Thanks for giving us your thoughts.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Knalus
I don't know about most of you, but I find definitions to be important. Marriage has always been between a man and a woman that are not related to each other and who are not married to anyone else. (although in the distant past and/or Saudi Arabia, that last one is iffy).
|
I think that your definition of marriage is far too narrow. Indeed, you are describing only one type of marriage. Marriage conventions and practices vary tremedously across societies and time. Also, even in the West, the institution of marriage has not been static or unchanging. For example, polygamous marriages were once common place. Arranged marriages were typical until only a couple of hundred years ago, etc.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Knalus
Marriage is an important thing. Not a flippant thing, nor an iffy thing. I didn't get married because it was no big deal, that if things went south I could always divorce. That's not right. Where I come from, where I grew up, Marriage was a solemn thing. It went beyond politics and ordinary stuff.
|
This is in fact one of the arguments in favour of same sex marriage.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Knalus
I guess I really should get past that. What I believe just isn't relevant anymore. The Institution of Marriage is indeed destroyed. I can understand why everyone should be free to do what they want, but I can also be disappointed in what they do.
|
I became engaged less than a year ago. I don't feel that the institution of marriage is destroyed at all.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Knalus
Which is why I struggle with this argument. The definition stands as it is. No amount of wishing by anyone will change that meaning.
|
Again, the definition of marriage changes dramatically from place to place and time to time. Indeed, it just did in Canada 5 years ago.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Knalus
It's a him, btw, not that it matters.
|
Well, in North Carolina, it matters because it cuts your pool of potential spouses in half.
