I’d like to ask William why Portugal is now considering same-sex marriage and not civil partnerships? Why did any of the current seven countries upgrade to full marriage equality instead of accepting the lesser form of civil unions or partnerships?

William, why do you think its a good idea to distinguish a gay relationship from a straight relationship? What is different of any significance than the gender of the participants (which is not an important difference at all)? Once you create two seperate institutions you create the likelihood that they will be treated differently, one as less than the other. Your argument is akin to saying we should have seperate educational institutions for men and women, because they’re different. That opens up the institution to abuse to treating them as something other than equals. We should never treat people as something other than equals unless there is damn good reason to do so, and you’ve presented no pressing reason why gay relationships should be treated differently than straight relationships.

“Having separate drinking fountains for blacks and whites isn’t unequal, because they both get water! From a fountain! But they’re different! Because different is beautiful!”

It has nothing to do with “being different.” Everybody is “different.” We all have different DNA. It’s not a good argument for satisfying the Equal Protection clause in the Constitution.

If civil partnerships are so equal, you ask, why can’t straights enter into them, if they choose not to want marriage? Why should they want to, unless it’ to pretend that their relationship is the same as a gay relationship — which it’ not? And I can’t see any more point in that than in a gay couple wanting to pretend that their relationship is the same as a straight one — which it’ not.

Priya says: “If civil partnerships were the equivalent of marriage there’d be no point in having a separate name for them. They are called something different precisely because they are different, as in lesser.” I agree that they are called something different because they are different, but I can’t agree that “different” means or implies “lesser”. I LIKE difference. I don’t want everyone to be exactly the same. (Even those who think that they would like drab uniformity would, I’m sure, repent if their wish were ever granted.) I don’t want my Jewish or atheist friends to be Christian, my straight friends to be gay, my black friends to be white etc.

As the psychiatrist Thomas Szasz observed, to argue for the acceptance of a minority on the grounds that it resembles the majority amounts to a denial of the minority’ right to be different.

How would you like it if we sought a ban on religious marriages based on the premise that secular state governments issue only licenses for civil marriages? How would you like that?

William, civil partnerships don’t convey every single right of marriage, although most of them are conferred. They are second rate and carry NO portability once you leave the UK. If they’re so equal, why can’t straights enter into them, if they choose not to want marriage? I don’t believe in legal segregation which is what these partnerships are about and have absolutely NOTHING to do with full equality. Why do you think more countries are turning to same-sex marriage, seven so far and five American states, possibly six if the District of Columbia gets on board shortly? Civil Partnerships/unions will NEVER be the gold standard anywhere on this planet nor internationally recognized either. They are progressive in the short term, but incredibly regressive in the longer term if you look at the bigger picture.

No they shouldn’t sam, that goes directly against your bible:

Matthew 6:6
But thou, when thou prayest, enter into thy closet, and when thou hast shut thy door, pray to thy Father which is in secret; and thy Father which seeth in secret shall reward thee openly.

You’re welcome to live your life as you choose, but its immoral for you to attempt to dictate to anyone else how to live their’s when they aren’t harming you.