Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Snakeeye
Actually, I am fully aware of the semantics in this. This truely is a battle over a word, nothing more. It has been blown up into more by left-leaning hypocrites attempting to turn it to political favor.
|
It took two sides to blow up this issue (obvious), the homosexuals who want marriages, and those who believe they don't qualify for 'marriages'. It was not one vocal side making it an issue, with a subdued and fearful conservative element wailing in defense.
You're right though, it is over a word. Though, to say it's 'just a word', is clearly false, because both sides are fighting tooth and nail over it. And I don't blame the homosexuals, they live in a Western culture, they want a Western union, and we call them 'marriages' here... so that's what they want. If we called them 'unions', they'd want that.
Quote:
|
There is no issue with a gay union having the same legal rights as a hetro marriage. Nor do I see any reason why a gay union needs to be called a marriage. No more than I see any reason why a common-law union should be called a Marriage.
|
A 'traditional marriage' has the 'right' to be called a 'marriage'. Your side attempts to deny that 'right' from gay union/marriages... apparently because you see no reason they would want it...? They want the word... why not give it to them? How does it negatively impact anything hetero?
What are the negative consequences of calling a Homosexual Union a 'Marriage'? Seriously, real consequences, beyond 'I use that word, so they can't'.