Is that supposed to be directed at me or the guy that said it?

Well, at him for saying it, and to you for posting it on a serious debates thread with a laughing smiley. It's an important and serious subject.

Yeah, I think I know that more than anyone in this thread. But I don't think finding something a comedian has said funny devalues my argument or has derailed this thread either. It's one post in seven pages. In fact, I was the only one talking to myself in here so it's hardly been a debate.

This is all a smokescreen anyway, what else is going on that they had to have this debate again?
Not that it isn't a serious issue but I can't help but suspect it's a cover for something more controversial.

It's the report stage, people are getting confused and thinking that because the bill passed last time, that's it, it's done with.

http://services.parliament.uk/bills/...uplesbill.html

I really don't know how I feel about this civil partnership amendment.

I know but why the drama, these days bills get rushed through so quick there is none of this... Especially anything to do with welfare so why is this being forced back in the public eye?

I agree that straight coples should be able to have civil partnerships if they wish.

But I think that should be a seperate issue..as it will just slow this down I think

I think I'm leaning more towards this argument too, although some are suggesting that the claims that it'll push this bill back to after the general election, and that it'll cost £4billion are 'exaggerated', so I'm not really sure what to believe. Perhaps Livia would know more on the ins and outs of this.

One thing I don't like is that this amendment has been raised by an MP who opposes same sex marriage. That's just pathetic and really does make it look like an attempt to derail this.

one thing i don't understand is hating on people's religion for not being supportive of gay marriage. surely it's hypocritical to hate on them for not believing in something?

Well well well...look who has had his say...

https://twitter.com/JohnLoughton/sta...65520138657792

:joker:

[2.] I'm obviously in favour of gay marriage but if religious institutions choose to not wed a same-sex couple, I fear that people will develop negative attitudes towards religious people, even though I hate religion in general.

there's a guy on my FB like that. He's constantly belittling and hating on religion and it's pretty harsh. fair enough if you're not religious and don't believe in it. but to hate on it because they don't agree with something you agree with...? it's just a cycle and it makes them just as bad.

I agree but I was guilty of this as recently as last year LOL. I'm sure there are plenty of religious people out there who are not homophobic but simply don't condone practicing homosexuality..but the fact that the Bible and all are constantly making out that natural tendencies are tantamount to murder is why I really don't like organised religion.

don't really see the cause for contention with that Louis CK quote... the man's a genius, and it's a small frustrated comment about how silly this all is.

They've voted in favour of clause 16 :o

I feel like I'm the only gay guy who really doesn't care about this.

Oh, clause 16 is just a review of the civil partnerships amendment I believe, but clause 10 is something else (I'm searching Twitter to find out)

THE ONLY CLAUSE I CARE ABOUT IS SANTA, hurry this along faggots

Nah, all my gay mates (and here are a lot of them) dont give a **** either.

A couple I know are planning a wedding and say even if same sex marriage is available by the time they do it, they still want a civil partnership :laugh:

Overwhelming vote against clause 10, which was Tim Loughton's proposal which would have supposedly slowed the entire bill down.

So good result.

I hope they have this review soon though, not in five years as the clause suggests.

I think the thing to remember here is that any decision will have to be passed by the House of Lords. And there's no way it will get through the H of L unscathed. The place is full of dinosaurs, many of whom are lawyers and judges.

As far as civil partnerships for heterosexual couples goes... if same sex marriage becomes law I don't see how they could deny civil partnerships to heterosexuals without it being discriminatory.

It has been a really good debate though, some MPs you just wished would sit down quickly again but they have the right to say their piece even it is coming across in a bigoted way.

Chris Bryant was impressive and for me the speaker of the debate from the parts I have watched was an MP from Newcastle upon Tyne, Catherine Mckinnell. Liked her story and how she came to decide the way she was going to as well.

Pleased Clause 10 was resoundly beaten and that clause 16 was passed with a very large vote too.