On Thursday, the House of Lords approved various orders under the Marriage (Same-Sex Couples) Act 2013 to enable same-sex marriages to take place. You can read the debate here. The Government has managed to complete the necessary administrative action ahead of schedule, with the effect that the first marriage will be able to take place on 29 March.
The ability of couples in civil partnerships to convert their partnerships into a marriage will take a little longer: the Government hopes to have the arrangements in place by the end of the year. The reasons for the delay was explained by the minister, Baroness Northover, and are rather mundane but appear unavoidable. It is necessary to change various IT systems used by the General Register Office, as well as prepare guidance and training to operational staff for making legislative changes and designing new application forms and certificates. The minister stressed that the conversion process will ensure that the rights and responsibilities of a couple in a civil partnership are protected when they convert their relationship into a marriage. The effect will be that they will be treated as if their marriage started on the date that their civil partnership was formed.
The orders were welcomed by those peers who spoke. The controversy over same-sex marriage having been resolved by the House, the administrative steps necessary to deliver on the principle encountered no opposition.
And they wonder why this current government and its predecessors are despised by the voters. As you change our relationship status to the ridiculous you expect the public majority to back it. And when they don’t you fix the figures and pretend they do. This whole scenario is a smokescreen for the underclass to take over the traditional values of this country.
Time to bring in ‘Direct Democracy.’ That way, the entire electorate will have the wherewithal to remove the will of the ‘few’ who rule over us from ever being able to impose their will on the statute books without our total agreement and consent.
I can’t wait for the next general election. It will see a much changed attitude in the nation toward our elected bunch of politically correct appointees.
Marriage equality had majority support for the population, maude. What are you complaining for? A decision is only ‘imposing’ in the view of a minority that lose. It’s a default position.
@Rodercik Gates:
How do you know the majority of the UK approved such a move? What evidence do you have? Had there been a referendum on the matter, which there should have been, then I would go along with your discontent at my comment. However, the fact you are so annoyed by my stance tells me that the fear of being found out still rates highly in the psyche of those ho pushed this through.
I don’t believe in your observation because too many people are upset by it. And many of them long term Conservatives who will not vote for that party again because of this policy, which was first floated by left wing rulers, including Harriet Harmen and colleagues. Who now are being cited for having, in some way, appeased a deviant group called PIE to obtain money for the organisation they were working with.
All this interference in the sexual practice of the population by these parties on all sides of the spectrum is suspect and calls into question how many of them are in offices of power who have these leanings? Which, if they are way above the percentage in the general population would indicate the speakers and doers on our behalf are unrepresentative of the nation as a whole.
And if one goes to the next level, you have to then to wonder why government has forced our schools to impart this intimate sexual knowledge of practices, way above the heads of the very young children involved. This policy in eduction also goes against most peoples will. Were they asked for their consent? Has the vulnerability of youngsters who come up against such practice been considered when deciding this was the way to go?
Direct Democracy is the only way the electorate has any chance of getting their voice heard. For those in power are deliberately deaf.
You may have missed an interview back in late November 2013 where Billie Jean King and Elton John two high profile gays were interviewed by Amanpour on CNN.
http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/1311/22/ampr.01.html
“AMANPOUR: You grew up in the ’50s in England. It wasn’t exactly a bastion of sort of progressive thought.
JOHN: No. I didn’t know anyone who was gay. My family or anyone, I didn’t even know until I’d worked with a gay singer (INAUDIBLE) that there might be homosexuals in the world. And I didn’t really do anything about it until 23, when I first had sex.”
I have it on good authority that the transcript was redacted by CNN as Amanpour asked Elton John when he thought that gay marriage would be legal. Elton John now allegedly said “next week”.
Here we have a clear indication of just how the gay community is controlling executive. The outcome was that a date was given for when gay marriage would be legal: 29 March 2014. This date was announced by the BBC on 10 December 2103.
What is also evident from the interview and quoted above is that sex plays an essential part in turning people into gays. It’s the first sex act that commits an individual to a lifestyle choice of being gay.
In India the Supreme Court ruled that sodomy was illegal. In the UK the Supreme Court would find it difficult to make the same judgement? However, when and if gays do marry the law will have legally castrated them. The courts might view this as prescribing physical castration if evidence of sexual activity was proven.
For female gays it could lead to a similar castration or finding a way to prevent women from masturbating. Women are prolific masturbators and this is probably why genital mutilation became established in Africa; it weakened their desire for sexual activity with men or promoted gay activity when a man had more than one wife.
Both John Major and Norman Tebbit share a birthday on 29 March. What a gay day it might turn out to be? I don’t think so!
@Daedalus:
I have to confess I didn’t follow your gist in the connection between the variety of sexual practices in paragraph 7 and on.
I did know of gay people at fifteen and of some inclination into their penchant for same sex individuals, as my uncle, a studious and very clever Edinburgh educated man was one. His leaning included young boys who were his undoing. When found out, he committed suicide as he did not want to face humiliation and degradation by exposure of his acts when one of the boys told his mother and the entire community came down on him.
But, I don’t believe it’s a choice. You make no choice in these matters. No more than one makes the choice to be a leg or bosom man or a posterior girl. You instinctively lean toward one or the other or as is sometimes seen, Roy Jenkins, et al, bisexual. In his case though bi may have been imposed on him to expand his political career as he needed a beard to cover him from his proclivity being found out.
And, my uncle was raises with five tough rugby playing brothers and one sister. All sharp, hell bent on their straight sex. Uncle Billy never had a girlfriend and no one thought it odd, since he was a book man akin to Mr Chips. Not one of the family were aware of his bent until he was found betraying his trust. It did not stop any of us loving him and wishing we could have meant enough to him to stay with us.
However, one of the reasons I’m not in favour of gay marriage is because I know a great deal more than can be written of here. As do most of our public school boys, the older ones anyway. And this has been exacerbated by seeing celebrities buy children from poverty stricken women who then place them into a bizarre lifestyle of exposure in their ongoing efforts to remain in the public eye. It is horrendous what our government has done to the innocent in these circumstances. I only hope that when they reach their majority, funds will be available for them to sue those who put them in this untenable position.
A question put by Simon Kirby on Feb 4, 2014 to the Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport, Mrs Grant:
“To ask the Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport what steps her Department is taking to promote the rights of LGBT people during the Sochi Olympic Games. [185349]”
Her reply “…Over the coming months Stonewall will be developing and working to deliver a programme of activities to Russian human rights defenders to help improve their capacity to support LGB&T people in Russia. Stonewall’s work is being made possible through support from the UK Government…”
Can the minister tell us how many government funded musicians are presently being fielded by Stonewall within the borders of the Russian Federation? Will she accept that the bill as finalised facilitates slavery and human rights abuses by married homosexuals’ because Parliament has used a narrow legal definition of adultery as something that can only happen between a man and women rather than a broader view that the notion of adultery exists to promote fidelity within marriage to the exclusion of all others?
Ref: Written Answers to Questions: Tues Feb 4, 2014 Column 163W
http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm201314/cmhansrd/cm140204/text/140204w0001.htm