Wind-Up Rubber Finger - Latest Comments on A different way to look at Gay Marriage. What is really being debated?

OGRE [Member] in response to: A different way to look at Gay Marriage. What is really being debated?

OGRE [Member] — Mon, 07 Sep 2009 18:32:59 +0000

Holle:

# Main Entry: 1fag·ot
# Variant(s): or fag·got \ˈfa-gət\

Faggot is a variant of the word fagot. Click on the "1 fagot (noun)". The difference in spelling is only to show implied meaning.

Even if they gays did adopt the word Maridge, or even Mawidge, they would still lack any of the legal support which they are seeking.

Hollie [Visitor] in response to: A different way to look at Gay Marriage. What is really being debated?

Hollie [Visitor] — Mon, 07 Sep 2009 17:44:43 +0000

That would be faggot: http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/faggot (which says it seems to have come from the word fagot anyway). So how about the gays just call it mariage, or maridge, LOL!

OGRE [Member] in response to: A different way to look at Gay Marriage. What is really being debated?

OGRE [Member] — Sat, 05 Sep 2009 19:26:58 +0000

Hollie:

Merriam Webster denotes the "current" definition. The traditional definition does not include same sex marriage. That is the point. The law in most states does not recognize it either, for the same reason. Even in the "updated" Webster definition, there is emphasis needed to point out "same-sex" marriage, because the word marriage was not used to describe a joining of two people of the same sex.

There is also the difference in literal definition and legal definition. Literal definitions are subject to change over time. Take "fagot" for example, it once meant a bundle of steel, or wood. Now it is a derogatory term for a male homosexual. The legal definition of marriage was not so explicit, because it was "understood" to mean the marriage of a man and a woman. That is why so many states have, in recent years, passed same sex marriage bans, or explicitly defined the word marriage in legal terms.

Hollie [Visitor] in response to: A different way to look at Gay Marriage. What is really being debated?

Hollie [Visitor] — Sat, 05 Sep 2009 18:21:40 +0000

Hmm, looks like the word already has multiple meanings:
http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/marriage.

OGRE [Member] in response to: A different way to look at Gay Marriage. What is really being debated?

OGRE [Member] — Fri, 04 Sep 2009 15:20:05 +0000

The murder analogy was designed to show the absurdity of redefining the word marriage. Yes I think it should be a states rights issue as well. The only problem there is with health insurance portability from state to state. That is, if we ever have legislation passed that allows for insurance portability.

OGRE [Member] in response to: A different way to look at Gay Marriage. What is really being debated?

OGRE [Member] — Fri, 04 Sep 2009 01:48:01 +0000

Hey, the new Science Czar believes that animals should be represented in court. In that case perhaps you could claim your dog as an dependent!

Rob [Visitor] in response to: A different way to look at Gay Marriage. What is really being debated?

Rob [Visitor] — Fri, 04 Sep 2009 00:01:35 +0000

I have killed a few people back in my day. Not once did I get called a murderer. But it sure feels good to be called "killer." If gays want to get married, I don't see how that affects any of us. I am indifferent on this issue, which is a rarity for my opinionated ass. In a way, both for and against arguments seem baseless. The only way this thing will go away is through a Constitutional Amendment: either clearly state that marriage is between a man and a woman or declare state laws banning gay marriages unconstitutional. By the way, while we're at it, why not change the tax code so I can claim my dog as a dependent? After all, I do pay for all her food and vet bills.