General Chat

Perhaps someone will correct me but as far as I know the married tax allowance hasn't been in existence since wives stopped being chattels :-D

I recall when I got married there was a tax benefit if you married just before the end of the financial year

To Everyone - GR have decided not to reinstate my thread and threatened to remove me permanently from this site if I breach the gudelines again.
Well done RR for reporting me.

Chaotic - yes maybe :-D. Can see all sorts of legal shenanigans!!

Typical half-baked, not-thought-through legislation.

GP, there is a long way between the reporting of a thread , having it removed and a member being removed from the site....as you must know as you have been here some years. I don't generally report. but your post was offensive, simple as that.

EDIT If you disagree with GRs decision, appeal it, or alternatively post again if you are so sure you were right and see who else considers it offensive or otherwise.. IF you are sure the post was NOT offensive, then have the courage of your convictions and post it again

I didn't see your posting GP so it wasn't me who reported it - I always say if I do report something

Five years ago I purchased a golly in Broad Haven - he is gorgeous - just like the one I used to have. He is wrapped up safely and labelled 'for my first g.gchild'. :-D

AnnC. So does Rose tell people. And she did report GPride. And she did tell Geordie Pride.

Further she invited GP to put post back on if ir was felt appropriate and that it would not be reported by her again. But GP (wisely at is now seems) did not take her up on that kind offer.

I'd quite like to see something based loosely on the French marriage system, but available to same sex couples as well.

http://www.americansinfrance.net/culture/marriage.cfm

One civil ceremony available to all, whether same sex or mixed, to take care of the legal/socio-economic side of things. I don't see the need to have both civil marriage and civil partnership, and as marriage has been around longer, lets stick with that.

Then couples with religious inclinations could have either a religious ceremony or blessing according to the rites of their religious institution. I think it's up to the religious institution to decide if they think same sex marriage is compatible with their faith/belief system, and up to the members of that institution to lobby within the institution, if they do not agree with the current policy of that body.

The second ceremony could cover other than church ceremonies, eg wiccan, humanist etc, and be more 'personal' , and the civil ceremony take care of the 'legal' side of things, giving various rights and responsibilies like becoming each other's next of kin, inheritance rights etc.

You would then be catering for marriage both as a spiritual/emotional commitment, and as a socio-economic one.

Ann - RR admitted reporting it

RR - I have contacted GR about their decision and have stated my case but have been told they do not discuss individual cases so I have no one to turn to. You are the only one who found it offensive because you didn't give anyone else a chance to read it

John- If I add my thread back I would probably be breaching the guidlines. GR should put it back or if RR feels so strongly about it she should add it back.

GP

RR very rarely reports anything and always says so when she does. In the past I have agreed with her and if she found the post offensive I will take her word for it.

And GR must have agreed with her.

This is a public board and if what we post could be offensive to certain groups we have to accept that sometimes we'll be reported and take it on the chin when we are.

How on earth can I Add it back GP?! It was deleted...I don't have a copy! and I certainly would not wish to misquote you from memory!

Lest anyone be misled by GP's use of the word "thread"...I did NOT report GP's "thread"..I reported GP'S POST on this, Ann's, thread.

GP

I saw it and in my opinion the way you phrased it was offensive.

Of course you ought to be able to express your feelings and you could have achieved that by tempering your words.

Our gay friends on GR don't deserve open posts like that.

I'm pretty sure you would have been offended if that had been aimed at you.

RR - I did not keep a copy either so I couldn't add it back accurately, but basically
I roughly said the following hoping I will not be reported:-
1- That I was not GAY.
2- That I have been to places where gays were present and that I wasn't happy with what I observed.
I admit that this is not word for word but close enough.

Supercrutch - Sometimes we word things wrongly and wish we could go back and change things but by that time it's too late. I am one of the main culprits for doing this and have had many regrets in the past.
I am quite a mild mannered person and do not go out to offend people in anyway but there will be a time in anyones life where something snaps and we lose it like being RR'd for the first time in years.

GP

What has Elton John got to do with it?

no it's not word for word GP, that much I do know! The bit about you not being gay is...the rest was certainly not so mildly put otherwise I would not have reported it.

I accept that you may have worded it without much forethought, I reported it instinctively because I found it offensive... a reply that one person considers offensive can be reported by that one person, I make no apologies, I was offended by your phrasing so I reported it.

Edit, I might also add that I 'could' have left it there and waited for a 'concensus of opinion' that it was offensive, before deciding to report it, or indeed not stated that it was me, and let you call others out as "Judas" ...but if I can't decide for myself whether to report something I find offensive without having my hand held by others first it would be a pretty poor show.

If you recieved an email from GR they would have told you what you said....or thats what Estelle said would happen in future

As for any sort of marriage...it should be done away with now, forced into it 30 years ago...now it will cost me money to get out of it :-D

RR - In my last post I have admitted it wasn't word for word. FGS go back to GR and ask them to reinstate my post so that others can form their own views because I am now getting really bored now.

GP

Jax - Only received a warning from GR - nothing else

GP

I will not ask GR to reinstate a post I found offensive GP, that would make me a hypocrite wouldn't it,. Just forget it and move on.

edit: for ref, for those who have never seen the email sent to reporter of a post:

"Dear Rambling Rose

You recently requested a message board response for review giving the reason Hateful/Abusive Content .

After considering your request we believe the content to be unacceptable and outside of the terms and conditions and message board guidelines of the site. This content has therefore been removed.

Thank you for bringing this to our attention."