"Mother" & "Father" will be replaced with "Parent One" & "Parent Two" on PassPort Application Forms. (California, status)
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Ok so you say it is not does that make it so? Of course it does not. Just like me saying it is a step in that direction makes it so. Truth is neither of us know where it will lead.
Saying it's a step in that direction is like saying someone jumping is a step to disproving gravity.
It's like getting a pin prick and then complaining that you're going to bleed to death.
Seriously.
I mean, is the woman a mother? Yes.
Can she be called a parent? Yes.
Does being called a parent mean she is no longer a mother? No.
In fact, the definition of mother is literally nothing more than "A female parent".
It's rather difficult to have your status as X affected by being called Y when X and Y are the same thing.
Heck, I'd like to be called Parent 1. Then I'd be all "HA! I'M NUMBER ONE!"
You are correct but to many being a "mother" is special and has a deeper meaning. I know I will get slammed for this but I feel that a mother has a deeper connect to her child then the father. She carries that child in her body, is solely responsible for it's living or dying, that creates a bond that a father can not understand. So no I am not just a parent, I am a mother and to me that is as special a title that has deep meaning.
That is Fallacious reasoning though, you are falling prey to Appeal to Emotion Fallacy in apparently implying that because the term holds meaning or illicits emotional response from you that said emotional response is justification.
You could well say that you dislike what is being done, but to say it is inherently wrong or unfair is not true from a strictly logical and objective standpoint.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cyber Queen
She could careless because as she puts it. "I don't expect the world to change for me". It matters not to her what people call her she is secure enough in herself and her relationship and her way of life that she does not need any "special" treatment. She is a pretty amazing woman who I look up to and my children love. I have ZERO issue with gays, I wish they could marry and did not have the issues in society that they do. My battle is not with them. I understand why it is being changed but I don't have to like it. I don't have to agree with it but I understand it. What I find interesting is why no one can see why some do not want it changed.
Again this is a fallacious statement though, you are succumbing to Hasty Generalization Fallacy in using a single sample and apparently implying it is representative of the whole. Just because someone you know does not find the lack of gender neutral terms unfair or offensive does not mean that all or even the majority feel the same way.
Likewise your comments about what it would lead to is Slippery Slope fallacy... there is no logical reasoning or proof to support it, just a disjointed and extreme sequence of possibilities leading to an equally extreme end result.
Logically speaking this measure and change to forms is to prevent segregation or isolation of groups. The use of Gender neutral terms ensures that the phrasing can not be exclusive to any given group and thus can not offend or make uncomfortable any specific type of family unit. Neutral phrasing may not be what some would like to see, but as it is quite neutral it also is not what one could deem offensive and thus is a far safer stance to take on official forms.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.