Why Expect Californians To Rewrite The Dictionary?
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.
Etymology is the study of the history of words — when they entered a language, from what source, and how their form and meaning have changed over time.
Speaking of which, from the Online Etymology Dictionary:
marry (v.) 1297, from O.Fr. marier, from L. maritare "to wed, marry, give in marriage," from maritus "married man, husband," of uncertain origin, perhaps ult. from "provided with a *mari," a young woman, from PIE base *meri- "young wife," akin to *meryo- "young man" (cf. Skt. marya- "young man, suitor"). Said from 1530 of the priest, etc., who performs the rite.
Didn't particularly notice any seeds of change in this etymology that would lead to the fundamental change of the meaning of the word today.
civil union
n.
A legal union of a same-sex couple, sanctioned by a civil authority.
And from your dictionary:
civ·il un·ion (plural civ·il un·ions)
noun Definition: affirmation of same-sex partnership: a ceremony celebrating the affirmation of a partnership shared by a same-sex couple or a couple who choose not to marry
But no, that just can't be enough, can it?
No it's not enough, words often change the way they are used. Also, dictionaries often define terms based on how they are used in society. In older dictionaries it defines the word 'witch' as a hag or someone into 'black magic,' although now the term witch is defined as someone who is part of Wicca or nature worshipping religions. The word gay used to mean merry or happy, but now it means someone who is a homosexual. Definitions of words have been changed and redefined as new dictionaries come out and culture changes. Just because a dictionary says marriage is something that is between one man and one woman that doesn't mean marriage should be exclusive to heterosexuals.
Last edited by agnostic soldier; 11-10-2008 at 07:15 PM..
MrSykes (I love that name), I'd be fine with "civil unions" if it provided the same rights and benefits as marriage. As things stand today, it does not.
Obama has vowed to repeal the Defense Of Marriage Act. If he does this, it'll be a huge step toward giving everyone equal rights, whether it's called marriage, civil unions, or domestic partnerships.
Yeah, we should have kept everything in the world just as it was back in the year 1297. Things were so much better then.
I do understand what you're saying, MrSykes. It's just that things DO change over time, including the meanings of words.
Live and let live. It's the key to happiness in life.
To be sure, I am ambivalent about the issue myself. Unlike most, I am loath to ascribing moral or religious arguments either way. Indeed, as an individual who himself may likely never marry, whether or not gay marriage is allowed is of no real consequence to me. But when a group suddenly proposes a radical shift in the fundamental definition of terms that, in themselves, form the very building blocks of any coherent sociolinguistic system I tend to take pause in order to know the reasons such a shift would be justified in the first place.
To be sure, I am ambivalent about the issue myself. Unlike most, I am loath to ascribing moral or religious arguments either way. Indeed, as an individual who himself may likely never marry, whether or not gay marriage is allowed is of no real consequence to me. But when a group suddenly proposes a radical shift in the fundamental definition of terms that, in themselves, form the very building blocks of any coherent sociolinguistic system I tend to take pause in order to know the reasons such a shift would be justified in the first place.
Interestingly, however, we had legal same-sex marriages in California for six months, and almost nothing was said about it. The sky didn't fall.
Massachusetts and Connecticut continue to have legal same-sex marriages, and the sky hasn't fallen there either.
Everything would have been fine and life would have gone on peacefully in California if it weren't for the passage of Proposition 8.
Yes, MrSykes, it's very obvious you are ambivalent about the issue.
That's why you started the thread, right? Because of your ambivalence?
You could say that. Refer to the rest of the post, beginning with "But..."
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.