Civil partnerships to be opened to opposite sex couples

[Lottapianos]

Well I was NOT expecting to hear any good news from the Tory party conference but here we are. I know lots of us on here have been waiting and hoping for this and it's been announced today. No idea yet when it will become legally possible but it's happening.

I think this is really good news and DP and I will most definitely be taking full advantage at the earliest opportunity

'I don't get why so many naice wives don't get that other women might not want the same deal they have?'

It does seem to get some people's blood pressure right up. Funny that. Anyone who wants to become a wife rather than a civil partner will still have the option to do so. It's a gain rather than a loss

Awesome. Now we will have true marriage equality

Anyone who wants to become a wife rather than a civil partner will still have the option to do so. It's a gain rather than a loss

I mean for me it's not enough. I think that anyone should be able to nominate anyone else to be the kind of significant other who might be a beneficiary, or make life and death decisions, etc. and it should be legally easier for anyone to enter into the kinds of financial relationships that marriages ultimately are - for example, friends buying a house together should be able to be protected, etc. But it's almost as if traditional naice wives think that their sacrifice should be rewarded.

'I think that anyone should be able to nominate anyone else to be the kind of significant other who might be a beneficiary''

Completely agree with you actually. There's no reason why sexual relationships should be privileged over other kinds of committed relationships

Apologies if this has already been pointed out

The main difference is that adultery is grounds for divorce, but not for dissolution of a civil partnership. Is simply NOT TRUE.

It is one of the Unreasonable Behaviours listed as a reason to dissolve a partnership. It is termed being sexually unfaithful and isn't in a category of its own, but it is there! I have no idea where that idea came from but it keeps on coming up, as it did on the other thread abut this!

www.gov.uk/end-civil-partnership/grounds-for-ending-a-civil-partnership

I'm not a naice wife. Apart from adultery not being grounds for dissolution, I can't see any real difference between the two situations bar the historical genesis, and I can see the adultery exception as a positive and a negative thing. I have no issue with people choosing to do as they wish and I've already said that, and I'm not remotely hot under the collar.

It's great to have options, I guess, and it's right that everyone, gay and straight, is equal. But beyond that? Don't really get it.

Completely agree with you actually. There's no reason why sexual relationships should be privileged over other kinds of committed relationships

Exactly!

CuriousaboutSamphire, thanks for that, it's answered one of the negatives I thought of. So yep, there we go, all good.

Agree with the point about why romantic relationships need more specific recognition than others. Historically that's been because of research done into the idea of marriage as a stabilizing effect on society. Take marriage out of the equation, I'm not sure what the reasoning would be.

Good.
Now they just need to come up with painless vasectomy and I'll have 2 things i want.

^Can we settle on 'mostly painless'? I mean a little bit of suffering is good for the soul surely?

Can you mention a few of those reasons?
I can see that historically marriage had the taint of 'ownership', but what are the problems with it now?

I'm happily married so I'm glad others have answered your question as I don't have strong feelings against marriage.

On the other hand I had no strong feelings about getting married.

I'm being handed my arse on the other thread, possibly for being homophobic... but my argument is that many people do want a legal partnership that has no connection with the idea of marriage, women as chattels etc.

it doesn't matter if someone else thinks marriage no longer has those connotations!

There are other countries with effective 'civil partnerships' for the same reasons. Why can't the UK?

Honestly? I avoided the other thread because of the prevalence of threatened 'naice wives'.

I ignored those

I thought one of the issues with CPs over marriage was that marriage conferred greater rights than CPs did purely because certain laws and rules used the terminology of "marriage". E.g. the right for people in the military to move into "married" quarters. Have these issues been resolved now?

I appreciate that what other people prefer to do isn't really relevant, and I understand the naice wives being defensive comment a bit now another thread has been mentioned.

I'm of the opinion that if a society thinks it's a good idea to have some sort of legal recognition for stable monogamous romantic relationships, then there should be one, simple contract recognised by the state and there's an end to it.

There are already wildly different interpretations of the idea of 'marriage', what with the historical baggage, religious connotations and so forth, so I think it would be a lot less 'bureaucracatic jungle' to have a streamlined state involvement in the business and just have everything as a civil partnership. Marriage for those who see it as a sacrament or that sort of thing doesn't need to be specifically ratified by the state.

Sounds similar to the French model Floral - where everyone has to have the bog standard council ceremony for the actual legal part and then usually has some separate "wedding" on a different day whether religious or not.

I’ve a question for who are against marriage on here, hope you don’t mind.. is it so there are no labels, and you don’t become ‘just’ a wife? And so does the CP make it a more equal partnership (in the eyes of the law? Society?)

Just wondering, as me and dp plan to marry mainly to just be a legally bound couple, not to ‘show our love to the world’ if that makes sense. Hope I’ve expressed what I mean properly!

What are the benefits of CP over marriage?

Apologies I have read the previous responses, but I’m still not clear on why one would be preferred over the other.

I would have had a CP if I could. Mind you, stbxh would have probably taken it even less seriously than he did our marriage...

I understand the issues with it having a bit of a homophobic history (being introduced as a fudge because marriage wasn't allowed), but I guess it has less of a homophobic history than marriage does a misogynist one? Dunno, neither is ideal really.

Yy to florals post

MoltenLasagne, yep. I think it would solve an awful lot of the conflicts, actually. No more whining from people about redefining marriage and all that guff. No one needing to be going against their conscience by issuing 'marriage licenses' they didn't agree with. Churches free to conduct whichever ceremonies they wanted to - exclusively straight, or accomodating same sex partnerships if they want to, which many CofE churches do but can't.

I genuinely think a brave and sensible government should see it as the way forward.

What are the benefits of CP over marriage? There aren't any, nor should there be.

The idea of a French style system, where you can choose the churchiness, the marriage style or just a piece of negotiated paperwork - though I know that isn't the state of the CP, yet - could be a good legislative compromise.

I'm of the opinion that if a society thinks it's a good idea to have some sort of legal recognition for stable monogamous romantic relationships, then there should be one, simple contract recognised by the state and there's an end to it

I guess I don't privilege stable monogamous romantic relationships over others and I also recognise that 'love marriages' are a rather recent development. Marriage has for a rather longer time been a business deal and still is in many instances.

@POPholditdown I think every couple will have different reasons. For us we would like equality and security of legal and financial rights. Also we like our relationship as it is and somehow marriage feels like it would bring a whole emotional statement with it. Finally I really don't want a ceremony and all that goes with it. I know we could just get married with witnesses off the street but suspect that would go down rather badly. This way we can sign our documents, put it away in a drawer and carry on as we are