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.
Wrong. Marriage is the union of one man and one woman, as I said. You're the authority now? Bwaha.
Wrong. Marriage is defined by societies and different societies have eliminated the "man with woman" definition. Denmark and Canada have accepted same sex marriages for years and are doing fine.
BTW, you're using ONE definition of marriage. As we have seen, marriage has had various definitions throughout the years. Only 120 years ago, marriage was about a man owning women (meaning women were property) and at the same time, even in America, marriage was about having multiple wives.
Hey... if the pirates and rednecks can have their own flags, why not the gays?
(actual answer provided by raison above)
Hey, as far as I know EVERY state and most cities have their own flags, too. And a small bigoted group that appear to still be fighting the civil war (an we thought those japs holed up in tunnels were stubborn) have their own flags.
Wrong. Marriage is defined by societies and different societies have eliminated the "man with woman" definition. Denmark and Canada have accepted same sex marriages for years and are doing fine.
Sorry, but recent PC revisions have not changed the meaning of the term. Feel free to call a tennis ball a lemon. Your tea will still taste like fuzz.
Quote:
BTW, you're using ONE definition of marriage. As we have seen, marriage has had various definitions throughout the years. Only 120 years ago, marriage was about a man owning women (meaning women were property) and at the same time, even in America, marriage was about having multiple wives.
It is illogical to compare the nature of chattel marriage at some point in history and the institution of marriage per se. Polygamy, as practiced by marginalized religious groups, has always been broadly rejected in American society, whose rejection of the practice was the source for its current illegal status -- a status which, if gay marriage becomes generally accepted and legalized, must logically be altered. This is the very kind of consequence which gay marriage advocates may (if they are as cynical as they seem to be) or may not (if they are just ignorant) anticipate for the future of our society.
Get use to it, marriage will, not maybe, one day commonly refer to a union of two ppl, gender neutral.
Words and their meaning migrate freely...
F a g used to be a smoke...
Gay used to be lighthearted...
basement was once a toilet.
To bless was originally to redden with blood, as in a sacrifice.
Awful once meant "full of awe" i.e. something wonderful, delightful, amazing.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Yeledaf
Sorry, but recent PC revisions have not changed the meaning of the term. Feel free to call a tennis ball a lemon. Your tea will still taste like fuzz.
It is illogical to compare the nature of chattel marriage at some point in history and the institution of marriage per se. Polygamy, as practiced by marginalized religious groups, has always been broadly rejected in American society, whose rejection of the practice was the source for its current illegal status -- a status which, if gay marriage becomes generally accepted and legalized, must logically be altered. This is the very kind of consequence which gay marriage advocates may (if they are as cynical as they seem to be) or may not (if they are just ignorant) anticipate for the future of our society.
Last edited by buzzards27; 08-16-2012 at 04:08 PM..
The question of gay marriage is not if, but when, it will be federally legalized. One cannot look at the statistical trends and honestly believe the religious right will win this one (especially given that they never do).
Sorry, but recent PC revisions have not changed the meaning of the term. Feel free to call a tennis ball a lemon. Your tea will still taste like fuzz.
What the hell are you talking about? PC revisions? Sorry bub, the PC revision was the most recent : man and woman unions. Before that it Marriage was about property. Not love; it was for status and about OWNING a woman and to guarantee that any child she has would be from the man she married.
The man and woman definition was initiated during Clinton's term, when he signed into law DOMA in 1996. Before that, there was hardly any consensus on the definition of marriage. States were allowed to define within their Constitutions, but not every state had the same definitions. Many states, didn't even define marriage except on a legal contractual level as a CIVIL definition.
and definitions and terms CHANGE. Sorry if you want to cling on to the 1996 definition, but we live in the 21st century.
A tweet used to be an onomatopoeia for a bird's chirp - now it carries many meanings, including what a person texts via twitter
Texting - the word never existed before the advent of the mobile phone
Actually, I would prefer people to stop using pretentious French expressions.
You mean like sanctity, sacred, holy, divine, etc?
Quote:
The rest of your angry post is just a blur of frenzied nonsense and adolescent snarling, so I'll give it the attention it deserves.
I didn't see my post as angry, I think you mean informative, by frenzied I think you mean serene, by nonsense I think you mean sensible, by adolescent snarling I think you mean mature and informed input.
Quote:
Please feel free, though, to keep stalking me. It's fun watching you lose it.
By stalking do you mean debate? My friend, I haven't lost it yet. It doesn't take much to debate with you and your ilk.
Get use to it, marriage will, not maybe, one day commonly refer to a union of two ppl, gender neutral.
Words and their meaning migrate freely...
F a g used to be a smoke...
Gay used to be lighthearted...
basement was once a toilet.
To bless was originally to redden with blood, as in a sacrifice.
Awful once meant "full of awe" i.e. something wonderful, delightful, amazing.
Thank you, but I've taught applied linguistics, among other things, for many years. I am aware of the dynamic nature of language. None of the examples you cite were the result of a conscious effort to revise a basic tenet of our society by renaming it.
And "migrate freely" might not be the best word to describe the phenomenon to which you refer, though I'm sure it is an appealing image to many.
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.
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.
