- Joined
- 11 Jan 2004
- Messages
- 42,758
- Reaction score
- 2,641
- Country
Same as normal marriage,, except with blow jobs, bum fun, and less arguing about who left the toilet seat up.
You can't have BJ's and anal sex in straight relationships?
Same as normal marriage,, except with blow jobs, bum fun, and less arguing about who left the toilet seat up.
You can't have BJ's and anal sex in straight relationships?
What was the point though.
No-one knows.
There are legal implications of 'marriage' which become relevant when dealing with such things as property, offspring etc. It's not just about a chintzy ceremony and a lifetime of nagging.
There are legal implications of 'marriage' which become relevant when dealing with such things as property, offspring etc. It's not just about a chintzy ceremony and a lifetime of nagging.
So why raise the issue?All legal now.
Does anyone care. I for one couldn't give a monkeys.
Why did they bother though, what was the big breakthrough????
I don't get it.
I see you're homophobic as well as racist.I wonder whether the 'wife' puff is as adept at nagging as real wives are?
There are legal implications of 'marriage' which become relevant when dealing with such things as property, offspring etc. It's not just about a chintzy ceremony and a lifetime of nagging.
Can you read LMB?
So why raise the issue?
Are you incapable of forming your own opinion, so you'll wait to gauge the groundswell of opinion, then trot along behind them because you need to be part of a gang?
Or are you just exploring for another minority group to aim your vitriolic hatred at?
Who's next in your line-up of minority groups for the attention of your inferiority complex?
There are legal implications of 'marriage' which become relevant when dealing with such things as property, offspring etc. It's not just about a chintzy ceremony and a lifetime of nagging.
Can you read LMB?
So what your saying is...The reason gay people fought for the right to a 'proper marriage' is to protect their rights when they break up????
Didn't civil marriage cover the legalities of that.???
The only thing I can put it down to is some kind of equality issue. I don't know the answer.
What about those couples that form a gay relationship after having children from a previous relationship?To use my Monty Python analogy again, will they want the right to have a baby next...?
Then why wasn't the civil partnership deemed as such, much the same as a Register Office wedding.Mebbe gay couples just want to be able to say we are 'married'. Isn't that what a civil ceremony creates in any case?
I agree.Then why wasn't the civil partnership deemed as such, much the same as a Register Office wedding.
For the same reasons straight people do I suppose.Why would gay couples want to have a pointless, unnecessary, church service?
No, of course not and I can’t think of anything more cruel or anyone who would think of doing that.What about those couples that form a gay relationship after having children from a previous relationship?
Should they give the children back perhaps?
Gay can be every bit as good or better at bringing up kids IMO.Are single parent families or widowed fathers or mothers better prepared to rear children than gay couples?
I don’t know any man/woman who’s married that says that word. They always refer to the other half, the better half”, ’er indoors the missus etc. Okay, the last two would have to change to ‘him indoors’ and ‘the mister’ perhaps, but what matters more is the actual commitment and the emotional bond between two people who love each other.Mebbe gay couples just want to be able to say we are 'married'. Isn't that what a civil ceremony creates in any case?