It's nice to see only one or two people against it in these threads.... I remember when this topic first came up on Calgary puck and it seemed like I was certainty in the minority thinking gay marriage should be allowed.
The Following 4 Users Say Thank You to MrMastodonFarm For This Useful Post:
The definition is important even if it's just happening to you (and your spouse). It's about something important. Very few important things are undefined, and if they are, people do their best to define it. I got married. It has a meaning to it that was communicated to me what I had done. It's not just for mutual understanding, but for understanding oneself as well. At least this definition is.
So I think your original definition of marriage was far too brief, since you're talking about what marriage means to you, means to society, etc.
I understand and agree with what you are saying about the meaning of marriage to you and your partner.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Knalus
And because it happened to me, and because it was important to me, it matters to me what happens to it, even if it shouldn't.
I think that's entirely reasonable, marriage is a major social construct that everyone has a stake in, so it does matter.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Knalus
In that case, it's important what the definition is even to those who disagree with parts of it's definition. Why not change the definition to "A marriage is a union between a man and a woman, or a man and a man, or a woman and a woman, and it doesn't really mean anything"?
This is where you lose me. I don't understand why changing it has to mean it doesn't mean anything, especially when those changes are informed by higher virtues.
The only thing you've changed is "between a man and a woman" to "between a person and a person", how does that take away any meaning, let alone all of it?
__________________ Uncertainty is an uncomfortable position.
But certainty is an absurd one.
Another angle on this are the hermaphrodites (maybe 15,000 in the US? 0.05% of the population)...in jurisdictions where marriage is Man/Woman only...they could not marry anyone...what are the legal ramifications of that?
In any case, if only the fundies would focus their effort on real problems in marriage (e.g. child abuse, spousal abuse) the world would be a better place IMO
__________________
"WHAT HAVE WE EVER DONE TO DESERVE THIS??? WHAT IS WRONG WITH US????" -Oiler Fan
"It was a debacle of monumental proportions." -MacT
It's nice to see only one or two people against it in these threads.... I remember when this topic first came up on Calgary puck and it seemed like I was certainty in the minority thinking gay marriage should be allowed.
Yeah, I remember those days. Very nice to see that so many posters have changed their views on this issue in the past few years.
Honestly, I think a lot of the previous opposition to it was just political partisans adopting a sports fan mentality. At the time, Harper and the Conservatives were quite vocal in their opposition to same-sex marriage when Paul Martin's Liberal government wanted to change the law, so any posters who supported the CPC felt thy had to defend the party line. It's not really all that different than Canucks fans defending Bertuzzi after the incident. Deep down, they probably knew how wrong it was, but they couldn't go against their team.
I wish there was less of that mentality in politics.
The Following 4 Users Say Thank You to MarchHare For This Useful Post:
It was our western, North American, European definition, until recently, when it was brought into question by some who went looking anywhere they could to change that definition. As the discussion has been regarding North Carolina, and North America in general, I felt safe to use that as the basis for my definition.
I guess I just don't understand how you don't see a positive in definitions evolving like they have for so many things. Do you still believe women shouldn't vote or blacks aren't people?
__________________
2012.02.24 Hemsky signs a 2 year $10,000,000 contract:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Champion
A lot of character Hemsky has shown. He could have easily got a long term UFA contract. He knows what's brewing up here and wants to be a part of it. It can be contagious.
After all, why get married? If two people want to spend the rest of their lives together – fine, let them. Who needs a wedding? Sure seems like a lot of paperwork and hassle about something you intended to do anyhow, right?
And I do believe that marriage is a sacred thing, in much the way that Joseph Campbell indicates – as an act of following one’s bliss, it is one of the most important steps a human might take during a lifetime. Taken in that context, it seems perfectly natural to me that some couples would want to involve their community and peers – their friends, family, and other loved ones – in a ritual to acknowledge and give respect to the significance of this act.
CAMPBELL: You come into bliss. In the Middle Ages, a favorite image that occurs in many, many contexts is the wheel of fortune. There’s the hub of the wheel, and there is the revolving rim of the wheel. For example, if you are attached to the rim of the wheel of fortune, you will be either above going down or at the bottom coming up. But if you are at the hub, you are in the same place all the time. That is the sense of the marriage vow – I take you in health or sickness, in wealth or poverty; going up or coming down. But I take you as my center, and you are my bliss, not the wealth that you might bring me, not the social prestige, but you. That is following your bliss.
“Marriage is not a love affair. A love affair is a totally different thing. A marriage is a commitment to that which you are. That person is literally your other half. And you and the other are one. A love affair isn’t that. That is a relationship of pleasure, and when it gets to be unpleasurable , it’s off. But a marriage is a life commitment, and a life commitment means the prime concern of your life. If marriage is not the prime concern, you are not married.”
CAMPBELL: How many people before marriage receive spiritual instruction as to what the marriage means? You can stand up in front of a judge and in ten minutes get married. The marriage ceremony in India lasts three days. That couple is glued.
MOYERS: You're saying that marriage is not just a social arrangement, it's a spiritual exercise.
CAMPBELL: It's primarily a spiritual exercise, and the society is supposed to help us have the realization.
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).
Language is not a concrete thing. It is fluid and definitions evolve.
Redefining marriage as something between two people instead of between a man and a woman isn't as big of a redefinition as some would make it out to be. Calling the participants in marriage people doesn't mean that a man and a woman can't marry nor does it invalidate heterosexual marriage. It simply means that anyone can enter marriage with the person they choose regardless of the genders involved.
Exactly, just think your only talking about the english word for Marriage, for example in nordic languages "Giftast" means to marry... GIFT, I think you get where that has its roots..
But anyhow its really just wordplay, why it should hold any deep special meaning other than you give it is beyond me. Words and meanings constantly evolve and your making special 1 word in 1 language when in the western world there are so many variations of that word which stem from so many other traditions and old meanings that the importance of the word is really non existent.
Knalus, what I get from your posts is that the sanctity of marriage has gone downhill and letting gays marry will only keep it moving in that direction, and that disappoints you
What I think it boils down to is that gays just want what everyone else has. If they don't respect the sanctity of marriage, and get divorced, so be it. At least they then have the choice to disrespect what they and everyone else is entitled to.
It's not like things are going to get better in this part of the world.
It's nice to see only one or two people against it in these threads.... I remember when this topic first came up on Calgary puck and it seemed like I was certainty in the minority thinking gay marriage should be allowed.
I honestly don't even understand how this thread got 391 replies. I moved past this issue a long time ago. If I can, anyone can.
I honestly don't even understand how this thread got 391 replies. I moved past this issue a long time ago. If I can, anyone can.
Well it depends what you mean by "moved past it". Do you mean, you've finally changed your tune and agree that gays should have the same rights as anyone? Or moved past it, as in you still believe gay people are inequal, but no longer discuss it?
The Following User Says Thank You to jayswin For This Useful Post:
In all the years this has been a debate, I have asked anyone against it "How will this affect you, personally, in any possible negative way?"
Nobody, has been able to answer that question, without bringing god or the bible into play.
It can get sensitive without stupid religion, a few years ago I was at a beach with my then 10 year old son when 2 guys started kissing right in front of us, I personally didn't like answering my sons questions.So yeah it was negative!
I started this thread because I'm totally against governments discriminating against minorities by making laws against them but as a 50 year old man I'm not a big fan of open gayness and doubt I ever will be. This has nothing to do with a dumb book or an imaginary god it has to do with nature, if all humans were to be gay, well, we wouldn't exist.
It can get sensitive without stupid religion, a few years ago I was at a beach with my then 10 year old son when 2 guys started kissing right in front of us, I personally didn't like answering my sons questions.So yeah it was negative!
I started this thread because I'm totally against governments discriminating against minorities by making laws against them but as a 50 year old man I'm not a big fan of open gayness and doubt I ever will be. This has nothing to do with a dumb book or an imaginary god it has to do with nature, if all humans were to be gay, well, we wouldn't exist.
So just because you feel uncomfortable parenting (which is a big part of parenting ((being uncomfortable)) ) or even worse, can't be bothered, other people have to have less rights than you? It's your job to help your kids understand the world, and there are lots of other and more difficult things to explain to them.
As far as your animal example, there are plenty of examples of homosexuality and bisexuality in many other animals. It happens. True, if ALL of those animals including humans were gay, they wouldn't exist. But in many species, it is a variant of the genome.
EDIT: And as for explaining, how about this. You see kids, most men like women, and most women like men. But sometimes men like men, and women like women. Like skin color, race, language, it's all this beautiful diversity that is life. Some people will be different than you, and that's ok. And I want you to know, that whomever you want to love, that's ok with me.
Not too hard right?
(That last part is the most important, because if you have a child who you find out is gay, it will suddenly be important to you, and you may end up regretting things you said or did earlier. I've seen this happen with some parents I know.)
Last edited by Daradon; 05-11-2012 at 12:28 AM.
The Following 4 Users Say Thank You to Daradon For This Useful Post:
It can get sensitive without stupid religion, a few years ago I was at a beach with my then 10 year old son when 2 guys started kissing right in front of us, I personally didn't like answering my sons questions.So yeah it was negative!
I started this thread because I'm totally against governments discriminating against minorities by making laws against them but as a 50 year old man I'm not a big fan of open gayness and doubt I ever will be. This has nothing to do with a dumb book or an imaginary god it has to do with nature, if all humans were to be gay, well, we wouldn't exist.
Does anyone have the Louis CK picture that accompanies T&T's post? It fits perfect.
