Scottish government to approve same-sex marriages

[Flosshilde]

The SNP government has announced that it will introduce a bill allowing same-sex marriages, making Scotland the first UK country to introduce such legislation. From the comments made by the Deputy First Minister it would seem that although religious bodies will not be compelled to conduct same-sex marriages, individual celebrants will be able to conduct marriages in churches or other religious buildings:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-scotland-politics-18981287

Scotland's deputy first minister, Nicola Sturgeon, said: "We are committed to a Scotland that is fair and equal and that is why we intend to proceed with plans to allow same-sex marriage and religious ceremonies for civil partnerships - we believe that this is the right thing to do

She went on: "The Scottish government has already made clear that no religious body will be compelled to conduct same-sex marriages and we reiterate that today. Such protection is provided for under existing equality laws.

"However, our view is that to give certainty on protection for individual celebrants taking a different view from a religious body that does agree to conduct same-sex marriages, an amendment will be required to the UK Equality Act."

Scotland was also 3 years ahead of England in repealing section 2A/28, and introduced legislation banning smoking in the workplace ahead of England.

[Serial_Apologist]

Or am I overreacting?

[Flosshilde]

No - I thought you were being quite muted

I should add to the above that although Scotland will be the first to pass the legislation it will come into effect at about the same time as England's legislation, because of the plans to seek an ammendment to the UK Equality Act.

[amateur51]

Yay!!

Bravo Scotland!

Mind you, it was Ken Livingstone as Mayor of London who set up the first register of same-sex relationships

That was in 2001

People often forget that London is a country unto itself within the UK

[Flosshilde]

The Christian right (that's as in the political/social 'right', not as in 'right' & 'wrong' - although they are of course - wrong, that is) in Scotland (& elsewhere probably) is getting even more het up. As they can't make an argument based on logic they have tried to throw in a red herring by claiming that teachers who refuse to tell pupils about same-sex marriage will be disciplined, & trying to whip up opposition from parents. The Catholic church has also got upset at a Scottish Episcopalian who has invited Catholics who don't agree with the Church's position to worship at his church. A 'senior source' in the Catholic church is quoted as saying "This is an unprecidented attack on another Christian Church, using language which is incendiary & uncharitable". 'incendiary & uncharitable' eh?. Well, they'd know about that, wouldn't they?

[amateur51]

The Christian right (that's as in the political/social 'right', not as in 'right' & 'wrong' - although they are of course - wrong, that is) in Scotland (& elsewhere probably) is getting even more het up. As they can't make an argument based on logic they have tried to throw in a red herring by claiming that teachers who refuse to tell pupils about same-sex marriage will be disciplined, & trying to whip up opposition from parents. The Catholic church has also got upset at a Scottish Episcopalian who has invited Catholics who don't agree with the Church's position to worship at his church. A 'senior source' in the Catholic church is quoted as saying "This is an unprecidented attack on another Christian Church, using language which is incendiary & uncharitable". 'incendiary & uncharitable' eh?. Well, they'd know about that, wouldn't they?

I think they've got bragging rights on 'incendiary and uncharitable' language

[johncorrigan]

[QUOTE=Flosshilde;198542]The Catholic church has also got upset at a Scottish Episcopalian who has invited Catholics who don't agree with the Church's position to worship at his church. [QUOTE]
One of the most interesting things about this debate is a majority of Catholics won't pay a blind bit of attention to what their Church says on this matter. Most Catholics when asked don't think there's anything wrong with the Scottish Govt. proposals. So the Church is going to find itself up the same creek it did when it opposed contraception back in the 70s.

[Eine Alpensinfonie]

I singularly fail to see what the fuss is about. There are civil partnerships already, and that is marriage in all but name.
So many people nowadays would rather live together than get married. if they do eventually decide to get married, it is generally an excuse for an obscenely expensive party, usually at someone else's expense, and their lives then continue exactly as before.
or have I missed something?

[MrGongGong]

You've missed something

This is great news and well overdue and hopefully will see off the hideous bigoted cardinal once and for all

[Eine Alpensinfonie]

You've missed something

This is great news and well overdue and hopefully will see off the hideous bigoted cardinal once and for all

What have I missed?

[MrGongGong]

What have I missed?

That some people who happen to be gay would like to have the same married status as heterosexuals
personally, as a non gay person, I would have liked a civil partnership
though it's not recognised as the same in all countries which is a problem if you have children (which you can also have if you are gay as well as straight)

[ferneyhoughgeliebte]

There are civil partnerships already, and that is marriage in all but name.

Some Gay/Lesbian couples want the name, too. Some religious groups wish to deny them this. The "fuss" arises from this conflict of opinion/attitude to the name/word/institution "marriage".

So many people nowadays would rather live together than get married. if they do eventually decide to get married, it is generally an excuse for an obscenely expensive party, usually at someone else's expense, and their lives then continue exactly as before.

Not sure of the relevance of this to the present Thread, Alpie; many Gay/Lesbian couples "would rather get married rather than [just] live together". Up until now they haven't been legally allowed to. Now it looks as though, at least in Scotland, they will be able to do so.

[Eine Alpensinfonie]

I just think getting hung up on labels is rather pointless.

[Flosshilde]

I singularly fail to see what the fuss is about. There are civil partnerships already, and that is marriage in all but name.

That is the point - "marriage in all but name"

I just think getting hung up on labels is rather pointless.

Yes and no. Everybody who wishes to enter into a legal relationship (& emotional) with another person should be able to use the same term - it doesn't really matter what it is. The only reason that it was called a 'civil partnership' originally was because the churches insisted it shouldn't be called a marriage (& Blair gave in to them). The ceremony also must not contain any religious component. The ceremony of friends was held up because it was to be conducted by a friend, an ordained minister; the Registrar - who had to be present - insisted on checking the complete text, while we were all waiting for it to begin. This was degrading & not something that would happen in a civil marriage, as that may have religious components. The churches are very hung up on the label, & profess to believe that couples of the same sex being able to call the ceremony & the relationship a marriage will devalue the label.

(&, on a lighter (?) note, what do my partner & I say we are - Civily Partnered, rather than Married? Just try it, & you'll realise how daft it sounds).

The legislation in Scotland will allow same-sex marriages to take place in church (or other religious building), if the minister agrees. I think that in England it will not be allowed.

[Op. XXXIX]

I think they've got bragging rights on 'incendiary and uncharitable' language

Much like the GOP in the US. Tampa next week, general election in November. Should be a pathetic circus.