dream of a church “wedding” or any of the church sponsored mumbo jumbo surrounding “marriage” I was happy with the local registry office and the very efficient and friendly registrar, so i don’t NEED and don’t WANT marriage, i wanted the same legal recognition for my relationship as heterosexuals have for theirs and i’ve got it……why can’t you guys accept that and stop carping on about marriage/weddings etc…is this some fixation with long white dresses and bridesmaids that you all have?

These comments are un-moderated and do not necessarily represent the views of PinkNews. If you believe that a comment is inappropriate or libellous, please contact us.