Referendum on Gender Equality (THREADBANS IN OP)

Also the fundamental argument of not extending the definition of family by default limits the rights of children if they're not in the required family structure.

Unless and until you can give a reason as to why so called "committed" couples wouldnt want to get married then you are just talking without saying anything.

While you are at it, go ahead and "define" durable for us. With examples to show how one can determine if a relationship is "durable" or not.

A marriage is the most durable relationship there can be. A legal process is required to break that relationship, not just a change of mind.

Another wild swing and a miss Im afraid Anna. The only one twisting anything is your good self, as usual.

If you don't want to get married, then you are against marriage (or perhaps just not in a committed relationship?) Super simple stuff.

I'm still waiting for an answer by the way, take your time.

So being more committed to my family than my friends is something that "works for me, but doesn't for others"?

Thats really the argument now?

I'm still waiting for someone to give a reason why, in a committed relationship, they would choose not to get married.

Im afraid, thats your interpretation of what it means to be against marriage. You dont have to be storming the churches and registry offices of Ireland with flaming pitch forks to be against it.

I'd love to hear your explanation for someone who is both in favour (i.e. not against) of marriage, in a committed relationship, yet chooses to not get married.

I do notice that, yet again, the reply doesnt include a single reason why someone wouldnt want to get married. Its almost a bunch of people on here arent really as committed as they want everyone to believe they are.

Prove me wrong guys, give a single valid bloody reason.

Wouldnt the solution there be for the parents to bother to get married, assuming they are not already married to someone else?

What rights of children are being denied them?

I'll give you the benefit of the doubt that you are not purposely trying to be insulting here.

But you obviously have little, if any understanding (and clearly no empathy) for those who have been through the failure of a long term relationship or divorce in this country. Divorce is expensive, and why many remain legally separated only. And many, many, people - having been through a legal separation/divorce once - don't want to go there again.

That's not to say they want to spend the rest of their lives alone. They may go on to form new LT relationships, even have second families with new partners, but don't want to marry again. So no, they're not "anti-marriage". They just don't want it for themselves.

You also obviously don't understand the law in relation to property and cohabitating couples either.

My daughter was mine from a previous relationship and my partner also had his own child from a previous relationship. I wanted to safe guard my property (which I bought as a single person) for my daughter should anything happen to me. If I had married him (or cohabitated for 5 years) it would have given him an automatic claim on my property. So, again, it's not that I am anti-marriage, I have nothing against it, but I chose to prioritise safeguarding the roof over my daughter's head and her future security, over getting married - something which he agreed with.

And most importantly, neither of us felt we needed to marry each other to prove to anyone else or the outside world that we were committed to each other. It wasn't a lack of commitment that separated us, it was a tragic accident which took him from us.

You need to expand your mind, and look beyond your own limited frame of reference. Because quite frankly, your view that couples who don't want to marry can't be as committed to each other as the relationship you are in, is ridiculous.

Noone is canpaigning to abolish marriage - your whole anti marriage/against marriage shtick makes zero sense.

They are not allowed be against marriage? I disagree with them, but calling it shtick is your problem.

You do know the world doesn't revolve around you?

I didn't mention anything about friends, don't know where that came out of.

Some people may decide not to marry because they feel it is expected of them. Far too many people are getting married for show, and because it's what people like you expect them to do.

Really, why do we need a church wedding or a civil marriage to show 2 people are committed to each other?

This is a pretty simple scenario. Imagine, I am in a long term committed relationship but I do not want to or feel that I can make a lifetime commitment to my partner. Not only would be into marriage but I would be into marriage in the strictest sense.

Ye what?

I'm not dividing anything?

You don't know where that came out of? Perhaps go read the post of mine that you quoted and replied to, where you said "that works for you".

Again lots of talking, yet no concrete example of "why not". Is it just as simple as "it a divorce is (rightly) a pain in the ass, so I wont lock myself in, just in case this relationship that I am totally committed to, doesnt pan out."?