BS: 'Gay marriage' question

Subject: RE: BS: 'Gay marriage' question
From: Jeri
Date: 20 Sep 12 - 04:28 PM

Wesley, I'll take one.
Popcorn, I mean.

The consummation inspector for marriages presumably would check all of them, not just the heterosexual couples.

Subject: RE: BS: 'Gay marriage' question
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 20 Sep 12 - 04:23 PM

Not strictly true GUEST - signing the register commences a potentially legal marriage - if it doesn't get consummated, it is subject to annulment, which means the court has determined that there never was a marriage.

Subject: RE: BS: 'Gay marriage' question
From: gnu
Date: 20 Sep 12 - 04:22 PM

Wesley... hahahahahaha!

Subject: RE: BS: 'Gay marriage' question
From: Wesley S
Date: 20 Sep 12 - 04:20 PM

I'll start the popcorn........

Subject: RE: BS: 'Gay marriage' question
From: GUEST
Date: 20 Sep 12 - 04:17 PM

"A marriage comes into existence when it is consummated. "

Not in British law. Nor is it putting on the ring, or saying I Do, or kissing the bride, or cutting the cake. Signing the register by both parties commences a legal marriage.

Subject: RE: BS: 'Gay marriage' question
From: gnu
Date: 20 Sep 12 - 04:10 PM

Nah... if one partner makes another come, it's all good.

Maybe not a good joke but a stab.

In actuality, "consummation" occurs when they sign the papers. When you sign the contract you are truly fucked.

Subject: RE: BS: 'Gay marriage' question
From: Jack the Sailor
Date: 20 Sep 12 - 04:06 PM

Its like that judge said about pornography. You will know it when you see it.

As for myself, I'd rather have them just sign a certificate or something saying that they have consummated rather than have them describe what they did.

Subject: RE: BS: 'Gay marriage' question
From: Ebbie
Date: 20 Sep 12 - 04:01 PM

That was Bill Clinton's defense. Kind of.

Subject: BS: 'Gay marriage' question
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 20 Sep 12 - 03:56 PM

I'd have thought one way and another this topic has been talked to death - but a letter in today's Independent newspaper (London) raises a point I haven't seen discussed anywhere before:

"A marriage comes into existence when it is consummated. How do you propose to define consummation for same-sex "marriages"? If it can't be done then failure to consummate as a ground for annulment must be removed. If that happens marriage will not be redefined and extended – it will be abolished. (S P Rouse,Ashtead, Surrey)

The point at issue being, what counts as "consummation" in the case of gay relationships, male and female? And what doesn't? And have the legislators in various places where marriage has been redefined reached a common definition?