Professor Julian Legrand
Has just been on the radio arguing that cohabiting (or even non-cohabiting) couples who have a child together should, when they go to register the birth, be automatically married by the State. Even if said couple are not actually a couple and including if one of them is already married (he did say they'd need to get divorced first).

Regardless of the rationale behind this argument (it will give the woman and child more rights, even after a split, apparently) is this not the most barn arsed piece of 'thintank thinking' committed for public debate in a long time?
( Davros' Granddad a voice of calm reason in a world of spastics., Thu 14 May 2009, 12:57, 19 replies, latest was 16 years ago)

Bollocks!
If that was the case I could have ended up married to a lezza then have to go through the hassle of divorce to marry the mrs!
( SpikeyPickle wishes he was mabazaritchie, Thu 14 May 2009, 13:01, Reply)

DG
Before yesterday and the blatant fraud by Elliott Morley MP I'd have agreed with you. Now? This is small fry.

Who would support a march on Parliament to force the dissolution of this corrupt government and all it stands for?
(Eds Meds Mathskillz=1,Socialskillz=0, Thu 14 May 2009, 13:02, Reply)

Me!
I walk past the Houses of Parliament and Downing Street every day. Such distinguished and historic buildings deserve far better than the shower of cuntage that infests them right now.
(Bicycle Repairman "you're also a bit of a wanker", Thu 14 May 2009, 13:35, Reply)

what utter
bullshit.
That's ridiculous. Doesn't take ANYTHING into consideration! What if the mother's been raped by someone she knows?! Does that mean she'd be forced to marry her rapist? Now while I understand it'd be incredibly rare - some women refuse to have abortions regardless of how the baby was conceived. So if she knew her rapist - and they asked her who the father was - would she be allowed to lie and say she didn't know - or would she be forced to marry the cunt?
Fucking hell.
(Poppet some assembly required., Thu 14 May 2009, 13:03, Reply)

He did say
that in cases like that, or if one partner was violent, they could divorce straight away... I kid ye not.
( Davros' Granddad a voice of calm reason in a world of spastics., Thu 14 May 2009, 13:11, Reply)

/speechless.

(Poppet some assembly required., Thu 14 May 2009, 13:13, Reply)

For further clarification
it sounded as if he was advocating this only being enforced if both parents turned up to sign the birth certificate.

But still...
( Davros' Granddad a voice of calm reason in a world of spastics., Thu 14 May 2009, 13:39, Reply)

Double You
Tee
Eff.
(CaptainInnuendo One mouthful contains all your vitamin C needs., Thu 14 May 2009, 13:16, Reply)

It's a
bag of shite.
(Eds Meds Mathskillz=1,Socialskillz=0, Thu 14 May 2009, 13:12, Reply)

What happens
to women who have children by different fathers? Do they just collect husbands? Or get married and divorced over and over again?

That's just one of many questions such a proposal raises; it doesn't sound like it's been properly thought through to be honest. Which is really a 'think tank's' primary purpose.
(Land of Green Ginger It's dreamy weather, Thu 14 May 2009, 13:11, Reply)

Gives more power to the mother.
Ok. What if the mother is an abusive fuck - it's already hard enough for dad's to get to raise their kids in this case. You don't want to tip the balance any mroe that way!
(Potty Jag har smör i min rumpspringa, Thu 14 May 2009, 13:59, Reply)

If you want mother and child to have more rights
Why not just give them more fucking rights? Why drag marriage into it?

What a giant tool that man is.
( The Light in Chains don't touch the Pope's boner, Thu 14 May 2009, 14:35, Reply)

That what I thought
marriage should be a choice, not an imposition.

I wonder what his position on arranged marriages is? Hmmm?
( Davros' Granddad a voice of calm reason in a world of spastics., Thu 14 May 2009, 14:49, Reply)

I'm not even sure being married gives women and children anymore rights
When I left my ex I went with the kids and my clothes, nothing else.

And nearly three years on what do I have to show for those ten years?

The kids and my clothes.

Rights?

Some people can afford more 'rights' than others.

I can't see the point of marriage at all anymore, unless you like cake of course.
( chickenlady b3ta's very own Elizabeth Taylor, Thu 14 May 2009, 15:15, Reply)

bloody hell
what a twunt. albeit a twunt who sounds like he may well have been speaking to my parents recently.

Mr vitC and I are expecting a sprog later this year - he proposed a couple of weeks ago, so we're at least engaged now, but we don't have time or money to get married in the way we want before the micronutrient appears. However, we do plan to marry eventually, and did plan to before baby was even a glint in mr vitCs eye. My parents (and grandparents) all think that we are going to be bad parents just because we won't be married when baby arrives. I'm fairly convinced that a ceremony and bit of paper will make not the slightest bit of a difference to our parenting ability.

Sorry, this is a pet peeve just now, and hormones are preventing me from constructing an eloquent arguement, which is all the more frustrating. I'll just have to go and punch someone instead.
( ascorbate, Thu 14 May 2009, 15:15, Reply)

You could
go to BBC I Player, select today's Jeremy Vine show on Radio 2 and listen to the smug cunt spouting this claptrap.

Then throw your computer out of the window in a fit of rage.
( Davros' Granddad a voice of calm reason in a world of spastics., Thu 14 May 2009, 15:47, Reply)

hmm
tempting though it is, I value my computer too highly to do that. I may just have to go out and nut a passing chav.
( ascorbate, Thu 14 May 2009, 16:30, Reply)

Yay!

( chickenlady b3ta's very own Elizabeth Taylor, Thu 14 May 2009, 16:54, Reply)

what if
it's not her child?











oh, right.
(knackerz is skinning up, Fri 15 May 2009, 1:48, Reply)