Secondly, legal rights for straight couples who are not married. Point is is that many co-habiting couples believe they have some form of legal rights due to common law marriage when in fact they dont and end up a croper. Also by creating a ‘special’ ceremony for gay couples, then it could be seen to be highlighting differences, rather than the point of equality. Why not have the same for all couples committed to each other.

Marriage is also still too often associated with religion, and hence another reason for suggestion that the civil partnership idea should be for all couples.

and Finally, do you wear hats to these dos or DM boots?

Maybe these couples are just sort of lazily committed, in that they want the perks without the responsibilities? That’s pretty much what they get… in entering into a marriage/civil partnership you do become consciously aware of your responsibilities and rights and choose to accept these – why should people end up in a situation where they have these rights and responsibilities put upon them without having made that choice?

Paula, what’s wrong with hats AND DM boots?

May seem strange and nitpicking, but I don’t want my relationship defined by the religious, and unfortunately the modern legal marriage still is. I think they should abolish marriage as a legal definition and replace it with ‘civil partnership’ open to heterosexual and homosexual couples. People who feel a religious need to be ‘married’ can do so with their religious institution but it is a private thing not offering any greater or lesser legal recognition