I agree :lolface:
The problem is, same sex couples are not able to get "married". Oh yes, they are allowed to have "civil partnerships". I see that as an insult to same sex couples. It is basically saying that the love they feel for each other is not good enough to be called a marriage. Basically, the religious monopoly on "marriages" needs to end. Sooner rather than later :B|:
Alejandro - Lady ****ING Gaga
I have seen her live ;D The funny thing is, my ticket cost nearly £90 when the face value was £30 :x And then she decided to do more dates with a different sponser who then upped the price to from £50-75. So I still paid more ;D I AM A TRUE FAN D: It was awesome like, best gig I have ever been to. And it is good that you love her, otherwise I would have had to destroy your life :lolface:
Have you seen her live? :B|:
This was me in the queue for Lady Gaga ;D OMG it was so cold. Even with the coat :( And I had contemplated not bringing it ._. This was me in the front seat of the taxi (as I almost always end up being >_>) on our way to some club. I say that because I seem to sober to be coming back from a club xD
:/gasp: oh no u didn't
I read it because it was interesting and I'm bored xD Luckily I'm studying Theoretical Physics so I would have no problem communicating using Mathematics ::L:
Yes, let's pay people who create freaks of nature using photo manipulating tools :lolface:
It is far too late for me to be talking on some thing ;D But thanks for explaining =] (PS. it is 3am here ;D)
I have no idea what this is. Could someone please explain?
Starry Eyed - Ellie Goulding
As I said, a non-religious wedding would take place before the appropriate officer of the law. Therefore no religious ministers would have to take part. Churches could be rented out (if there would be no objections) but there would be no laws against any religious minister who objected to the building being used. For example, my parents got married in the city hall of Belfast. That was probably because they couldn't afford to get married in a church but meh xD The facility to get married outside of a religious building already exists. To be honest I see no cons to this method (other than those who insist upon semantics, which I see as being rather sad and pathetic).
Why is this still going? D: I was drunk when I posted it. :lolface:
There is loads of solid proof, people just don't go to museums or read around enough to see it. Evolution has been observed and documented in the...
Take photos :lolface:
I hate eggs with a passion :lolface: So I will be doing no such thing.
I see it as that, Christian couples have a Christian marrige. Jewish couples have a Jewish marriage. Muslim couples have a Muslim marriage etc. But there is also the capacity for non-religious/gay couple to have a simple marriage. A marriage that confers the same rights, and has the same importance as the other marriages, with the religious connotations. I see it as that, Christian couples have a Christian marrige. Jewish couples have a Jewish marriage. Muslim couples have a Muslim marriage etc. But there is also the capacity for non-religious/gay couple to have a simple marriage. A marriage that confers the same rights, and has the same importance as the other marriages, with the religious connotations.
LOL. Unless she is a Japanese native, I doubt this will ever actually occur.
Finding something evil/wrong is much different from finding it disgusting. There are many fetishes that I find disgusting but I would never ask for them to be banned. It is up to individuals to practice what they wish.
