Auristania wrote:http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-39039146
A straight couple in Britain wanted gay marriage (civil partnership) rather than regular marriage, they lost the court case on the legal technicality that they are straight and plan to appeal.
When I first heard the news there was little difference between gay and straight marriage, therefore the couple are snow-flake hipsters who knit their own beards, "Hey look at us, we are much too progressive to have regular marriage."
The whole point of civil partnership was a halfway house until the Law allowed gays to have regular marriage and now we got Equality, civil partnerships will go obsolete.
Then I read this and changed my mind.Differences from marriage[edit]
The contracts of marriage and civil partnerships are very similar though there are some technical differences: Venereal disease is a grounds for annulment of marriage, but not civil partnership; adultery is a grounds for divorce, but not dissolution of civil union; where laws differ for wife and husband, both partners are generally treated like the husband would be. Otherwise, the rules for pensions, survivor benefits, annulment and dissolution are very similar. [17]
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Civil_partnership_in_the_United_Kingdom#Differences_from_marriage
So this couple want the difference that civil partnership was designed around the classic fabulous stereotype, the right to have multiple partners and give each other Aids. What a bunch of
Now, I say let them have their stereotypes; the sooner they give each other Aids, the better.
Emphasis mine.
