RE: Same sex marriage
March 19, 2012 at 3:56 pm
(This post was last modified: March 19, 2012 at 3:57 pm by NoMoreFaith.)
(March 19, 2012 at 3:52 pm)StatCrux Wrote: I think its entirely reasonable to have a distinction in terms for two distinct types of partnership, whilst giving equal rights in law.
So you don't mind if they have a religious civil partnership in a more tolerant church then?
A while ago you were dead against it, and wanted them to be banned from having a religious ceremony in a quaker or unitarianist church.
Going back to the original question, this is the basis of the amendments under the Equality Act 2010.
Or are we cherry picking equal rights in law now. Equal.. but not too equal now!
Self-authenticating private evidence is useless, because it is indistinguishable from the illusion of it. ― Kel, Kelosophy Blog
If you’re going to watch tele, you should watch Scooby Doo. That show was so cool because every time there’s a church with a ghoul, or a ghost in a school. They looked beneath the mask and what was inside?
The f**king janitor or the dude who runs the waterslide. Throughout history every mystery. Ever solved has turned out to be. Not Magic. ― Tim Minchin, Storm
If you’re going to watch tele, you should watch Scooby Doo. That show was so cool because every time there’s a church with a ghoul, or a ghost in a school. They looked beneath the mask and what was inside?
The f**king janitor or the dude who runs the waterslide. Throughout history every mystery. Ever solved has turned out to be. Not Magic. ― Tim Minchin, Storm