Lord Young is the only person, who works at Number 10, other than the Prime Minister, who has his own office, according to an article in The Times today. I like the last paragraph. Asked if he will retire, as he is 81, this is his reply.
Never, until She herself calls me from upstairs. I am convinced it must be a woman upstairs as women are doing everything. You must remember that I have been married 57 years to the same wife. I’ve worked for Margaret Thatcher. I know who my bosses are.
I agree with him, although I’ve never worked for a female boss, but I was married for forty years.
It is reported in the Daily Telegraph, the the judge; sir Paul Coleridge, is praising Keira Knightley for her low key marriage ceremony. Here’s the first bit of the article.
Sir Paul Coleridge said he hoped the marriage, which saw Miss Knightley, 28, driven from the wedding with her new husband in a Renault Clio and guests wearing flip flops, would encourage other young couples to get married without having to worry about spending thousands on lavish ceremonies.
Sir Paul, who has launched the Marriage Foundation, said he felt the costs of weddings in Britain had got out of hand recently, with the average price tag to tie the knot now £20,000.
I can remember C, who was a barrister specialising in sorting out the details of divorces, chuckling as she saw details of the latest celebrity wedding in the papers. often saying, “It won’t last!” I think she said that about the Beckhams, but it was the only case I can remember, where she was wrong.
Our own marriage was a small affair in 1968, on the only glorious day in an awful summer. As it lasted forty years, is there a lesson there?
I can’t say I hold a brief for the views of Cardinal O’Brien, as what right does anybody have to deny anybody a proper marriage, be they straight, gay, divorced or widowed.
So I was rather pleased that Stonewall’s bigot of the year, has got dropped in it, from a great height by a former priest and some other complainants. The priest left the priesthood and got married, which probably sums up the real fault of Catholic doctrine. Being denied your instincts, like wanting to have a meaningful relationship with someone that might lead to marriage, surely causes more problems than it solves.
The full story is here on the BBC.
I do fear that if people like O’Brien are choosing the new Pope, what sort of dinosaur will they choose?
I am not religious, but all of those who have religion that I respect, don’t really care about anybody’s race, sex or sexual orientation.
Therefore this story from the BBC’s web site, says to me that the Roman Catholic Church is still living in the Age, where they set the rules and others complied on pain of being excluded. I’m afraid in the modern world, we can all make up our own minds. Now if gay people want to go to a religious service it is up to them, not the church or religion concerned.
I hope one day, that I might be invited as a guest to a same-sex wedding in a Roman Catholic Church conducted by a woman priest!
Or is it the Tube?
I took this picture this afternoon. I hope this guy’s extensive preparations went down well with his wife!
In some ways, I miss St. Valentine’s Day more than others, as C and I usually went somewhere nice to have a meal. I’d also usually got her some nice underwear or cashmere from one of the many on-line sales after Christmas. She was very easy to buy underwear for, as she was a very common size and she always liked expensive sets, that she knew had been picked up for a bargain.
It’s now six years since I had a good St. Valentine’s Day. Tonight, I’ll be cooking myself a pork chop with some vegetables and watching the football. I shall probably have a couple of Celias.
Why has such a simple proposition created so much amount of useless hot hair?
So what right does anybody have to deny anybody happiness?
If we do, we’re following the route of religious nutters, like the Taliban and some Christian and other groups, who deny women a good life.
I would also take civil partnerships further and allow it to any couple, who wanted it. C and I had a pretty good marriage, but at times we wondered, if it would matter, if we hadn’t got married or not. Some couples, who don’t think marriage is for them for various reasons, might prefer a civil partnership to sort out their tax affairs, if one sadly dies. When C died, it saved a fortune in various taxes compared to if we’d just been living together.
There is also the problems of say two widowed sisters or brothers living together for economic and companionship reasons. Should they be allowed a civil partnership to perhaps put their financial affairs on the same basic as any other couple. In C’s work as a family barrister, she came across several cases like this. Often the surviving sibling would be living in a dingy flat on benefit. We owe people a better life and all it would need would be the extension of civil partnerships.
This story is the most shared this morning on the BBC’s web site. here’s the first paragraph.
Hundreds of thousands of protesters have taken to the streets of Paris over plans to give gay couples in France the right to marry and adopt children.
France seems to be getting in more and more messes, what with the taxes, jobs and the economy in general. Will they come to regret their incursion into Mali.
I shall be sitting down to Christmas lunch with two same-sex couples in long term relationships. So what right does this dinosaur of a churchman have to condemn gay marriage?
None! In my view.
I don’t know the scriptures well, but I do seem to have read that Jesus opened his ministry to all. He is said to have healed a Roman centurion’s servant in both Luke and Matthew. I don’t think that Roman soldiers were the most popular people at that time.
Let’s face it too, but unmarried priests really know nothing about how a marriage is a real strength in human life. As someone, who was married for nearly forty years, I have a lot more experience than he has.
When some countries recognise gay marriage and others don’t you are going to get a few problems.
This story from the United States, illustrates one small but sometimes expensive problem well.
Edith Windsor was legally married to her gay partner in Canada, five years ago. Her partner has since died and because she now lives in New York, she will have to pay $600,000 in what in the UK would be death duties. If her partner had been a man, she wouldn’t have to pay the tax.
So now the case has ended up at the United States Supreme Court.
I’m not a lawyer and I’ve no idea what would happen in the UK.
But surely in this age, we should clear everything up to make it all clear to everybody.
With all the fuss about gay marriage, it is worth noting who you could marry was different in the past.
One of my ancestors in about 1850 was the progeny of one pair of marriages, where two brothers married two sisters. I’m not sure who, but one of the brothers and one of the sisters, who weren’t married to each other, died, leaving the two surviving parents with several children. They obviously lived together, as the union produced some more brothers and sisters.
But the law at the time, said that marriage was not allowed.
Today, in this rare situation, there would be no problem if the two parents wanted to marry, as the law has changed.
I think that the current position is sensible, but I doubt there have been many cases, where someone has married their sibling’s widow.
Leviticus incidentally has a view.
If a man takes his brother’s wife, it is impurity. He has uncovered his brother’s nakedness; they shall be childless.
That certainly didn’t occur in my ancestor’s case, as there were at least two more children. Genetically, of course, they shared a lot of genes, but they would have been no more inbred than the original children.
There is also the case of two of my mother’s brothers, who married first cousins.
Now that still happens! Although for genetic reasons, I don’t think it is a good idea. It would also be impossible for me, as I have no female first cousins and only ever had one. There is a good discussion on Wikipedia.
Last night, there was a very heated debate on gay marriage on BBC Radio 5. So for those who say it is against the Bible, I say that for reasons of common human decency, the law can and should be changed, just as it was to help those like my Victorian ancestors.
I’m very much with David Cameron’s view, that everybody has the right to a long, happy and fulfilling marriage. I certainly enjoyed my marriage for nearly forty years until my wife died.
Widowhood is not the best of circumstances.