Well done to New Zealand for getting on the right side of history!

http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/w...riage/2089857/

And Uruguay from last week as well, which I hadn't heard about

It's shameful the UK has yet to join this list of countries.

How wonderful to see Norway, Denmark, Iceland & Sweden there, too. The Nordics know how to look after their people!

Isn't it illegal not to be gay in Scandinavia?

I think at least one gay experience is mandatory for all of their citizens!

But seriously, it's great to see so many countries following suit now.

Pretty moving video:

http://www2.macleans.ca/2013/04/17/n...-sex-marriage/

That blast in Texas was terrifying

What a week it has been for the USA.

They have omitted Finland for some reason...
I thought it was legal in the UK as well, though?

So did I!!!

If I recall correctly, civil partnerships for same-sex couples are currently legal in the UK. It's illegal for a same-sex couple to get married in a church.

True equality won't be achieved until anyone can marry the person they want to marry, anywhere.

It seems to be the same in Finland - the term 'registered partnership' (rekisteröity parisuhde) is used to describe the union of a same-sex couple.

So in the UK and Finland, you can't 'marry' your same-sex partner, only enter a legal partnership. This is clearly short of the status opposite-sex marriages have, and not equal.

^ Well, I don't want to offend anyone, but to be honest it seems just a technicality, splitting hairs, only if it's not called "marriage", but you have all the same rights as heterosexual couples... What difference does a mere name/term make? And why would same-sex couples want to get married in church, when they know the church (as an institution) doesn't accept them..?

(For my part I really don't see why anyone would want to get married in church, the whole idea gives me shivers, but anyway...)

I see this argument a lot in response to equal marriage. It seems really odd to me to presume that homosexual people are by default not religious. Religion and sexual orientation are not completely correlated.

Even if the main trend is that same sex couples reject a religious doctrine that excludes them, it is definitely not the rule. Equal marriage is about giving those same-sex couples who are religious the choice to marry in their faith (even then, no religious leader or priest would be obliged to perform the marriage - they can refuse to marry anyone, not just same-sex couples).

I see it as principle over practice. In Iceland it is legal for a same-sex couple to adopt a child - the law was brought in in 2006. A grand total of ZERO same-sex couples have actually adopted a child. The law has served nobody. But the principle is there, which I think is the most important thing.

I agree with you, I also don't believe that Christian churches should be forced to let homosexual couples marry there. If homosexual marriage goes against Christianity then churches have every right to not let gay couples marry on their grounds and I don't believe the law has the right to change that. I think people's beliefs and religion should be respected just as much as one's sexual orientation.

I know a few Anglican priests who would happily perform same-sex marriages if it was legal. Believe it or not!

Absolutely, not to mention some religious organistations like the Quakers are in favour of equal marriage. And no church is going to be forced to doing anything, in fact the CoE is being actively banned from carrying out any same sex marriages.

I get the point of someone saying..."there are civil partnerships, why do you need a marriage" But this is exactly my point back.....Why should there need to be a separate partnerships for people in a loving relationship with someone of the same gender! Should it not just be equal!

I believe churches should have the individual rights to decided whether or not they choose to perform a ceremony for a same-sex couple, just like they do for a male/female couple - who they can refuse to marry on whatever grounds. In Scotland it is up to the individual ministers if they want to marry a male/female couple, and they can refuse if they wish. This should be the same for same sex couples, as there are churches, ministers and religious groups who wish to perform them.


A point that often gets put to me by a couple of people I know who are very very religious is that "Marriage" has never been redefined in this way before....I hate the term redefined! It has been redefined many many times over history, one of the major things in the UK being that it was LEGAL to rape your wife if you were married to her until the 1990's!!!!!!!!! That soon shut them up!

Someone even once said to me that "Marriage" is defined in the bible, and they didnt believe that people of other faiths like Sikh's Muslims and Hindus shouldnt be allowed to call their marriage a "marriage" in the UK as the have not done their vows in a Christian ceremony!!!! I couldn't believe this narrow-mindedness and downright disrespect to others!

Anyway....those are my thoughts! I believe that I should be able to marry the person that I love and want to spend the rest of my life with, whether that is a woman or a man, it shouldn't make any difference.

Of course not, and I didn't presume that; but there are many other religions than christianity... And call me odd then, but I for one would never want to believe in a religion that denies my right to be what I am (like christianity does for being gay)!


Seriously?! That's unbelievable!

For me marriage is first and foremost a legal contract, in a way of speaking, nothing to do with religion at all. Thus I even have some trouble to understand how a religious ceremony can make this legal contract valid, but then that's just me I guess... (And that may also be why I don't see any real difference between "marriage" and "civil partnership", they are just two terms for the same thing for me.)

This stuff in Boston is gripping

I've had BBC News on all day it's so tense!

There's been more attacks in Boston? I really need to check the news sometimes...

I've been watching CNN all day.

This guy is some kind of tactical genius- how on earth has he managed to evade police for nearly 24 hours?

It's crazy. The city is swamped with the police, FBI and the world's media.

I wouldn't be surprised if he has got some sort of help to evade capture

Good old Kiwis!

Meanwhile, the reaction in France to the possibility of gay marriage couldn't be more different : http://www.thelocal.fr/page/view/pm-...-marriage-vote

I really thought a country like France wouldn't have such a large and vocal anti-gay marriage movement. It's the sort of thing one would expect in some Eastern European countries.

Looks like they might have him!!

They've got him!