Originally Posted by Faust:
“Well let's examine that one a bit more closely. Until gay marriage was legalised gay couples could have a civil partnership. That entitled those that choose to go down this route, tax breaks amongst other things and if one of them died, the ability to pass on the others pension rights i.e. similar to a widows pension.
None of those rights and tax breaks are open to a heterosexual couple who simply decide to co-habit rather than choosing to get married, no matter how long they stay together.
I would say that isn't equality for the gay community that's superiority.”
Superiority? Civil partnership was offered as an
inferior fob off option when gay couples weren't allowed the
equality of marriage. Those couples now have to pay again for the
privilege of having their civil partnership converted into a marriage. Couples with a civil partnership are not simply cohabiting, they've made a legally registered commitment to each other. What commitment have cohabiting couples made? It's entirely their own responsibility to make a commitment and legal provision for each other if that's what they want.
Government policy made the option unavailable to heterosexual couples
because they've always been allowed to marry. Understand yet?
Originally Posted by Faust:
“No not at all. I was implying that they may exert an undue amount of influence as opposed to other minority groups, by the very fact they have superior numbers at the seat of power.”
Do tell, what influence do you fear? "Turning" people gay?
Originally Posted by Andrew1954:
“Dear Marge, I had some icecream yesterday. Does this make me gay? It was homemade by my (female) partner. Does this mean she's a lesbian? Worried of Walls End.”
Dear Andrew, stay calm, lock yourself in the lav and ring the police.....
(Take some ice cream, they may be a while)