Would gay marriage undermine the exalted status of heterosexual marriage?

[Pruni]

Message withdrawn

Message withdrawn

BK, No, that is not an exclusively Christian model, by any means, but my understanding of marriage in THIS country is that it is based on the CoE, which , along with many other religious bodies, has difficulties with gay marriages, for e.g. Or marriages of divorced people. These difficulties arise out of religious belief, and that it is on this foundation that our current civil marriage is based, and from which it has evolved.

Not many people nowadays would have a problem with a civil partnership between two men, or indeed you and I BK, (well, they might, since you are already married), but instead of separating civil marriage from religious vows, our half arsed gvt has left heterosexual marriage within the old part-religious-part-civil framework, and invented a new 'certificate' system for gay people.

My solution would be to separate off the religious model (not as a lesser thing, just more 'pure', perhaps, and loud and strong for those for whom it is important), and have a new civil version available for absolutely everyone.

I hope this isn't coming across as anti-religious marriage vows - I don't feel like that at all - I just don't like the current muddle.

Oooh MI, you're so radical, arenb't you? or just downright promiscuous - shall we start the Mn free-love commune? In Utah, perhaps?

Blu, I agree with you about separating religion and marriage. Slightly off the point but interestingly, my 7.5yo ds doesn't think dp and I are a 'done deal' until we're married. We've been together for 5 years and have an 18mo dd. Now, since I'm divorced from his father and he therefore knows marriages can be undone and don't always work, I'm surprised at this and wonder where he got the idea from. Maybe I've unwittingly conveyed it somehow? I would describe myself as pretty much non conformist and yet I do want to marry dp and that surprised me when I first realised it. But I see it as a private thing between us, really so I don't know why I feel a need to have that piece of paper. Shallowly, I also want to be able to call him my husband since partner seems an inadequate word to describe what he is to me. Anyway, I'm rambling a bit but I suppose I was surprised to find that I DO want to be married and I wonder why I do. I'll think about this a bit more.

I'm part way through reading Married: a fine predicament by Anne Roiphe which talks about the state of marriage and what marriage means, it's very interesting. Anyway, I'm going way off the point, but fwiw, here are my answers to the original questions:

Do you think marriage will be devalued if gay people are allowed to marry?
Of course not! What a ridiculous idea! But I agree that it isn't much valued anyway, really. It is different to just co habiting though, not necessarily better, just different. For example, friends of mine used to say that a man who lived with someone might be fair game, whereas a married man was not. Please don't shoot me down, I don't think so, but I did understand that they were quite different propostions, so to speak.

Do you feel that the relative ease of divorce is a good thing or not? Why?
Hmm. Yes, I do. Agree that maybe it's marriage that should be made harder. Although divorce isn't that easy.

Do you think people have a rose-tinted view of marriage and are less prepared to work at it these days?
Sometimes. I think it's a good thing that we've moved on from 'you've made your bed so you've got to lie in it' attitudes. I think Suedonim makes an interesting point about our instant gratification society.

And lastly, he is vehement that studies exist showing that children from families where the parents have a marriage certificate are statistically more likely to do better than children from families where there are two unmarried parents. Have you ever heard this? I find it hard to believe.
Studies schmudies. Utter bollocks as people have said. Oh that's such a mature contribution isn't it? Sorry!

In NZ people can have a civil ceremony (anyone- gay/straight/transgender) and it gives them rights to shared property, children, be next of kin , claim life insurance etc. It's not marriage but it has the same legal rights.

I have gay friends who have been together as long as dh and I and it is just wrong that I would get to decide when to turn off dh's lifesupport machine if he was seriously injured, but my friend would not have had the same right previously.

Anyone should be able to marry, gay or straight. Religion should move with the times. After all, the peodophile priests were protected for so long, why not gay marriages?

I had a civil ceremony. Nothing to do with religion whatsoever!

I know lots of people that have only had a religious service as they didn't like the Registry Office as a venue! So I don't think having a gay marriages as civil ceremonies has any bearing on the church.

Can't understand why its such a no-no to be honest. Our marriage was a legally binding ceremony that joined us as a partnership.... what difference does it make what bits and pieces you have between your legs!

Prui - My friend is in the process of Divorcing after only a 7month marriage. She has had to wait 2 years before she could even send the papers to him! I don't think its as easy as people think.... as she couldn't prove any 'unreasonable behaviour' from her H she had to wait the full 2 yrs.

Bobbybob - That is the way it should be! We should be taking a leaf out of NZ book.

It's actually called Civil Union - I'm not sure why I wrote civil ceremony. I'm just not sure how effective they are the minute you leave NZ, say something happened to you on holiday - could you still be the next of kin?

Wouldn't bother me.

"I'm proud of the fact that my daughter isn't "legitimate" (I haven't heard that term for years!)"

Just to clarify - I used the term 'legally legitimate so as to differencitate from the socail idea of legitimacy - which i don't think anyone gives two hoots about these days anyway, do they?

After getting married I had to reregister DD. I asked the Registrar why and cycnically suggested it was just so that the Governemtn could update their figures and know how many children live in homes of married parents. The Registrar was the one who talked about 'legal' legitimacy.

ooh - can't believe I've missed this thread - and I'm at work so can't read it all properly!!

When dp and I first got together (14 years ago!) I was really pissed off we couldn't marry - wanted to for all the romantic, declaration of love etc. reasons. Now, 14 years and 2 children later I'm less desperate to trip down the aisle in a big white dress, but more aware of the need to ensure if anything happened to either of us the children would be OK (although we've made wills) and stay with the other one etc., and of then there's the tax breaks to consider! Also, ds1 is starting to ask about marriage and putting together in his head about how people get together and what it all means, so I think in the future it might be important for him - a bit more 'normality' in his and his brother's more unusual family set up. So, when it comes into play in December ( I think) I'll be thinking about it - whether she'll have me is another matter!!

Logic - I don't agree with you saying I (deliberately taking it personally, as it's one thing to make a sweeping statement, but we have to remember this impacts on people we know - friends and relations...) shouldn't be able to marry in church. OK, I'm not hugely religious, but I have my own 'faith' and to be honest dp is a complete non-believer so we'd probably end up in a town hall, but there are lots of religious gay people out there so to deny a ceremony in a church/place of worship seems a bit prejudiced and mean spiritied (not exactly Christian?!)to me...

Agree totally with Suedonim's views.
www, maybe you want to marry your dp because you have a child by him?

Yes, they are funny aren't they, Batters, my dd thought it very strange that dh and I got married after she was born - she couldn't understand why not before. I had to show her the photos of herself wearing a pretty dress and looking very happy (aged 15 months) for her to realise it was ok

dot1 - I believe that marriage from a Christian point of view is between a man and a woman. I also believe that there is far more to marriage than a tax break. If that's all you want it for, then I've made my point really.

Did dot1 say she wanted to marry purely for a tax break? I thought that was added as an afterthought/joke?

I don't see marriage as a joke either.

Do you think marriage will be devalued if gay people are allowed to marry?

No, why would it ? I think that those who get married 'just for the big party' devalue marriage much more than a couple who are genuinely in it for the long term, no matter what their gender mix.

Do you feel that the relative ease of divorce is a good thing or not? Why?

Divorce isn't 'easy'. Anyone who says it is easy has either a) never been divorced, or b) never seen a divorce up close (close friend, parent, partner).

Do you think people have a rose-tinted view of marriage and are less prepared to work at it these days?

Possibly, I think I did. Marriage is certainly much more challenging than I expected. I'm not so sure that it is a case of 'not being prepared to work at it', that seems a bit simplistic. I think it's more a case of women are now (thankfully) more independent, and so can get out of difficult or painful relationships nowadays without being held up as some sort of social pariah. Also I do think that more people do seem to get married without thinking it through properly, a bit hasty, perhaps. Sometimes there is no solid base to a marriage to 'work on'.

If we went back to the days when divorce was difficult, what do you think would be the effect on women's lives, if any?

It could be disasterous for those women in violent, abusive or controlling relationships. It would trap them (and their children). It would be a terrible thing.

And lastly, he is vehement that studies exist showing that children from families where the parents have a marriage certificate are statistically more likely to do better than children from families where there are two unmarried parents. Have you ever heard this? I find it hard to believe.

I have heard this, I've also read somewhere that the statistics of parental break-ups where the parents are not married to one another are much much higher than those of married parents. I don't know where these statistics came from and wouldn't want to comment on why that might be the case if they are accurate.

Isn't that interesting Batters? Ha ha at the idea of half the bus gasping too! Cam, yes maybe it's that except I wanted to marry him before we had dd together, I haven't had time to think more about it, maybe it's so everyone (meaning the state I suppose) recognises our union as permanent (ooh this is all dodgy, typing as I think it and that's rarely a good idea!) and that if I was in a crash he could make them switch off the life support. As it stands now he possibly wouldn't even be allowed in to see me. Romantic huh? Must think harder about this!

Hmmm... interesting - yes, one of the main reasons I'd get married would be for the tax reasons. I'm utterly confident dp and I are in this life together for the rest of our lives, so getting married wouldn't in any way 'firm up' our partnership. But another reason would be the stability of our family life - as I've said, about our ds's hopefully feeling happy and confident about their parents' relationship. Our family and friends recognise the strength and validity of our relationship as it is, so I don't think I'd get married just so they'd think "oh good, Dot and Juno are married".

If you were in a situation where you could be helped financially by doing a particular thing which involved saying some words and signing a piece of paper, wouldn't you do it? And if you legally couldn't, wouldn't it annoy you??!

(am being a bit devil's advocate here, but until you're in that situation and live it it's hard to try to understand it)

dot didn't know your partner's name was Juno, really like it, gonna put it on my 'if it's a girl' list
sorry for the hijack!

The new Civil Partnership law isn't all good for gay couples though. It means that we no longer get assessed as single people for tax credit and benefit purposes, whether or not we actually go through the ceremony. (In the same way that unmarried straight people are treated by the benefits system as 'if they were married'.) That's fair enough really--why should I qualify for a tax credit that I wouldn't get if my dp was a man. It does bring it home though that the gay people who will benefit most from this change in law are the best-off ones who already don't get benefits or tax credits, and those who will get least from it are the poorest. Not very surpising, I suppose.

why does marriage have an exhaulted status any way-i know several couple who met got married and divorced in less time than me and my dp have been together(some of them wasting 20 thousand on the 'big day' its so sad and it just makes me sick -waste of money emotion -etc
it is to easier to get divorced but maybe its just to easy to get married ! people seem to take it to lightly ... married on day divorced the next..think its just a symptom of the times

Lunachic - You must know my bestfriend! Her wedding cost her family £20k. 7 months later.... separated. They realised that the whole time they were together they talked about and planned the wedding. Once the wedding was over they had nowt in common!