Referendum on Gender Equality (THREADBANS IN OP)

Thank you for at least attempting to reply to the question I have asked.

But can you not accept that what you are describing, is a lack of commitment? Hiding it behind euphemisms like "just not for them" doesn't change what it is. If you were in a loving, trusting relationship, why would you feel that your child would somehow be less safe if something happened to you? I 100% wouldnt enter in a long term relationship, marriage or not where I didnt trust that my partner would treat my kids like their own in the event of something happening to me!

Note that I have zero problem with people not getting married. Someone already said it, but far too many people get married for all the wrong reasons and indeed have children for similar wrong reasons. But if you are not getting married, just be honest and say the reason is that you aren't sure that you are willing to work on and persevere with the relationship for ever?

I have very close experience with divorce actually, but don't blame divorce and the breakdown of the relationship on the choice to get married. You don't blame your umbrella when it rains. Divorce is rightfully a complicated and drawn out process. If it wasnt then what would be the point of entering into the legal contract of marriage? Sure there are some situations where divorce could and should be made smoother/faster. But not just becuase two people changed their minds when life got too real.

And this is where we get to the crux of the problem. By campaigning in favour of the referendum you are indeed diluting marriage, becuase you want to bestow the exact same opportunities onto unmarried couples as you do onto married ones, yet, its plain to see that those who chose to remain unmarried are doing so purely for insurance for when the relationship breaks down.

I knew I shouldn't have bothered wasting my time giving you the benefit of the doubt, as you clearly are just closed minded when it comes to anything beyond your own perspective.

BTW, I haven't campaigned for anything or told anyone how to vote, I've just given my view, based on my experience, and I will vote accordingly.

What is more important to me is that in all the years I spent raising my child as a single parent, she and I were not legally classed as a "family" in our own right.

If you feel that giving legal recognition to my family, (which is what we are) somehow dilutes your marriage and your family, then that is your hangup, not mine.

I'm out, on this subject.

So I'm closed minded because I wont roll over on marriage yet your are totally open minded because you refuse to accept my points. Seems legit alright.

For what its worth, I have zero problem with a single parent child or grandparents + child being classified as "a family". However I wouldn't include your partner or their child(ren) in your family. If you want them to be included as a single family, then get married.

I have a real problem with couples who could get married, but refuse to, yet want the same rights & recognitions as those who did make the legal commitment to each other and the family.

Fully committed, just can't promise forever. An honest person would not get married in this situation.

Some people just don't want to get married. It's as simple as that really.

Some folks don't like the idea of the pomp and ceremony of a wedding day, others may not like the religious connections or historical connections to how women were viewed as part of a marriage contract. A lot of people (including married people) see the expectations of a big wedding day here a waste of money.

There are lots of reasons people don't want to get married. It's just not important to many. I still don't see how this means those people are any less committed in their relationships?

Personally (as a married person) I see having a child with someone as far more of a commitment than marriage if you want to go down the 'acts that can never be reversed' route.

Yet you're here arguing against a referendum that would grant them that recognition.

Because "marriage".

Enough said.

It's a case of having your cake and eating it. Wanting the best of both worlds - a stable relationship but with the option to just walk out the door when it doesn't suit anymore. And they want us to give this type of arrangement equality in the constitution with the legal obligations of marriage. Won't wash.

If the cost and effort of a divorce is one of the primary drivers of not getting married then you need to accept that you are not in a committed relationship, you are dating someone.

"s an aside, anyone who enters any kind of legal contract without looking at all potential outcomes (ie in the case of marriage, divorce) is a moron. Anything can happen in life. To think your relationship is 100% set in stone forever is childish nonsense."

In that case, very few couples would get married. Very few contracts would be made in business etc. It's the nature of humans to size things up and then make the best decision they can at the time. It requires a thing called trust, which is very valuable. And the basis of any relationship whether in business, politics or personal life. Marriage is a mechanism to legally recognise that trust/ commitment which couples make for the benefit of each other and any children they have.

Being married doesn't stop anyone walking out the door.

marriages end every day

Any time I hear someone say something like 'having your cake and eating it' in this type of conversation I can't help but picture a spiteful oul lad shouting on a corner that nobody cares to listen to.

'I had to do XYZ to get these rights and I'll be damned if I let anyone else have it easier than me!'

There is a little more to it if you are married, hence the "argument" that people dont get married because divorce is hard and expensive.

Lol. the irony of you asking for a debate and yet refusing to defend your point. Watch any debate and see how often the winning side relies on "because I don't feel like it".

I'm not stamping anything, merely asking you to defend your position, but you are incapable becuase to do so would be to admit a lack of commitment.

But that's not really true actually. Currently law on cohabitants doesn't always give you to just walk out the door with no responsibility etc.

There is a redree scheme for long term cohabitants