I posted yesterday on having to beware of the amendment on opposite sex Civil Partnerships – because the proposers are no friends of Equal Marriage – which makes me uber suspicious.
However, I have always wanted both same sex marriage and opposite sex civil partnerships.
So my task this morning is to try and get some facts. The Conservatives are not champions of ‘living together’ – they believe in marriage – and that has been their rationale for their support on same sex marriage. I am concerned as to whether there is any truth in their assertion that this will delay same sex marriage implementation.
That is the key fact to understand – what would be the actual harm (if any) that this amendment could cause?
Lynne Featherstone 
Not sure, but I think the phrase ‘beware enemies bearing gifts’ is an important one to remember today!
Also – typo in your post – ‘rationale’ not ‘rational’.
Thanks for all your hard work.
Dear Lynne
First could you please explain why the govt’s proposal to review straight CPs in 5 years time does not satisfy everyones requirements. Afterall wouldn’t it be better to see if CPs are still popular in 5 yrs time ? The consultation up to now (over a year’s worth of it and more) has been entirely on same sex marriage and now MPs suddenly ,without any consultation (apart from 1 measly question in the SSM consultation paper) and now an off the wall question on it by you, want opposite sex CPs introduced.
It’s just plainly silly to start extending this bill to straight CPs without proper costings, consultations etc etc…
The govt is right, if straight CP are suddenly opened up and the millions of couples that are currently in relationship do it then it’s going to cost a bomb , loss of inheritance tax, increased pension costs etc. I thought the UK was skint!
In addition all those so called “christian” will be even more up in arms if they think you are going to “water” down marriage even further.
It’s absolute madness to even think about it now, on the 3rd reading. Why didn’t you all think about it sooner!!!. Even the committee stage kicked it out as an amendment. WHY NOW, the morning before the vote?
Whilst I’m in favour of equal marriage for all people and civil partnerships should be available for all couples, I feel that this amendment could delay or kill the present bill.
This bill must be passed for the sake of all those who want to get married (including myself). Surely civil partnerships for ‘straight’ couples could be introduced at a later date.
For Heaven’s sake, please don’t sacrifice basic LGBT rights on the alter of Heterosexual Equality.
Sure there is a strong argument for a Relationships Bill to deal with the rights of de facto partners, and maybe also a PACS style alternative registration system allowing for freedom of contract between partners. But you’ve had 2000 years to come up with that and seemingly nobody in parliament has been sufficiently motivated to do anything about it. Not Labour during the passage of the CP Act, not the LibDem-Tory Coalition at any time up to now.
Only now, on the penultimatel day of the Bill to recognise marriage for same sex couples, do MPs suddenly develop an acute anxiety about it.
Stop getting the wind up & hold your nerve.
As to your question – what harm would it do – the answer must be presumed to be “a lot” – or Tim Loughton wouldn’t be proposing it.
Secondly, you’d get a half baked alternative to Marriage, which was only designed as a sop to LGBT people, and is not a real alternative.