• Dear Guest, Please note that adult content is not permitted on this forum. We have had our Google ads disabled at times due to some posts that were found from some time ago. Please do not post adult content and if you see any already on the forum, please report the post so that we can deal with it. Adult content is allowed in the glory hole - you will have to request permission to access it. Thanks, scara

Gay Marriage Bill

Gordinho said:
I genuinely do not know the difference between a registry office wedding and a civil partnership. Or will civil partnerships become defunct and it will just be termed a registry office wedding from now on whether you're gay, straight or Australian?
Click to expand...
The day Australians get equal rights is the day I up sticks and move to Mexico.
 
scaramanga said:
I'm not sure there is much of a difference - I would be just as happy if all non-religious weddings were known as civil ceremonies. It's the differentiation and attempting not to allow one group based on an act of chance in genetics that bothers me so much.
Click to expand...

thats the issue for me, its not about religion or homosexuality, its the base point that we have politicians in this country in the ruling party who do not believe all people should be considered equal in the eyes of the law, quite frankly that is disgraceful and it tinkles me off

if any religious groups do not want to do a gay ceremony that's fine, its their club, it's their rules, i'm solely talking about the laws of the land here
 
in this country very little since 2004, its effectively the same thing, not sure about international recognition though
 
scaramanga said:
I had a wedding, it wasn't in a church and neither was it a religious ceremony.

Why should I have more rights than a gay person? Replace the word gay with black or Irish, how does it sound then?
Click to expand...

The point I would like to make is that you don't have any more or less rights than any gay couple. The argument is quite literally semantics, you have a civil marriage and they have a civil partnership.

There is a perfectly valid argument to be made over whether the use of a separate legal term is discriminatory, but I don't doubt most gay couples in civil partnerships happily refer to themselves as 'married'.

If the argument really was over the rights of couples then I would agree with it, but I don't really think it is. It's about a word, which is why I find the debate a bit meaningless.
 
Richie said:
The point I would like to make is that you don't have any more or less rights than any gay couple. The argument is quite literally semantics, you have a civil marriage and they have a civil partnership.

There is a perfectly valid argument to be made over whether the use of a separate legal term is discriminatory, but I don't doubt most gay couples in civil partnerships happily refer to themselves as 'married'.

If the argument really was over the rights of couples then I would agree with it, but I don't really think it is. It's about a word, which is why I find the debate a bit meaningless.
Click to expand...

To extend that a little further, surely riding on a bus is riding on a bus. Why should some people get upset whether they have to sit at the back or the front?
 
i was gonna bring Rosa into this as well

different labels for the same thing, bit like wearing either a party badge or a armband, whats the difference?
 
scaramanga said:
To extend that a little further, surely riding on a bus is riding on a bus. Why should some people get upset whether they have to sit at the back or the front?
Click to expand...

I don't agree with the correlation. Clearly Rosa Parks didn't have the same rights of bus travel as a white person did, as she could only sit on certain seats.

The correct analogy with bus travel IMO would be black and white people both having equal right to travel, can sit wherever they want etc... just as we have now, except white people buy a 'ticket' for travel and black people buy a 'permit'. They both give the passenger the exact same rights of tavel, neither has any more or less than the other, but they have two different names.

Now I'm not defending such action, and there is a perfectly valid argument against it, but it is simply semantics.

Sent from my HTC Desire S using Fapatalk 2
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back