<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	
	>
<channel>
	<title>
	Comments on: SAME-SEX MARRIAGE LEGAL!	</title>
	<atom:link href="https://www.mambaonline.com/2006/11/30/gay-marriage-legal/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>https://www.mambaonline.com/2006/11/30/gay-marriage-legal/</link>
	<description>South Africa&#039;s leading LGBTQ news and community platform</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Thu, 05 Feb 2026 08:43:19 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>
	hourly	</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>
	1	</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>https://wordpress.org/?v=6.9.4</generator>
	<item>
		<title>
		By: Robanaurochs		</title>
		<link>https://www.mambaonline.com/2006/11/30/gay-marriage-legal/#comment-5348</link>

		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Robanaurochs]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 30 Nov -0001 00:00:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">https://www.mambaonline.com/2006/11/30/gay-marriage-legal/#comment-5348</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[Not offensive at all. Hi Curious&lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;We all know by now that the original Marriage Act does not allow same-sex marriage but there are other reasons for marriages to be denied under that Act too.&lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;I understand the quote to mean that if you disqualify under the Marriage act for one of those other reasons, then you also disqualify under the Civil Unions Act.&lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;Since the two Acts are so similar, I don&#039;t really understand why they didn&#039;t just ammend the orignal one instead of making another one to sit beside it.&lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;I wonder if the Constitutional court is going to still allow the Marriage Act to stay on the statutes. It is still discriminatory even though gay people can marry now under the CU Act.]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[ <p>Not offensive at all. Hi Curious</p>
<p>We all know by now that the original Marriage Act does not allow same-sex marriage but there are other reasons for marriages to be denied under that Act too.</p>
<p>I understand the quote to mean that if you disqualify under the Marriage act for one of those other reasons, then you also disqualify under the Civil Unions Act.</p>
<p>Since the two Acts are so similar, I don&#8217;t really understand why they didn&#8217;t just ammend the orignal one instead of making another one to sit beside it.</p>
<p>I wonder if the Constitutional court is going to still allow the Marriage Act to stay on the statutes. It is still discriminatory even though gay people can marry now under the CU Act.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
		
			</item>
	</channel>
</rss>
