1) the term adultery can be amended. Its a term, is open to reinterpretation to suit. "Unreasonable behaviour" is also a possible cause for divorce, this could be applied for annulment, shagging all and sundry can be construed as such in any marriage at any point in time.

2) As you wish. The point about its use in the ceremony isn't up for debate.

3) I dare say there are gays who disagree with gay marriage, same as hetero's who don't wish to marry as they dont the point either. I too have no desire to marry or become CP'd, however I don't see that as grounds to deny those that wish to marry now or in 20 years time, to marry.

4) I'd hope its a simple logic issue, not bound by ECHR therefore no threat from ECHR!!

As this is the Ukip thread, Im more interested in their opposition, so as TBT sums it up, I think this is more the position in totality....just wish they would actually say that.

Parents cannot marry their children. Nothing has changed. Tebbit - oh, sorry, "one of his colleagues" - is being a fking idiot.

I think the UK law on incest will not change, regardless of gay marriage. I can't marry my mother as it stands at the moment, I'm not sure why allowing gay marriage suddenly opens the door for me to marry my Dad (which to be fair would be marginally preferable to me for a number of reasons.)

Cameron's policy on Europe is clear? Best of luck selling that one to the electorate.

Do you actually work in Central Office?

my dear marsupial friend why do most, if not all, of your posts have to include an insult or two, veiled or otherwise..really does undermine your creditability you know

All sounds reasonably sensible then descends into blah blah be afraid blah blah be afraid of leaving the Eu but we dont want you to be afraid.

A complete nonsense. It is a leading article to lend you to believe we are better off in the EU than out with a Re negotiated agreement which we will not get. Sure they will make a few concession to make it seem like we are al getting what we want we then vote yes because we have been led to do so and then we become a part of the EU state as planned.


It was done the same in the 70's/80's and is being done again.

Fool me once and all that crap.

People will make their own minds up - in the digital age there will be far more information available than there was in the 70s.

There seems an element of fear about this process from the Eurosceptic brigade. If you believe in democracy then that should not be the case.

The point of the renegotiation is that you can't settle the issue and expect it to stay settled in this country without it. Its the same old "winning the war is only half the battle, then you have to win the peace" issue.

In this case if we vote to exit then we need a position where the Europhiles can't say that nobody tried to sort the thing out first.

Indeed so - seems clear enough that it is being used to try to undermine the Government.

It's more than that though. The media won't let it go, and it would appear that few here will either.

I'm a life long Tory voter, ex member and constituency worker. "Simple" or not, if Cameron's losing the likes of me, he's losing a hell of a lot of support. I don't trust him (particularly over Europe) and neither do millions of others. Roll your eyes all you want, doesn't change the facts.
Clegg is a convenient human shield for Cameron, to excuse inertia over Europe.