General Chat

... for straight couples. The PM has announced that she will make them available soon. I have no opinion on the matter one way or the other, but.... they seem to me to be no different to a registry office marriage. Also, if someone already in a marriage then contracts a civil partnership with someone else, is this bigamy? Does anyone care?

Have to admit, if I ever remarried, I'd want a Civil Partnership.
Religion has no place in my life, and to have to go through a religious type of ceremony just strikes me as hypocritical.

Sir Edward Leigh - MP for Gainsborough, possibly doesn't understand what a Civil Partnership is. He said in response to the ruling:

"Mixed-sex civil partnerships to be legalised. Why not for siblings too?"


:-S :-S :-S :-S

My only comment on it is - it was wrong that it was available to same sex couples only - understandable in a way. However when those couples were then given the opportunity to actually Marry, that meant they had two choices, which was unfair. I think that’s what instigated this by the couple who fought for this change.

Nevertheless I don’t really understand the need for it.
When I first married it was in a Register Office as OH had been divorced - and I’d certainly never hankered after the white dress/church wedding. When I was widowed and was fortunate to meet someone else, we got married in the Register Office - so a Civil Ceremony each time.... just as binding in our eyes.

So what is the difference between that and a Civil Partnership?

'Sexual relations within marriage may be defined as the association of mates for the care of their offspring.

Marriage is a variable & a fluctuating institution, which has passed through almost every conceivable form & experiment in the course of its history from the primitive care of the offspring without association of mates to the modern association of mates without the production of any offspring'.

'Civil Partnerships', as mentioned in the OP, are as old as Methuselah.

There are some minor legal differences - I don't think you can use adultery as a reason for divorce in a civil partnership, and there may be some differences about annulments too.

Marriage in a church and marriage in a civil setting are both the same legally although some seem to view the latter as 'different' or 'inferior'.

I welcome this news.

Of course there is a difference between register office marriage and a civil partnership 'marriage' being the obvious one, but more importantly - equal rights in the law. Why should a couple who have been in a committed relationship for decades not have the same rights as a couple who have been 'married' for 5 minutes?
It may also be the case that the C/R couple don't have to make promises in front of witnesses - why should they? Their commitment is to each other and private, no one else.

I've always been one for loyalty and commitment but since a very young age have loathed the idea of the whole 'getting married' thing. Being 'given away' by one man to another and becoming Mrs His Name without consultation has always seemed pretty gross to me. I've seen couples go through the whole showbiz of weddings when it has been plain as day that it won't last, have rights over those in committed partnerships??? Why???

Bring it on I say and you're all...…...not invited :-D :-D

Maggie, I think the MP you mentioned is possibly referring to the fact that in a civil partnership when a partner dies, the remaining partner is able to inherit a workplace pension. I have heard mention in the past that when a person dies, why should a sibling not be allowed to be named as the beneficiary to inherit in the same way that a partner/spouse is named.

I can't recall the person who brought this up but it may well be the MP you referred to.

I can't see the need for civil partnerships for straight couples when they have the choice of a religious church wedding or a civil non-religious register office one.

Why can't the liberal trendies leave things alone!

The upcoming change in the law had nothing to do with "liberal trendies". It is the result of a very determined couple who pursued their case right up to the Supreme Court (formerly the House of Lords ) and won their case.

France has had something similar , the PACS ( Pacte civil de solidarité ), for some years. It is rather more liberal than the UK Civil partnerships and easy to promote to a full marriage should a couple so desire.

Other than direct relatives any two people can enter into a PACS.

If French experience is anything to go by the change in UK law will, over time, lead to a big decrease both in couples informally living together and registry office marriages. Around a third pf PACS are diissolved due to the couples becoming fully married.

Since the revolution all marriages in France take place in the mayor's offices (la marie). There may be a church wedding as well but it has no legal force.

Much as I dislike msn for it's 'celeb' tittle tattle...…

This may help those who don't 'get it'.

https://www.msn.com/en-gb/money/personalfinance/33-million-cohabiting-couples-to-be-offered-a-mammoth-tax-break-as-civil-partnerships-are-finally-extended-to-all/ar-BBNPMOR?li=AAnZ9Ug&ocid=mailsignout

Enjoy :-D

Thanks for putting that up, Island.

Must read more about this, maybe talk to a financial advisor. We thought we might have to get married when OHs pension became available but were lucky.

At least you don't have to have anybody else involved with a civil partnership.

When 'marriage' was discussed on a previous occasion, wasn't it mentioned that the surviving cohabitee/life partner couldn't be the informant on a DC?

I'm really please that Civil Partnership has been opened up for all, regardless of gender or gender preference. Unfortunately, it'll probably take a while before it becomes law.

Many married couples do not act civilly to each other.