Civil Partnerships

There's much debate going on down south about whether or not same-sex couples can be married. To all intents and purposes, civil partnerships are, but legally they aren't. Yes, I know, it doesn't make a lot of sense.

But, that's not what I am going to talk about. No, it's the heterosexual couples who want to enter into a civil partnership. So, let me get this straight, they want to have all the legal rights which come with marriage (mainly to do with inheritance tax in the UK) but they don't want to be married. Am I missing something? Anything? Is it just me, but why not get married?

It strikes me these couples want the privileges of marriage without the responsibility which comes with it. It's an overused phrase, but with great privilege come great responsibility. Or are they just making a point, I wonder?

It's not like it has to be a religious ceremony or a fancy do to be married. That's what registry weddings are for. Maybe the one difference, as far as I can tell (other than the obvious) between weddings and civil partnerships is the later can be conducted in private.

As a former marriage cynic, I wonder if these people haven't got the right person? There was a year, yes just one year, between me thinking marriage was just a piece of paper and why can't people just live together if they want to, to actually being married. Yes, I am a born again marriage evangelist. Well, not really, but you get the picture. Funny how quickly that changed with spotthegerbil. He is the perfect person for me and being married to him is as natural as breathing (usually, I don;t want him getting funny ideas!). Maybe I, too, would have been a civil partnerships for heterosexual couples person once?

Marriage is a declaration of a couple's love, loyalty and commitment to one another. End of. If you can't sign up for that, don't cop out and try to make a point. It just makes you look like a numpty IMHO. God doesn't even have to get a look in (officially, but he'll be around somewhere!), nor do you have to spend a fortune and invite everyone of your facebook friends!

If you want to live together, do that. That's fine. But accept the privilege and responsibility which comes with it too.

Part of the world, but not of it.

Jesus knew his disciples lived in a real world, with danger and temptation and illness. He also knew, and prayed, his disciples would be separate from the world (John 17:14-15, for example). That the pleasures and pain of the world would not get the better of them and they, though their lives and love, would show a better way for being in the world.

That prayer of Jesus is just as relevant to us, as Christians - his current disciples - as it was 2000 years ago. Which has got me thinking, what makes my actions different from others who aren't Christians? I do try to talk to those others won't; I do try to defend the prisoner and NED; I have a deep sense of fairness and justice; I turn the other cheek. Are those purely things which can be done as a Christian? Can someone of no faith do so?

I've also been thinking about the standards the kirk should have for those "in authority". The minister, the deacon, the reader and the elder. Surely, there should be a moral and ethical standard which those set apart by the kirk to represent the kirk should be aiming for? I'm not saying it should be different from any other Christian, but perhaps allied more. I know it's a tough one, but I feel without some kind of standard the kirk becomes so ties up with being in the world it forgets it's supposed to be showing the world (and Scotland in particular) a better way.

Take for example, an elder. They've started living with their boyfriend and in case it doesn't work out they are renting. They have no intention of getting married. Is that right? Is this the standard the kirk should be aspiring to?

Personally, I have no problem with people living together out of wedlock, so long as there's a commitment there. Hedging your bets by renting, then walking away if it goes wrong is not commitment. So don't bother living together to begin with.

I think those society attitudes sums up much of what is wrong with society. Suck it and see. If I don't like it, I junk it. Relationships are, for some, becoming as disposable as last nights take-away boxes.

Surely, though, the kirk should be encouraging their members to be different from society in this regard. So those in authority live out their lives as different from society. Leading the way. Showing a better way to live in the world. A way that's more difficult - you can't just walk away if it doesn't work - yet more in keeping with a way of love and more rewarding too. Otherwise, are we really followers of Christ?