There will be a difference, the receptions after the marriage will be more fun. A must song will have to be abba’s ‘dancing queen.’
What other songs/music would you say?
We are having our CP in July, we’re leaving the Town Hall to the finale friom The Mikado “for he’s gone and married Yum-Yum”
We opened up with the Eurovision anthem and walked in to Chiara’s lovely entry from Malta in 98, The One That I Love.
Isn’t that played at every wedding anyway, along with It’s Raining Men and YMCA?
Me and my man didn’t wait for the state. We had our wedding in 1994. The end of the ceremony was marked with “Kiss” by Prince, at which point we and our congregated friends did just that. What a feeling.
I love Rifkinds bottom line which is that opposing equal marriage is simply a declaration of disguised prejudice.
This along with the Bishop of Salisbury supporting us. With Jack Straw pointing out that he did not choose to be straight and his being straight does not make him a better human than if he had been gay. With Eric Pickles saying the case for equal marriage is undeniable and Francis Maude and David Cameron supporting equal marriage. With a Daily Mail columnist strongly supporting equal marriage. With a survey stating that 61% of Christians support equal rights for LGBT people and 70% of the general population in the UK. With one of the co-founders of the Conservative Christian Fellowship supporting equal marriage.
The disguised prejudice of the Cardinal and those who oppose us will be exposed and equality will be ours.
Amazing what can happen in a week…..
We need to keep up this moment. We ALL must put our views over once the consultation process opens, because you can be sure that the bigots will be putting across their views. After 13 years with my partner, with 6 of them as my hubby in a civil partnership, we would love to have FULL civil marriage equality and call it what it is…..marriage!!!
OOps, should have typed ‘momentum’….that’s what you get for getting over-excited at my age….lol.
Rehab is a wonderful thing!
How many times have you been?
Obviously it didn’t work. Awww…..
Can everybody please ignore and not respond to the poster Poo etc. It is just promoting his mental illness and I am asking everyone to adopt a policy of ignoring individuals who are homophobic and have religous mania such as Poo and Keith etc. It’s a bit like putting a very distruptive child on the naughty step and ignoring them until they learn to behave. So Poo etc on the naughty step / chair and let’s now ignore them?
Fortunately for the church, the “argument from ‘Eeeeuw’” isn’t a reason to ban something. Otherwise we’d need to rethink that whole communion/cannibalism business.
Good article by Mr Rifkind.
Did you know that ” Poop on the P….Eeeuw” is an anagram of
Pope Pee Hugs Thou Union.
First, I hate polls regarding human rights. It is pointless and feigns a legitimacy where none exists. You don’t have two lions and a lamb put “what’s for dinner” up for a vote. 99% of the population cannot stifle the rights of the 1%, especially if the only reasoning is “ewww!”
Of course, the unsaid question is, “why are so many religious heteros so obsessed with fantasizing about Gay relationships?” You must imagine the Gay sex before you reach the “ewww”. I’m Gay and I am nowhere near as obsessed with Gay sex as they are.
Has any organized religion, at any point in history, actually done more good than harm? All they do is replace one tyranny with another. Globally, the number of people killed in wars, crusades/jihads and inquisitions alone far outnumber death by plagues. Why give the opinions of any religion, regardless of size, any serious consideration on any factual topic? We’d be idiots to even listen to them.
I see the Christian Institute are trying to spin last nights Question Time somewhat differently. They seem to conveniently forget that even Eric Pickles (who they liked recently for his comments on council prayers) said that marrying gay couples is inevitable and essential in a fair society:
Just looked at that link, and on their website, in march, 12 out 23 of their news stories were anti gay marriage stories. That is an obsession. Like I’ve said before, they should change their name to The Anti-Gay institute. They are a hate group.
Yeah, I think the Anti-Gay Institute (and liars) just about sums them up!
You will never understand the difference between equality and discrimination will you ? Your head is more cabbaged than the homoexualite Will Young. Since marriage laws are equal for all and apply to all regardless of orientation, the law discriminates on gender. This means that homosexuals and heteroexuals may not mrry the same sex.
See, equality. However, marriage being defined as between man and woman means that gender discrimination will disallow same gender marriage though the equality is still there on the grounds that the law applies equally, regardless of orientation. I hope you are able to assimililate this information though I suspect you will be more incline to be confused and call the police!
I see he’s hit the bottle again, probably upset that PN removed his offensive posts – or has another of his offensive pseudonyms been blocked?
He becomes more agitated and aggressive the more drink he has.
I used to feel pity for him, now I just laugh.
There is no getting through to your thick skull with reason. I sought to educate you regarding equality, discrimination and the fatal flaw in your perception of equality, but your brain cell is clearly busy looking for the other one!
La la moo moo fridge!
I would prefer that people do ignore me s it is my aim to state my position without disruption, religiophobia and heterophia.
Thanks in advance!
As good as I think this is, I’m wondering what is in this for Murdoch. What is it that he thinks is good about marriage equality that is making his newspapers support it.
Trying to get back in with the Tory leadership?
Preposterous conspirational anti-corporate rant.
If I ever get hitched, man or woman, the first dance will have to be to Rammstein’s “Rosenrot”. Heavy metal as the first dance? You betcha!
Will it really happen soon though? Are we in spitting distance of actually being able to get married? Damn I hope so…
What about the ‘equal rights’ of two men and a woman who love each other and want to collectively get married? I mean giving marriage equality to polygamous people won’t harm anyone will it and there’s no reason to oppose it other than bigotry.
The same is true of siblings in a relationship (whether of same or opposite sexes.) Let’s give them their marriage equality to.
I mean, it’s not going to harm anyone is it?
You have heard a call for polygamous marriage on a significant scale then, Olly?
You are aware of a number of sibling couples that want to marry?
No, thought not, strawman argument is all you are throwing.
You think a principle is only valid if it is popular? Homosxualites are in the minority and those that wish to marry are even less. By your criteria of a vague ‘significant scale’, yuu should crawl back into the woodwork and never be allowed to practice homosexualism, never mind mary.
I assume also that if the call for polygmy became significnt, you would support it???
Your morality is subjective (changeable) and not objective )constant). This thinking is dangerous to society and must be crushed. Incidentally, cannibalism was at one time significant in some lands. I assume that would have had your support?
Incest, Polygamy, Cannibalism etc etc are all illegal in this country.
Now yes, currently same sex marriage is illegal. Nonetheless gay relationships are not.
To legalise a marriage between two siblings would require two law changes. It also would require a change in morals in the UK.
There is no appetite or request or desire or morality that says incestuous relationships (of whatever type) should either be legal or taken to state licensed ceremonies of commitment.
It is a strawman argument to suggest otherwise.
Now homosexual relationships exist legally in this country. You might not like it – fine thats your (in my opinion bigoted view). The answer for you is to not have a relationship with others of the same gender. Not for you to demand that others who consensually and legally engage in committed monogamous relationships can not be treated with the same value in civil law.
Its not about same sex marriage being popular. Its about it being the right thing to do
A homosxualite said…
“You have heard a call for polygamous marriage on a significant scale then, Olly?
You are aware of a number of sibling couples that want to marry?”
No, thought not, strawman argument is all you are throwing.”
Yours is the Strawman. Olly (who is not me) asked a reasonable question which sought to determine whether the principles you champion (incorrectly called equal rights) should apply to all groups, not just homosexualites which in itself would be inequality, bigotry and phobic.
Clearly you are unable to answer a politely put and reasonable question. Why can you not answer? Bcause there is no answer by which you would not look bad! If you say polygamous should no marry, you look like a bigotted hypocrite by your own standards of ‘equality’. If you say they should be able to marry, you expose yourself as accepting of what is obviously wrong practice.
You have not produced a compelling reason why two gay men should not have a civil marriage. Nor is there a compelling reason.
he reasons are many. There is no significant call for it. The majority do not want to marry someone of the same sex. Homosexual acts are unbiblical and perverted. All children deserve a biological mother and father.and marriage arrangements should facilitate this, not proclude it.
Homosexul marriage is illegal!