Quote:
Originally posted by Diane_Keaton
And phrases like "marriage of ideas"? Is that using the "commonly-accepted" meaning of a man-woman union? The word marriage is used for more than a man/woman union. I think the underlying point is that you do NOT see gay unions as being worthy of the same relationships that a man/woman may have. And that's fine, but the "let's not confuse the dictionary" thing is (with all due respect) a bit weak.
|
Actually, as with many other issues, what I'm endorsing is the right of the majority to maintain the meaning of terms in their own language, as they understand it.
Care to cite an example of two ideas being united (i.e., "married")
and given respective rights and duties by government, particularly an example that does not involve a man/woman union? The fact that one can cite "fuck" as an old statute doesn't mean its not just a swear word in the eyes of the majority.
As to the underlying point, I hate to tell ya, but you don't speak for me (or I believe the majority of the right and righteous in this nation). I do see gay unions as being worthy of the same protections, which is the same "relationships", and in fact I posted the same here early when the topic first came up (perhaps even before Atticus!).
But putting words in my mouth (e.g., "you do NOT see") and ascribing only your understanding of my beliefs to me does not lead to a proper conclusion that my basis is "weak". If it was so weak, you wouldn't have to mischaracterize my beliefs and skip a few steps before reaching an unsupported conclusion that they are "weak".
