Meet the Other Phone. Child-safe in minutes.

Meet the Other Phone.
Child-safe in minutes.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

To be very annoyed by this mailshot

33 replies

catgirl1976 · 12/01/2013 12:03

Have just had the worst leaflet through my door I have ever seen from "MyArea for Marriage", imploring me to write to my MP to protest about marriage becoming a genderless institution. Best claims include "Kids need a mum and dad" and "people will lose their jobs for supporting traditional marriage". Whilst I love free speech, I have never been so annoyed by my doormat.

OP posts:
Narked · 12/01/2013 15:25

Because bigoted fuckwits might refuse to do their jobs if it involves gay marriage.

catgirl1976 · 12/01/2013 15:28

I liked "people will be punished for believing in traditional marriage"

Confused
OP posts:
baremadness · 13/01/2013 12:24

Cantbelieveitsnotbutter i think your argument in itself is an interesting one. However, I hate the way that this issue is even remotly connected to religion.

I got married in a registry office. By law the marriage ceromony could have NO religious element. Marriage here is a legal and social arrangement NOT a religious one. Why are religions so involved in something that has NOTHING to do with them.

They can believe what they want but why inflict their beliefs on others?

sashh · 13/01/2013 12:34

They can believe what they want but why inflict their beliefs on others?

Because they can.

We still can't shop at 9am on a Sunday

myfirstkitchen · 13/01/2013 13:34

That would prompt me to email my mp singing the praises of gay marriage

pawpawya · 21/01/2013 08:50

baremadness "in the uk...marriage is not religious"

Completely incorrect. Religious marriage exists worldwide, wherever there are religions that engage in religious marriage ceremonies. It has nothing to do with countries.

To say someone cannot have a Catholic, Methodist, Hindu or Sikh wedding because they live in the UK is crazy. They CAN have as many religious marriages as they want- they are just not recognised by the State.

What you mean is that in the UK civil marriage exists, which is the one referred to in legislation and official paperwork. This is secular. It is a piece of man-made contract law with no necessary relation to Christian or other religious doctrine. As opposed to countries where the church and state are less separated and the only type of legally-recognised marriage is also a religious one.

The issue arises because many people combine a State (secular) and church (religious) wedding, wanting to be seen as a married couple both in the eyes of the law [to get the benefits and protections that come with legal spousal status] and in the eyes of God [to get spiritual blessing and the backing of their faith community.] It is also possible for a couple to be legally divorced but still spiritually married, if their religious organisation rejects divorce in their circumstances or in all circumstances- or legally married and spiritually never married e.g. if a couple are within the prohibited degrees of consangunity such as first cousins for faith purposes but not considered to be too closely related by the legal standards of their jurisdiction.

For the first few centuries, when Christians had no institutional power, most of their marriages were spiritual-only marriages, intended to place them in relation to one another, God and the church through sacramental means- not to gain a legal status predicated on being a married citizen of a specific country. The Roman Empire had plenty of secular ones. The distinction has tended to get lost since the age of Constantine because the Church hegemony led to either only religious marriages being available with no secular alternative in law or custom or, as currently in the UK CofE and other churches, the two being conflated in one event. Now that the legal definition is again set to differ from the one most religious people believe in, the parallel system could come back in.

baremadness · 21/01/2013 09:11

Your argument is flawed as you say "most religious people" and you fail to justify or define.

Do you mean most christians? Where is the evidence for this?

Even if most christians do believe that, and I would be very dissapointed if that were true, this no longer represents tje majority of the country.

If you mean most people of any religion the argument is flawed as any person of any faith other than christianity would have to have a civil ceremony on addition to a religious one to make the marriage legally binding in this country.

I do not think any religion should be forced to marry people outside the parameters of their beliefs. Having said that plenty of people who would not be allowed a religious partnership ARE allowed to marry in a civil ceromony. Why should this be any different for same sex couples?

And why do religious people care so much what happens between 2 people, outside of their domain, who love each other and are not hurting anyone.

birdofthenorth · 21/01/2013 09:17

Please write to your MP offering a more tolerant position. MPs are getting absolutely inundated with this crap & need to be able to quote constituents who are offended by it.

New posts on this thread. Refresh page