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.
Your point? Many of our dictionaries also include same-sex couples in the definitions of marriage... but I'm not surprised you failed to cite those.
mar·riage [mar-ij]
noun
1. a. the social institution under which a man and woman establish their decision to live as husband and wife by legal commitments, religious ceremonies, etc. Antonyms: separation.
b. a similar institution involving partners of the same gender: gay marriage. Antonyms: separation.
Exactly...the document requires the specification of ..."similar" and explain its reasoning as a Gay Marriage...the whole function of a document is in the clarity and itemization of all specificities, otherwise it can be argued.
Exactly...the document requires the specification of ..."similar" and explain its reasoning in a Gay Marriage...the whole function of a document is in the clarity and itemization of all specificities, otherwise it can be argued.
Duh... that's why they will be making NEW documents that are gender-neutral. Why are you all making this so complicated?
Same issues have come up in schools over the years, since not every student has a mother & father - some have one parent (of either gender), custodial relatives, foster parents, etc. As a result most schools have adopted more neutral language on their forms, which actually makes for LESS confusion in the long run. I don't know if you have kids, but haven't you ever seen a school permission slip? They usually just say "parent/guardian," while I imagine at one time they said only "parents" or "mother & father." No big whoop, and if you're that easily confused you have bigger problems.
Marriage is a contract between two consenting adults. There's nothing romantic about it.
Quote:
Originally Posted by AnUnidentifiedMale
If an anti-gay person needs the words "husband" and "wife" on a government application for marriage in order to feel legitimate, I'd say your marriage is doomed.
Both very good points! A contract is just a contract, and has nothing to do with your personal ceremony... regardless of what the forms say, you can still conduct the actual wedding ceremony however you darned well choose.
Duh... that's why they will be making NEW documents that are gender-neutral. Why are you all making this so complicated?
Same issues have come up in schools over the years, since not every student has a mother & father - some have one parent (of either gender), custodial relatives, foster parents, etc. As a result most schools have adopted more neutral language on their forms, which actually makes for LESS confusion in the long run. I don't know if you have kids, but haven't you ever seen a school permission slip? They usually just say "parent/guardian," while I imagine at one time they said only "parents" or "mother & father." No big whoop, and if you're that easily confused you have bigger problems.
I don't care at all about this and would go for Gay Marriage right across the land rather then the stupid vote that just cause's chaos with the individuals creating a group with the sales pitch...we are people too and drive it through the social as though its a number 1 priority with the parades, nonsense in education , internet and on and on. That way the parades will not be needed ... hetro don't need parades for acceptance. The document will require the specific and that means ..Gay Marriage Certificate, its a license.. A person can't have a license to drive a car and then say I'm good to go with the tandem truck. Either the language is used or its twisted around, so eventually the thing will create a problem with a dispute of some nature prob $$$ orientated as usual, costing more tax dollars. And seriously I don't care myself what marriage arrangement is made and think they should go for it everywhere and retract this stupid divisive anti-unity inflammatory vote, but...get it right and with a few town rules.
Last edited by stargazzer; 11-28-2012 at 08:27 PM..
A lib-leaning Seattle Times columnist named Danny Westneat wrote an interesting piece on some of the unintended consequences of "gay marriage" which will become law in Washington state next week. It was signed into law by outgoing Gov. Gregoire. But here in WA a law can be challenged by getting enough signatures; then it goes to a vote of the people and is either upheld or rejected. "Gay marriage" was upheld by the voters by 53-46.
The way I see it, what two consenting adults want to do is none of my business. Three consenting adults, for that matter. But my objection to the "gay marriage" issue was that this was an English word with a longstanding meaning, and now we are re-defining it. Why couldn't we have just passed legislation allowing 'civil unions?' I've seen polls that found that even most evangelicals are ok with that.
The column by Westneat shows some of the unintended consequences when we redefine words. County auditors around the state are having to re-tool all their forms due to the new law. No more brides and grooms. The state Dept of Health chimed in with the suggestion of "spouse A" and "spouse B." I wonder how much that idea cost taxpayers. Did they focus-group it? Your tax dollars at work. "It drains the romance right out of it, doesn't it?" says Chelan County auditor Skip Moore.
Words have always been very important to me. One thing I've always noticed in politics is that people who have a constant need to play games with words, are often on the wrong track. Orwell covered the topic pretty well.
Yes they do!! and words aren't for just politicians anymore.
If an anti-gay person needs the words "husband" and "wife" on a government application for marriage in order to feel legitimate, I'd say your marriage is doomed.
By the same token, if a gay couple needs the word "marriage" on their government application in order to feel legitimate, is it not likely that their union is doomed?
Hey (like the girls from newsy say), I don't care at all about this and would go for Gay Marriage right across the land rather then the stupid vote that just cause's chaos with the individuals creating a group with the sales pitch...we are people too and drive it through the social as though its a number 1 priority with the parades, nonsense in education , internet and on and on. That way the parades will not be needed right..? I mean hetro don't need parades for acceptance. Don't people think theres been enough dividing noise with this issue..? The document will require the specific and that means ..Gay Marriage Certificate, its a license.. A person can't have a license to drive a car and then say I'm good to go with the tandem truck.
1. If changing those two words from "bride and groom" to "spouse and spouse" causes mass chaos among straight people, I'd have to say we aren't the brightest bunch of people. Especially when you consider it actually makes things easier, since you wouldn't have to know which name goes where.
2. Homosexuals have parades for acceptance because they had to fight for acceptance in society. Simple concept, really, and I'm sure heterosexuals would do the same if they'd been treated unequally for as long as they gay community has/was. Heck, if you took away straight marriage rights tomorrow, you and I would probably BOTH be in line to parade/protest for justice. Well, at least I know I would.
3. Yes, marriage requires a license - that's kinda the whole point of why they want legal marriage, since you lose approx 1000 benefits & rights without that pesky certificate. If it weren't for that, I have a feeling this wouldn't be as important (but still somewhat) of an issue to the gay community.
4. You're right, there has been enough dividing; and it's time to STOP the divisiveness by offering equality to ALL.
By the same token, if a gay couple needs the word "marriage" on their government application in order to feel legitimate, is it not likely that their union is doomed?
Without that one word, there is no legal union... so that's an irrelevant argument, since the words "bride and groom" aren't needed to become legally joined & enjoy the benefits of marriage. If they changed that word across the board, for both gay & straight couples alike, I doubt anyone would care much - as long as the change was applied to EVERY couple. This whole debate isn't about words, it's about equality. Why don't you get that?
All this to sign a contract with the state that they can alter at any time without your consent. Yes enjoy.
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.
