Evidence for God from Science

Gays, do you support gay marriage, or are you happy with civil unions? I am very supportive of gay rights. I have many gay friends who I love very much, and it makes me sad that they don't have the same rights as me. I support gay marriage, but only because marriage is a legal contract. I would PREFER everyone get a civil union at town hall, and a marriage at a place of worship.

The problem I have with this whole debate is the fact they want to change the etymology of the word to suit their desires. If marriage has always been defined as a union between man and women, then let homosexual couples come up with a new word to describe their union. If they want to have the same civil rights as a heterosexual couple, fine, it's not my life. But to call it marriage is simply wrong because by definition its NOT :S

It's too bad that our government completely overlooked that fact that marriage is still by majority a religious institution, not a legal contract... shame. But, after all, I suppose it is just a word, and nothing more until you assign meaning to it.... there are many different definitions throughout the world, and I prefer to adhere to mine.

StMonicaGuideMe wrote:The problem I have with this whole debate is the fact they want to change the etymology of the word to suit their desires. If marriage has always been defined as a union between man and women, then let homosexual couples come up with a new word to describe their union. If they want to have the same civil rights as a heterosexual couple, fine, it's not my life. But to call it marriage is simply wrong because by definition its NOT :S

Perfectly said!

Good call, KMR. It has been a religious institution and it's even a sacrament in most religions (Christian and otherwise!). So why would they want to take something that has traditionally been sacramental and religious and change it to something completely secular? Come up with their own title for it and let this issue be put to rest.

It's like a bunch of people petition the government change what the word "cheese" means. Okay, says the government, what is cheese, then? Well, they say, it will not be a dairy product, it's going to be soy based. Government scratches their head, and says "well then, why not just call it soy?". Seriously, it's THAT simple. All of this kurfuffle is for nothing.

I'm tired of the word "homophobic" being used just because you oppose something to do with it. No, I am not afraid of homosexuals. It's simple word definition. I'm afraid of spiders (arachnophobia). Of clowns (coulrophobia). And of small spaces (claustrophobia). Not gay people. I have gay friends. They know my position and they respect me as a human being the way I respect them.

Just another case of utter public bandwagon jumping when they don't want to use that grey matter in their skull.

While some people have questioned the definitions of words and so on, I think the issue with most homosexuals and homosexuals isn't the word "marriage" itself. The real issue comes with the legal and societal benefits of it. There are a ton of medical and monetary impacts that getting marriage has (as well as others to a lesser degree). If the government were to endorse a new phrase for homosexuals but give it the EXACT same benefits and impacts as marriage, the vast majority of homosexuals would be overjoyed.

The problem is, those opposed to gay marriage aren't usually just opposed to the terminology. They feel that it should be illegal for gay couples to adopt children, share health plans, get tax breaks, etc. because their romance is unnatural or unethical or whatever they happen to feel.

Though, on the topic of the word marriage, I still think it's a little silly to get up in arms over something like that. Marriage used to be only between people of the same race. Interracial marriages were not allowed worldwide, and still aren't in some backwards societies. Inter-religious marriages were once forbidden. Both of those were on completely religious grounds, and were simple discrimination based on idiotic 2000-or-more year old principles. People have non-religious marriages all the time these days in court rooms or other non-places of worship, and some of them are still religious and heterosexual. So why should only the homosexuals be denied "marriage" based on it being a religious context? Shouldn't then all marriages not performed religiously be banned?