andrewducker: (Default)
andrewducker ([personal profile] andrewducker) wrote2018-10-02 12:00 pm

Interesting Links for 02-10-2018

skington: (brain shrug)

[personal profile] skington 2018-10-02 03:16 pm (UTC)(link)
When France introduced civil unions, they cleverly deflected the expected “this is only for gay people, and gay people are icky and bad” objection by making it open to more than just same-sex couples: e.g. elderly sisters who had never married, or whose spouses had died, and who wanted to have hospital visitation rights. And I know of some people who decided to start off with a civil union, and then move on to marriage later on, if at all, if that seemed like a good idea. So having civil unions, or civil partnerships, as a weaker but broader version of marriage makes all the sense in the world.
skington: (brain shrug)

[personal profile] skington 2018-10-02 03:49 pm (UTC)(link)
They might not be, but if they're basically the same as marriage the legislator missed a trick.
skington: (brain shrug)

[personal profile] skington 2018-10-02 04:08 pm (UTC)(link)
OK, but that only makes sense when you don't have gay marriage. Once you do, there's no point in there being another thing that's the same but has a different name.
danieldwilliam: (Default)

[personal profile] danieldwilliam 2018-10-02 04:36 pm (UTC)(link)
Which makes sense (both the French approach and the way they introduced it) but I'm not sure that there is much difference between civil partnerships and marriage in the UK.