I am not particularly bothered either way, but I wish these minority interests would just get on with their lives and stop insisting that the rest of us get involved and give opinions.

One would almost think they are seeking justification.

What do they hope to gain? - They want to say that they are married rather than being in a partnership.

However civil partnerships are still not open to heterosexuals who live together.

I'm far from sure that there are enough legal measures in place to protect those who refuse to conduct same sex marriages. There should be enough places and people to carry out those marriages without causing difficulties for those who are against.

"Is there any monetary gain when homosexuals obtain the right to get married?"

Is it not only for ladies also, lesbians?

and what if if a Mr smith marry's a mr jones. When they are married will they both be mr jones or mr smith or will they still be mr smith and mr jones?

If 2 men or 2 women wish to marry each other then I can see no difference from a civil ceromony in which they now take part.

From Oxford Dictionary:

"Definition of marriage

noun

1the formal union of a man and a woman, typically recognized by law, by which they become husband and wife:"

I also do not mind who does what, with which, or to whom, but to change the meaning of a word is rare, to say the least. Why not invent a new word for the union of two persons of the same sex, rather than hijacking a word that has another meaning? I would be interested to know, in these days of referenda, what the result of one on this issue would be? I wonder how much consultation there has been between MP's and their constituents? Usually MP's vote as they think, but on issues like this, I think there should be consultation.

Algerian Peter - It doesn't matter what they call each other. I know a number of married men and women where the woman has retained her maiden name and is referred to as Miss or more likely Ms. However will one change their name in a gay marriage?