Let Hetero Couples Get Civilly PartneredFebruary 24, 2010December 23, 2020Mark Simpson argues in today’s London Times that heterosexuals should be allowed to have civil partnershipsClick to share on Twitter (Opens in new window)Click to share on Facebook (Opens in new window)Click to email a link to a friend (Opens in new window)MoreClick to share on WhatsApp (Opens in new window)Click to share on LinkedIn (Opens in new window)Click to share on Pinterest (Opens in new window)Click to share on Telegram (Opens in new window)Click to share on Reddit (Opens in new window)Click to share on Pocket (Opens in new window)Click to print (Opens in new window)Click to share on Tumblr (Opens in new window)RelatedTags:civil partnershipscivil unionsdivorcegay marriagePACSpre-nuptials4 thoughts on “Let Hetero Couples Get Civilly Partnered” uroskin March 2, 2010 at 5:23 am Civil unions for hets is what we have here in New Zealand. In the parliamentary debate on civil unions the then Labour deputy leader famously answered to the question what the difference was between civil union and marriage, that in a marriage you didn’t need to be civil. Mark Walsh February 26, 2010 at 12:17 am Well, Ms. Sullivan gives a new, but not so fresh meaning to the “tart “designation as she unashamedly leads a host of true believers to the alter with her drawers dragging in the mud, bare bottom wagling about, still confident of tendering a flagrantly misleading bill of goods to the not so bright contrite hearts of America. Mark S February 25, 2010 at 8:10 pm No one really wants to be made an honest woman these days. Not even Andrea S. Mark Walsh February 25, 2010 at 5:03 pm The impression I have is not that this alteration in sensability has a lot to do with gay people as such as much as it is proscribed to take the church out of these agreements. The point of that stickes me personally as having to do , as Mark suggests, with the construction of a safe distance from the sense of duty ancillary to marriage, that there be some sacred necessity for continuance regardless, of unresolved conflict. I have always felt that my parents, and many other people would have been better off themselves and provided a saner climate for children if they felt free to separate. as the situation permited. This has become a necessity with the development of womens ‘rights and individual self determination. I have no interest in the corelative option for gays in joining the religious debauchal; it only lends verity to the colision of church and state.and traps people spiritually in a contract that seems emotionally overly binding.Comments are closed.