I tend to shy away from debates involving the Daily Mail. Anyone with more than half a brain cell knows it’s a hateful, vindictive propaganda-sheet better suited for post-fecal hygiene. Usually when a person I know posts or tweets about some piece of sputum masquerading as a Mail article, it’s a given that the contents will disquiet, if not enrage those of us who understand and embrace such concepts as objectivity, intolerance and common sense; after all, flabbergasted liberals must constitute a significant portion of the Mail’s own website traffic, so it’s in their best interests to incense us to the best of their abilities.

Every now and then, however, the Mail manages to aggravate me enough for the mask of calculated indifference to slip a fraction. A friend posted a link to a recent editorial which criticised the National Secular Society for suggesting that antiquated laws enforcing “broadly Christian” worship in schools be scrapped. In a move that would make ‘Mox’ News ubercunt ‘Mill O’Meilly’ proud, the Mail throws in with Jesus, suggesting that the democratic process is “at the mercy” of advocates of the Human Rights Act. That’s right, folks! Forcing people to engage in Christian worship regardless of their faith (or lack of it) is something that “in this paper’s view” is something that should continue ad infinitum, human rights be damned.

The comments section of the Mail’s website is always a mixed bag, the quality of which is usually dependent on how many times someone on Twitter posted the link out of bemusement. This particular article had an inspired comment that warrants sharing:

“Leave aside that the law [forcing Christian worship in schools] is widely ignored (a matter for deep regret, in this paper’s view).”

Oh is it really! Well let me explain something to you. When I voted last, I cannot remember voting for the Daily Mail or seeing it mentioned on the ballot paper anywhere. In other words what you think is of no more importance than what my next door neighbour thinks or his cat for that matter. You are supposed to be reporting the news, not trying to push religion onto other people or worse still other people’s children. I and my partner are perfectly capable of deciding what religious beliefs or lack of them our children should follow, and we don’t need your help or the state sticking their nose into the matter, thank you very much. What is this 1810 or 2010?

Alan Bellis from Hull, my hat is off to you sir. Nail on the head.

With the recent announcement on his blog, Neil Gaiman has confirmed that he is to marry his girlfriend of 8 months, Dresden Dolls lead singer Amanda Palmer.

There are those who might question why the pair feel the need to formalise their relationship. Others might raise their brow and mutter to themselves at the 16-year age gap between the two. Still more might consider a marriage after such a relatively short period of them being together.

To any and all of those people, I implore you: hush up and mind your own damn business.

The debate over the worth and validity of marriage is a prickly one, even in an age of supposed enlightenment and acceptance. Religion (or lack thereof) plays a pretty major part of the discussion, with some questioning why people who don’t follow a given religion would choose to have a religious service held in a place of worship, and others asking why anybody would want to get married at all. After all, marriage is expensive, divorce is rife and everyone’s heard the stories about how marriage and kids ruin your sex life and make you miserable, right?

There are those who even now could not get married even if they wanted to. Conversely, there are those who are forced into marriage against their will out of a twisted sense of duty and loyalty to their family. It’s no wonder the whole issue is so contentious, and why there seems to be no end to the debate in sight.

But honestly, people… what people do with their lives – whether that be dating within their gender, marrying their grandmother’s best friend, or chaining themselves to one another using matching nipple rings – is really only their business, and none of yours. Just because you subscribe to a religion, or don’t, or because something offends your morals or your sensibilities one way or the other, that gives you precisely zero call to interfere in the lives and lovelives of other consenting adults.

My good friend Mike gets married this year to his girlfriend of almost four years. They’re both affirmed atheists, yet they decided they wanted a church wedding before they would even start thinking about having kids. At first, this struck me as odd, but the moment I realised that it’s what would make them happy, any doubt left my mind. At that point you shouldn’t give it another thought. Life is short, and questioning or forbidding a couple from making an informed decision they have come to of their own free will is just another thing that’s stopping our species from evolving and moving on to the real problems in the world.

Not long after my dad died, I had a conversation with my mum about marriage, specifically asking her would she still have gotten married if she had the chance to do it over.

Her answer was no.

She told me that she and my dad would have stayed together even without the need to get married, and the only reason they did it in the first place is because of pressure from religious members of my mum’s family. It’s strange to think how far we’d have come along as a civilisation if more people lived in a manner that made them truly happy, rather than living as they felt they ought to.

I still haven’t decided whether I want to get married. The only reasons I can think of for myself to actually do it is for the financial benefits, or because I was seeing someone without UK citizenship and we both wanted dual nationality. If those are the best reasons I can think of, maybe it’s best I leave off the idea for the time being! Time and experience will tell, of course, but I have a feeling I’d have a hard time being in a relationship with someone who insisted that marriage was an inevitable part of being with that person.

Does that mean I think you shouldn’t get married? Of course not! Marriage may make you happier than you’ve ever been before, or it may ruin your life. The fact is, it’s your life to experience as you will, so to those who are doing what makes them joyful, I truly am pleased for you. For those who would rather control others and stop them living a fulfilling life, I hope soon you realise what it is that makes you happy, and embrace it.

ETA: Oops! Since I posted this, Mike and Laura have both pointed out that they’re not getting married in a church, as I mentioned above. Rather, it’ll be a civil ceremony held in some grounds that just happen to have a church on them! Admittedly most of the conversations I have with them are when either one or all of us are inebriated!

In this surreal anti-airflight video by campaigners Plane Stupid, we’re told that the average European flight produces 400kg of greenhouse gas per passenger, which works out at roughly the same as an adult polar bear.

Not sure the motif really drives home the point, but the video is certainly striking and is bound to get people talking – something which, in the days of shock campaigns aimed at shaking the non-voters out of their indifference, is almost as important as the message itself.

Insufferable UK dishrag The Sun manages to do the one thing its critics could not, and in one fell swoop puts a lid on the gutter-politicking over Prime Minister Gordon Brown’s accidental mis-spelling of a soldier’s name on a letter of condolence.

Hopefully now we’ll see an end to the matter, yeah? And the paper? Okay, okay fine, one step at a time…