Quote:

---

"Civil Partnership is a completely new legal relationship, exclusively for same-sex couples, distinct from marriage.

There are a small number of differences between civil partnership and marriage, for example,
• a civil partnership is registered when the second civil partner signs the relevant document, a civil marriage is registered when the couple exchange spoken words.
• Opposite-sex couples can opt for a religious or civil marriage ceremony as they choose, whereas formation of a civil partnership will be an exclusively civil procedure."

---

Quote:

---

MARRIAGE

To have and to hold from this day forward, for better for worse, for richer for poorer, in sickness and in health, to love and to cherish, till death us do part.

These marriage vows have been recited at church weddings since 1552, whenever two individuals have willingly pledged to enter into a relationship for life. But before the wedding service was written into the Book of Common Prayer, marriages were much more informal: couples could simply promise themselves to one another at any time or place and the spoken word was as good as the written contract.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Wulfenstar:
Like children, you must have your way and ONLY your way....

Smoking? Carrying a gun? HELL NO! Freedom of self and liberty only apply to those things WE want!

Grow up.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Wulfenstar:
Like children, you must have your way and ONLY your way....

Smoking? Carrying a gun? HELL NO! Freedom of self and liberty only apply to those things WE want!

Grow up.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Wulfenstar:
Like children, you must have your way and ONLY your way....

Smoking? Carrying a gun? HELL NO! Freedom of self and liberty only apply to those things WE want!

Grow up.

---

Quote:

---

I also believe that it is not my place to judge a person's choices.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Wulfenstar:
No, and I will explain what I meant...so that even the slowest here can understand.

So called liberals do not mind taking away the rights of people, on issues they disagree with. These include (but are not limited to) guns and smoking. As in gun and smoking bans.

I live in D.C. and get to listen about how "great" those bans are from the mouth-breathers here.

I AGAIN do not have issue with gays being together. I just don't believe it should be called "marriage"...but rather a "civil union".

Jeebus....

You don't mind curbing some rights, and boosting others...but God help anyone who either disagrees with what you are doing, or says let everyone have true liberty.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Wulfenstar:
Like children, you must have your way and ONLY your way....

Smoking? Carrying a gun? HELL NO! Freedom of self and liberty only apply to those things WE want!

Grow up.

---

Quote:

---

So called liberals do not mind taking away the rights of people, on issues they disagree with. These include (but are not limited to) guns and smoking. As in gun and smoking bans.

---

Quote:

---

I AGAIN do not have issue with gays being together. I just don't believe it should be called "marriage"...but rather a "civil union".

---

Quote:

---

Jeebus....

---

Quote:

---

ou know how they say the right to swing your fist ends at my nose? Well then, your right to smoke ends at my nose. Smoke all you want! Just don't expect me to breathe the crap that you foul the air with. AFA guns... carry one all you want.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Storymark:

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Wulfenstar:
No, its a civil union. The "marriage" part comes from whatever church you are under. Despite what might be said.

---

Now, is that your definition, or do you have backing? Looking into it a bit, I find nothing that says a court marraige is anything less than a marriage.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Khyron:
I haven't looked at too many posts in this thread, so sorry if this has been discussed already, but:

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Storymark:

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Wulfenstar:
No, its a civil union. The "marriage" part comes from whatever church you are under. Despite what might be said.

---

Now, is that your definition, or do you have backing? Looking into it a bit, I find nothing that says a court marraige is anything less than a marriage.

---

As far as I know, what Wulfenstar said isn't the way it is, but in my opinion, it's the way it should be. The only type of "marriage" sanctioned by the state should be a civil union, which can hold between any two people of whatever religion or gender or whatever (as long as they're old enough, obviously). If these two people want their union to be approved by the church as well, they can then get married in a church, but in the eyes of the state, the only thing that counts is the civil union between the two.

This way, the whole stupid and pointless gay marriage non-issue gets transported out of the political sphere and the pressure to allow gay marriage is placed on the church, which is where it should be.

------------------------------

This isn't my signature. I have to type this every time I make a post.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Wulfenstar:
This is more along the lines of what I meant. The term "marriage" is a religious one.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by citizen:

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Wulfenstar:
This is more along the lines of what I meant. The term "marriage" is a religious one.

---

Except it isn't. And even if it was, all they'd have to do is start the "non-denominational church of gay-marriage".

---

More insane ramblings by the people who brought you beeeer milkshakes!
No one can see their reflection in running water. It is only in still water that we can see.

---

Quote:

---

The term "marriage" is a religious one. While "civil union" is not.

---

Quote:

---

First, a quick review of the marriage law of England and Scotland at the time (1753) sets the case in context. The only thing necessary for a legal marriage was the free consent of both parties, as long as they were of age (twelve for girls, fourteen for boys), were not within the forbidden degrees of kinship, and were free of any other marriage. Neither the consent of parents nor the presence of witnesses were required. A marriage could be established by verbal de praesenti, that is, the statement of consent by both parties, or by verba de futuro, a promise of marriage in the future, followed by sexual intercourse. Because such things happened in private, various types of evidence came to be accepted in disputed marriage cases, such as letters in which the man wrote, or referred, to the woman as his wife, "habit and repute" (that is, the couple cohabited and were considered by their neighbors and relations to be husband and wife), and so forth.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by PonyXpressInc:

Anyway, this seems to support the idea that marriage was a civil matter before it was a religious one. Our understanding of what constitutes a marriage has already changed a lot over history, I can't see why it can't change again.

---

Quote:

---

To paraphrase Wulfenstar, because.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by SigmaNunki:
To paraphrase Wulfenstar, because.

---