To feel discriminated against because I cannot enter into a Civil Partnership because we are not Gay.

[happyclapper]

Having been married twice before and feeling it is, for me, a meaningless institution, I would like some legal form of commitment to my partner of 13yrs.
We have 2DS and I now only work part-time in order to facilitate my partners career and a stable home.
Consequently I have no pension and would be left fairly high and dry should anything happen to my partner.
This could be covered by a Will I quess but that would not help me if we simply decided to split.
I had a good job, pension scheme etc but have no chance now of returning after a 8yr abscence.
I think a civil arrangement would be perfect and can't understand why only same sex couples can enter into it.

Yanbu op. It is so difficult being a hettosexual now a days. We're always being discriminated against. oh wait we are not. Sorry yabho (highly offensive)

Interesting links. The couple in the BBC article don't want to be married because they refuse to be a part of an institution that isn't available to Gays.

Different way of addressing the discrimination point. Still doesn't force religious institutions to face their discriminatory attitudes and allow same sex couple who wish to marry in church to do so. Which is the point I'm arguing.

OP I will admit I still don't get your reluctance to call yourself a wife. How does your DP feel about being called a husband?

I don't want to be married,read Julia's link as it quite sensibly illustrates that this isn't unreasonable or uncommon, it seems 60% think both should be available for both groups and it's discrimination.

If you are revolted by holding his hand and looking into his eyes in public then I wouldnt think that either marriage or a civil partnership would be appropriate

No poster has actually put a valid point re why both groups shouldn't be able to do either.

Bogey why on earth not.

OP totally get why you don't want to be a wife. Can't imagine why anyone who can read a history book wants to.

Agree emmieg

For the past 22 years I've been in a partnership and not a marriage.That is the way dp and I wish to stay.

my point is rockpool that if the previous government had called a CP a marriage, we wouldn't be having this discussion. there would only be marriage, which could be between same-or different- sex couples.

that would be a fair situation. i don't see the pont of having the same thing known by two different names.

So you want a legal partnership that won't be recognised abroad and that can't be dissolved because of adultery?

Those were obviously two big issues in your previous marriages, I'm guessing.

pont = 'point'

Julia

can you really not? History has no relevance to my emotional and financial partnership with my husband.

But rockpool you can have essentially the same. No lovey dovey stuff.
Tbh this thread smacks of people wanting to be discriminated against.
Why not go to a bloodly solicitors and have a legal document drawn up.

That's because there is no valid reason, Rockpool. There just is none. The fact that they are separated is nothing more than bigotry, imo. Any two people should be able to have at the very least a registry office wedding/civil partnership agreement. You can perhaps say that a registry office wedding gives you this this this and this and you get this this and this if you opt for a civil partnership (I'm talking about rights and securities etc)- but both are an option for everyone.

If churches don't wish to allow it, then that's for them to argue over, but the state shouldn't involve itself in that.

So because you don't see any point that's a valid argument.People want both there should be both.

American friends of mine (heterosexual) are in civil partnerships. Guess it's like 'marriage light'

"So because you don't see any point that's a valid argument.People want both there should be both"

laws aren't made to please people. they need a purpose. what's the purpose in calling the same relationship something different?

There is no purpose to exclude eith parties from having the same,last I looked we're all human being and there is absolutely zero difference between a gay couple and a hetro one.

Ilove I wonder if you can do the civil partnership abroad ie in the US and it would still be valid over here.hmmmm interesting.

I don't get the I want to be me. A marriage doesn't turn you into somebody else, you can be married and still be an Individual.
Julia you may not understand it, but the history books have nothing to do with my marriage. Can you tell us what you are referring to when you say this?

there is absolutely zero difference between a gay couple and a hetro one.

absolutely. they should both be able to enjoy the protection of marriage .

Trip to NY, Rockpool ? (I would)

"Ilove I wonder if you can do the civil partnership abroad ie in the US and it would still be valid over here."

civil partnership is not a thing in the US. You can get married there, and it will be recognised here.

But if you have a civil partnership, AFAIK it will not be recognised there as it is a UK legal arrangement, unlike marriage.

I understood civil partnership like athing did. That it is only recognised in the country that in takes place in.