Tag Archives: Same-sex marriage

End of Adultery and more now?

2 Feb

A section of a blog from the Telegraph website  which I think is very pertinent to this issue, and adds to what I have earlier blogged:

The drafters have belatedly realised that, since there is no procreative act which defines homosexual behaviour, there can be no consummation, or non-consummation, and no adultery. These will not, therefore, be grounds for gay divorce. If your gay husband offers you no nookie, or if he avails himself of large amounts of nookie elsewhere (or both), he gives you no legal cause to divorce him.

So what they have ended up offering, strangely enough, is a law of marriage with no sexual element whatever. This has never happened before (although there have been plenty of sexless marriages). There is nothing in Mr Cameron’s new law to say that same-sex marriages must be between homosexuals. If I were a bachelor, I could marry a straight male friend just to get whatever tax advantages, travel deals and insurance discounts might be going. Incestuous marriage remains forbidden, but I don’t see why, in Mr Cameron’s vision of same-sex marriage, a mother could not marry her daughter or a sister her sister or a father his son. No sexual act is expected of them and even if – distressing thought – it did take place, it could have no genetic consequences. Why should such pairs not just agree that they fancy the married couple’s exemption from inheritance tax, and hurry down the aisle? How long before a same-sex, keep-it-in-the-family couple tries to make a fight of it, and wins a case against the British Government at the European Court of Human Rights (ECHR)?

Politics, Life and Theology

The current legislation around making gay marriage has popped out  a surprise – gay couples who are married under the new law will not be able to divorce on grounds of adultery, likewise having a gay  marriage annulled on grounds of non-consummation. Partners in same sex unions will instead have to divorce unfaithful partners on the grounds of “unreasonable behaviour”, as is currently the case with civil partnerships.

This developments seems to down to Government legal experts who failed to agree what constitutes “sex” between people of the same gender. Therefore the distinction created inequality between heterosexual and homosexual couples in the divorce courts.

Jonathan West, the head of family and marriage law at Prolegal, said: “In my view it is discriminatory. The test for discrimination is whether one section of society is treated differently from another. They are being treated differently.

It means that people in a same-sex marriages who discover that their spouse is unfaithful…

View original post 136 more words

Advertisements
Link

10 Reasons Why The Government is Wrong To Redefine Marriage

29 Jan
Houses of Parliament, London, England

Houses of Parliament, London, England (Photo credit: ** Lucky Cavey **)

 

10 Reasons Why The Government is Wrong To Redefine Marriage

 

The Marriage (Same Sex Couples) Bill has had its first reading and due for its second reading on the 5th Feb (you can follow the progress here).

 

Both the Conservative and Labour party are allowing a free vote, so this means each MPs can vote as their conscience lead them. Part of this will include listening to the voices of their constituents.

 

Therefore this is a great time to contact your MPs (again if you have done so before) and express your views on the matter. Personally, the whole legislation concerns me which is why I have signed the Coalition for Marriage’s petition. You can find out who your MPs is and how to contact them here.

 

For is now becoming clear that Christian teachers with traditional views will have no protection from dismissal if they feel unable to promote the new norms. Many implications of the legislation will only become clear after the courts have become involved, but it is most likely that the assurances being offered will not hold, at least once the European Court becomes involved.

 

End of Adultery?

27 Jan
Christ and the Woman Taken in Adultery

Christ and the Woman Taken in Adultery (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

The current legislation around making gay marriage has popped out  a surprise – gay couples who are married under the new law will not be able to divorce on grounds of adultery, likewise having a gay  marriage annulled on grounds of non-consummation. Partners in same sex unions will instead have to divorce unfaithful partners on the grounds of “unreasonable behaviour”, as is currently the case with civil partnerships.

This developments seems to down to Government legal experts who failed to agree what constitutes “sex” between people of the same gender. Therefore the distinction created inequality between heterosexual and homosexual couples in the divorce courts.

Jonathan West, the head of family and marriage law at Prolegal, said: “In my view it is discriminatory. The test for discrimination is whether one section of society is treated differently from another. They are being treated differently.

It means that people in a same-sex marriages who discover that their spouse is unfaithful to them would not be able to divorce for adultery – unless it was with someone of the opposite sex. Equally, it makes clear that straight people cannot accuse their partner of adultery if they discover they had a secret lover of the same sex. It could also ultimately lead to the abolishment of adultery in law under the basis of equality – fundamentally changing marriage law.

Some have claimed, if passed, this will open up a “Pandora’s box”. Likewise civil partnership will still be the exclusive right of gay couples, something Peter Tatchell calls, “flawed and wrong” and a “discrimination against straight couples”.

What a mess…