Give me your answer true

The right is perturbed because men are getting married on Los Lunnis. Their objections are historical rather than theological–no one’s suggesting we respect Genesis 24:3 and 38:6 and allow fathers to select girlies for their sons–and their problem is that the world has moved on. I’d regard myself as a natural PP voter (although that feeling might not be reciprocated), but virtually the only positive proposal I’ve heard from the PP camp since the elections was one made in jest: namely, that if men were to be allowed to marry men, why not allow grandmas to marry their cats? Since marriage now seems to be socially defined as a contractually committed partnership, this seems to me a perfectly reasonable proposition, so long as an animal psychologist can be found to establish that Puss really wants the inheritance. In time, I don’t see why this principle should not be extended to permanently inanimate objects. I can’t see the bicycle saying no, and the hell with Daisy.

Similar posts


  1. Read the spanish constitution. Article 32.2. The different marriages here depends on the law. If we want we can admit any kind of marriage, including grandmas and their cats.
    Excuse for my poor english. Good luck

  2. Here it is:

    32.2 The law shall make provision for the forms of marriage, the age and capacity for concluding it, the rights and duties of the spouses, the grounds for separation and dissolution, and their effects.

    Claims that widening marriage’s scope is unconstitutional are based on 32.1:

    Man and woman have the right to marry with full legal equality.

    I don’t see that as an obstacle, but with Spanish judges you never know.

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *