SoCal Deek Posted July 11, 2022 Share Posted July 11, 2022 1 minute ago, BillStime said: Why do gays hate the GQP? Wouldn’t the liberal work solution be to change the name to something other than marriage? Or would that make too much sense? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BillStime Posted July 11, 2022 Share Posted July 11, 2022 Just now, SoCal Deek said: Wouldn’t the liberal work solution be to change the name to something other than marriage? Or would that make too much sense? Your bigotry is showing again. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SoCal Deek Posted July 11, 2022 Share Posted July 11, 2022 Just now, BillStime said: Your bigotry is showing again. That’s a mirror dude! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BillStime Posted July 11, 2022 Share Posted July 11, 2022 Just now, SoCal Deek said: That’s a mirror dude! No - you wear your bigotry and hate with pride. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SoCal Deek Posted July 11, 2022 Share Posted July 11, 2022 5 minutes ago, BillStime said: No - you wear your bigotry and hate with pride. Sure dude…..you clearly speak the gay community. Everyone knows that Buffalo NY is the heart of the community. Give me a break. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BillStime Posted July 11, 2022 Share Posted July 11, 2022 2 minutes ago, SoCal Deek said: Sure dude…..you clearly speak the gay community. Everyone knows that Buffalo NY is the heart of the community. Give me a break. More pathetic nonsense Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SoCal Deek Posted July 11, 2022 Share Posted July 11, 2022 3 minutes ago, BillStime said: More pathetic nonsense Well you would know, being that you’re The King of Nonsense. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cle23 Posted July 11, 2022 Share Posted July 11, 2022 1 hour ago, SoCal Deek said: Wouldn’t the liberal work solution be to change the name to something other than marriage? Or would that make too much sense? If the word means so much to you, why shouldn't it mean something to gay people as well? Also, no religious institutions are forced to perform gay marriages. As long as marriage is a term used in the government's recognition of a union, and at this point why would they change it, then everyone union should be called marriage. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SoCal Deek Posted July 11, 2022 Share Posted July 11, 2022 9 hours ago, cle23 said: If the word means so much to you, why shouldn't it mean something to gay people as well? Also, no religious institutions are forced to perform gay marriages. As long as marriage is a term used in the government's recognition of a union, and at this point why would they change it, then everyone union should be called marriage. The word means what it means. Not to me…but to the English language. It’s why we have language at all. A unique word for this form of Union would keep you from having to use two words (gay marriage) to describe it. Mine is not a religious point, but a linguistic one. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cle23 Posted July 11, 2022 Share Posted July 11, 2022 52 minutes ago, SoCal Deek said: The word means what it means. Not to me…but to the English language. It’s why we have language at all. A unique word for this form of Union would keep you from having to use two words (gay marriage) to describe it. Mine is not a religious point, but a linguistic one. Most people don't call it gay marriage. I personally know 2 couples that got "gay married." Neither invited people to their "gay wedding", just to their wedding. Why make a new word for something that functions exactly the same for everyone? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SoCal Deek Posted July 11, 2022 Share Posted July 11, 2022 1 hour ago, cle23 said: Most people don't call it gay marriage. I personally know 2 couples that got "gay married." Neither invited people to their "gay wedding", just to their wedding. Why make a new word for something that functions exactly the same for everyone? Because language is supposed be more, not less, descriptive. When you ask your significant other what’s for dinner….do you say, meat? I’m guessing not. We use language to better define our world…not make everything equal. No malice intended here at all, just some creative thinking. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cle23 Posted July 11, 2022 Share Posted July 11, 2022 30 minutes ago, SoCal Deek said: Because language is supposed be more, not less, descriptive. When you ask your significant other what’s for dinner….do you say, meat? I’m guessing not. We use language to better define our world…not make everything equal. No malice intended here at all, just some creative thinking. I understand where you are coming from, but why make an effort make separate words for the same thing? The whole point is for exclusion at that point. There is a word for it already. Just use it and be done with it. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Niagara Bill Posted July 11, 2022 Share Posted July 11, 2022 Laws that proclaim a bill of rights for any group, only serves to separate people. One bill of rights for all. Any consideration of any religious order, is wrong. You are American, Canadian or whatever. Your religion may be important to you, but not first. Even the founding fathers knew that. If we do that then the issues of gay, Muslim, transgender, Catholic etc etc no longer exist. Do knock on my door with your beliefs, and I will respect your privilege to practice your beliefs, providing you practice man's law in our country. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SoCal Deek Posted July 11, 2022 Share Posted July 11, 2022 58 minutes ago, cle23 said: I understand where you are coming from, but why make an effort make separate words for the same thing? The whole point is for exclusion at that point. There is a word for it already. Just use it and be done with it. Why? Because, there actually isn’t a word for two men joining in such a union. Or two women for that matter. The sole purpose of language is to help people communicate MORE specifically, not LESS specifically. That basic rule applies to every field of study and expertise. Why not this one too? It solves much of the current discourse and hurts absolutely nobody. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cle23 Posted July 11, 2022 Share Posted July 11, 2022 40 minutes ago, SoCal Deek said: Why? Because, there actually isn’t a word for two men joining in such a union. Or two women for that matter. The sole purpose of language is to help people communicate MORE specifically, not LESS specifically. That basic rule applies to every field of study and expertise. Why not this one too? It solves much of the current discourse and hurts absolutely nobody. It doesn't solve anything, and it hurts in the sense of making a separate word for the sole purpose of exclusion. There is no need for a separate word if the union (marriage) means the same thing. Also, here is the Webster definition: Definition of marriage a: the state of being united as spouses in a consensual and contractual relationship recognized by law b: the mutual relation of married persons : WEDLOCK c: the institution whereby individuals are joined in a marriage 2: an act of marrying or the rite by which the married status is effectedespecially : the wedding ceremony and attendant festivities or formalities 3: an intimate or close union, the marriage of painting and poetry— J. T. Shawcross So, this definition covers everyone. Nothing in it that differentiates same sex or "traditional" marriage. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SoCal Deek Posted July 11, 2022 Share Posted July 11, 2022 21 minutes ago, cle23 said: It doesn't solve anything, and it hurts in the sense of making a separate word for the sole purpose of exclusion. There is no need for a separate word if the union (marriage) means the same thing. Also, here is the Webster definition: Definition of marriage a: the state of being united as spouses in a consensual and contractual relationship recognized by law b: the mutual relation of married persons : WEDLOCK c: the institution whereby individuals are joined in a marriage 2: an act of marrying or the rite by which the married status is effectedespecially : the wedding ceremony and attendant festivities or formalities 3: an intimate or close union, the marriage of painting and poetry— J. T. Shawcross So, this definition covers everyone. Nothing in it that differentiates same sex or "traditional" marriage. Oh brother…that definition existed before we had gay marriage. It’s like when a new species is discovered…. they create a new word. Biologists don’t keep calling everything a dog. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BillStime Posted July 11, 2022 Share Posted July 11, 2022 1 hour ago, SoCal Deek said: Oh brother…that definition existed before we had gay marriage. It’s like when a new species is discovered…. they create a new word. Biologists don’t keep calling everything a dog. Your bigotry and hate is running hot today. Do you think gay marriage minimizes the significance of “straight” marriage? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cle23 Posted July 11, 2022 Share Posted July 11, 2022 1 hour ago, SoCal Deek said: Oh brother…that definition existed before we had gay marriage. It’s like when a new species is discovered…. they create a new word. Biologists don’t keep calling everything a dog. Yes, the definition existed before, and it encompasses all "types" of marriage in it's very definition. Why do we need to make it more complicated by making a separate word when this one covers it? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BillStime Posted July 11, 2022 Share Posted July 11, 2022 6 minutes ago, cle23 said: Yes, the definition existed before, and it encompasses all "types" of marriage in it's very definition. Why do we need to make it more complicated by making a separate word when this one covers it? Marriage was a religious term before it was a legal term. I think the government at all levels should get rid of the term marriage and reclassify them ALL civil unions. Watch the cults’ heads explode. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SoCal Deek Posted July 11, 2022 Share Posted July 11, 2022 (edited) 3 hours ago, BillStime said: Your bigotry and hate is running hot today. Do you think gay marriage minimizes the significance of “straight” marriage? Again I say…oh brother. And yes if you use imprecise distinctions in the definition of words it waters down anything you’re trying to describe. That’s true for every type of word you use and has nothing to do with your bigotry nonsense. And I still have no idea why this would be in any way offensive to gay men. I’m pretty sure they already know that they’re gay!! But we all know the real agenda is just what you stated…to minimize the significance of traditional marriage. Edited July 11, 2022 by SoCal Deek Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts