Will same sex marriage be codified in Congress?

[SoCal Deek]

2 hours ago, Chef Jim said:

Well it seems as if you don’t look at them as equals under the eye of God and that’s just sad.  
 

WWJD?  I don’t know but I doubt he’d tell someone to go ***** themselves.  Hope the nerve I struck heals.  

 Bigotry comes in all shapes and sizes Jimmy boy. I recommend you go buy yourself a mirror. 

[Chef Jim]

17 minutes ago, SoCal Deek said:

 Bigotry comes in all shapes and sizes Jimmy boy. I recommend you go buy yourself a mirror. 

 

Geez, a reply right out of old Billy Boy playbook.  That's rather disappointing.

 

We are all bigots in some fashion.  Some of us recognize it in ourselves and admit it.  Other hide it under the auspices of religion.

[SoCal Deek]

3 hours ago, Chef Jim said:

 

Geez, a reply right out of old Billy Boy playbook.  That's rather disappointing.

 

We are all bigots in some fashion.  Some of us recognize it in ourselves and admit it.  Other hide it under the auspices of religion.

Go get that mirror Jim. Your bigotry is hidden right under the surface of your reply.

 

Sorry to be this way, but you’re the one that went all nasty in the discussion. ‘Dirt Gay People’….really? That’s pretty bad. 

[Chef Jim]

24 minutes ago, SoCal Deek said:

Go get that mirror Jim. Your bigotry is hidden right under the surface of your reply.

 

Sorry to be this way, but you’re the one that went all nasty in the discussion. ‘Dirt Gay People’….really? That’s pretty bad. 

 

Well how would you prefer I refer to a group of people that you have deemed not worthy of referring to themselves as married?  I'm not the one that has a problem with the term "same sex marriage"  I just assumed dirty was a substitute for sinner.  I guess I was wrong.  

[SoCal Deek]

10 minutes ago, Chef Jim said:

 

Well how would you prefer I refer to a group of people that you have deemed not worthy of referring to themselves as married?  I'm not the one that has a problem with the term "same sex marriage"  I just assumed dirty was a substitute for sinner.  I guess I was wrong.  

Yes.....you are and were wrong.  I'd respectfully suggest you back away from your religious folks hate Jim. Whether you know it or not it's just another form of blatant blind bigotry. 

[BillStime]

[Big Blitz]

12 minutes ago, BillStime said:

 

This is actually exactly what Christianity preaches.  
 

Is this some sort of self own?

 

Individual responsibility!  

[BillStime]

 

8 minutes ago, Big Blitz said:

 

This is actually exactly what Christianity preaches.  
 

Is this some sort of self own?

 

Individual responsibility!  

 

You're funny.

[SoCal Deek]

Yikes…there’s an awful lot of anti-Christian posts on here today. I guess that’s the one remaining acceptable form of group hate speech. Who knew? 

[Chef Jim]

1 hour ago, SoCal Deek said:

Yes.....you are and were wrong.  I'd respectfully suggest you back away from your religious folks hate Jim. Whether you know it or not it's just another form of blatant blind bigotry. 

I’m wrong?  And what am I wrong about?  
 

Yes I’m a bigot against people who push their archaic beliefs on others.  You still haven’t explained why you’re so against same sex couples can’t call their union a marriage. 🤷🏻‍♂️

[Big Blitz]

9 hours ago, BillStime said:

They had time to vote, right comrade? 

 

Look at how wonderful this young generation is.  I don’t think our grandparents could say they ever accomplished so much in school

 

 

[BillStime]

8 minutes ago, Big Blitz said:

 

Look at how wonderful this young generation is.  I don’t think our grandparents could say they ever accomplished so much in school

 

 

Look how wonderful this generation is:

 

 

 

[cle23]

On 11/29/2022 at 7:29 PM, SoCal Deek said:

Sure...it's going to be great when every single word in the English language is properly hyphenated so as not to offend anyone. Yep....that'll be FANTASTIC.

Because using two words to define something is just a lazy use of the English language.

 

.

 - the legally or formally recognized union of two people as partners in a personal relationship

- the state of being united as spouses in a consensual and contractual relationship recognized by law

-an act of marrying or the rite by which the married status is effected

 especially : the wedding ceremony and attendant festivities or formalities

-an intimate or close union

 

Who is using 2 words?  You literally have said multiple times in this thread that we should make a new, separate word for "gay marriage,"  and then in turn also say using 2 words to define something is lazy.  The above definitions all meet and describe any "type" of marriage.  It works for everything.  My wife and I are married.  My brother and his husband are also married.  Our marriages, especially in the eyes of the government, mean the same thing.  

 

Also, if the word means so much to people in "traditional" marriages, why then do people think it wouldn't mean something to everyone else as well?  Everyone gets married, and everyone is happy with that, except the people who want everyone to have to call it something different.  If it means that little, let's change "traditional" marriage to another word.  Does that work for you?

Edited December 1, 2022 by cle23

[SoCal Deek]

8 hours ago, cle23 said:

 

.

 - the legally or formally recognized union of two people as partners in a personal relationship

- the state of being united as spouses in a consensual and contractual relationship recognized by law

-an act of marrying or the rite by which the married status is effected

 especially : the wedding ceremony and attendant festivities or formalities

-an intimate or close union

 

Who is using 2 words?  You literally have said multiple times in this thread that we should make a new, separate word for "gay marriage,"  and then in turn also say using 2 words to define something is lazy.  The above definitions all meet and describe any "type" of marriage.  It works for everything.  My wife and I are married.  My brother and his husband are also married.  Our marriages, especially in the eyes of the government, mean the same thing.  

 

Also, if the word means so much to people in "traditional" marriages, why then do people think it wouldn't mean something to everyone else as well?  Everyone gets married, and everyone is happy with that, except the people who want everyone to have to call it something different.  If it means that little, let's change "traditional" marriage to another word.  Does that work for you?

Well reasoned response. My sole contention is that people in general do in fact use two words to define it. It’s most commonly referred to as ‘gay marriage’ not ‘marriage’. So to show my sincerity to your hypothetical proposition, yes I’m okay with changing traditional marriage to another word. Again, mine is not a primarily religious position. It’s in essence a linguistic one. Trust me when I say I’m not losing sleep over the matter. I just believe it’d be a more accurate (not right or wrong, nor better or worse…as Chef likes to accuse/imply) use of the language. I’m fully aware that my position goes against the common narrative. But I can also assure you that it’s not coming from a position of hate or ridicule. 
Thanks for the discussion. 

[Sundancer]

43 minutes ago, SoCal Deek said:

Well reasoned response. My sole contention is that people in general do in fact use two words to define it. It’s most commonly referred to as ‘gay marriage’ not ‘marriage’. So to show my sincerity to your hypothetical proposition, yes I’m okay with changing traditional marriage to another word. Again, mine is not a primarily religious position. It’s in essence a linguistic one. Trust me when I say I’m not losing sleep over the matter. I just believe it’d be a more accurate (not right or wrong, nor better or worse…as Chef likes to accuse/imply) use of the language. I’m fully aware that my position goes against the common narrative. But I can also assure you that it’s not coming from a position of hate or ridicule. 
Thanks for the discussion. 

No “people” do not. Marriage is marriage to most people. 
 

When discussing the political rights of people, it can be helpful to say gay marriage but I don’t say my friend is gay-married or straight-married. They are just married. 
 

We don’t need two words because nothing is different in the union. I don’t refer to old marriage vs young marriage. Or short people vs tall people marriage. 

[Chef Jim]

38 minutes ago, SoCal Deek said:

Well reasoned response. My sole contention is that people in general do in fact use two words to define it. It’s most commonly referred to as ‘gay marriage’ not ‘marriage’. So to show my sincerity to your hypothetical proposition, yes I’m okay with changing traditional marriage to another word. Again, mine is not a primarily religious position. It’s in essence a linguistic one. Trust me when I say I’m not losing sleep over the matter. I just believe it’d be a more accurate (not right or wrong, nor better or worse…as Chef likes to accuse/imply) use of the language. I’m fully aware that my position goes against the common narrative. But I can also assure you that it’s not coming from a position of hate or ridicule. 
Thanks for the discussion. 

Linguistics?  Now it’s a linguistics issue?  Why have you changed your tune?  A couple weeks ago you were adamant that the term was only between a man and a woman according to the church.  What in the world does linguists have to do with this?  Methinks you’re shying away from your religious beliefs.   If so why?  Nothing wrong with it. If the church is against it so be it.  Don’t use the word amongst yourselves. Don’t perform same sex marriages.  But do NOT tell others what to call themselves. THAT is my whole issue here. 
 

 Would you be ok if we dropped the word gay? And went with just the word marriage?  

[cle23]

47 minutes ago, SoCal Deek said:

Well reasoned response. My sole contention is that people in general do in fact use two words to define it. It’s most commonly referred to as ‘gay marriage’ not ‘marriage’. So to show my sincerity to your hypothetical proposition, yes I’m okay with changing traditional marriage to another word. Again, mine is not a primarily religious position. It’s in essence a linguistic one. Trust me when I say I’m not losing sleep over the matter. I just believe it’d be a more accurate (not right or wrong, nor better or worse…as Chef likes to accuse/imply) use of the language. I’m fully aware that my position goes against the common narrative. But I can also assure you that it’s not coming from a position of hate or ridicule. 
Thanks for the discussion. 

 

I honestly think for the longest time it was called "gay marriage" because it was not allowed.  At the time, they were different.    Now, in the eyes of the government, they are not, so I feel there is no need for them to be different.  

 

I was not accusing you of anything hateful either in response.  People can have differing opinions, I just try to show WHY it may be important to people on the other side of the argument.

[SoCal Deek]

13 minutes ago, cle23 said:

 

I honestly think for the longest time it was called "gay marriage" because it was not allowed.  At the time, they were different.    Now, in the eyes of the government, they are not, so I feel there is no need for them to be different.  

 

I was not accusing you of anything hateful either in response.  People can have differing opinions, I just try to show WHY it may be important to people on the other side of the argument.

Thanks! There’s no intent on my part to be disrespectful to anyone. I just personally loathe the new hyphenated trend in our shared language. And while it’s immediately exciting for the gay community to be married, I believe over time if it continues to be called “gay-marriage” they are going to look back and think this isn’t the equality they were striving for. We’ll see where the language takes us. 

[Chef Jim]

12 minutes ago, SoCal Deek said:

Thanks! There’s no intent on my part to be disrespectful to anyone. I just personally loathe the new hyphenated trend in our shared language. And while it’s immediately exciting for the gay community to be married, I believe over time if it continues to be called “gay-marriage” they are going to look back and think this isn’t the equality they were striving for. We’ll see where the language takes us. 

You may not have any intent to be disrespectful but can you see why your thoughts on the subject can be interpreted as such? 

[SoCal Deek]

4 hours ago, Chef Jim said:

You may not have any intent to be disrespectful but can you see why your thoughts on the subject can be interpreted as such? 

I can see how reasonable adults talk to each other. That I can clearly see. It’s amazing how well it works when ‘someone’ isn’t trying to WIN every discussion. Every topic isn’t supposed to be a fight to the death. 

[Chef Jim]

10 minutes ago, SoCal Deek said:

I can see how reasonable adults talk to each other. That I can clearly see. It’s amazing how well it works when ‘someone’ isn’t trying to WIN every discussion. Every topic isn’t supposed to be a fight to the death. 

 

I'm just trying to understand your position on this.  I'm not trying to win.  You've stated it about religion, then you say it's about linguistics.  You have not explained why, in YOUR MIND, why same sex couples cannot use the word marriage.  

 

And BTW reasonable adults don't tell each other to go ***** themselves.  Just something to think about ok.  

[SoCal Deek]

3 minutes ago, Chef Jim said:

 

I'm just trying to understand your position on this.  I'm not trying to win.  You've stated it about religion, then you say it's about linguistics.  You have not explained why, in YOUR MIND, why same sex couples cannot use the word marriage.  

 

And BTW reasonable adults don't tell each other to go ***** themselves.  Just something to think about ok.  

Reasonable people don’t belittle others because of their faith. Reasonable people don’t accuse other people of thinking that other are ‘dirty’. 
 

Something to think about…if you’re open to it. 

[Chef Jim]

1 hour ago, SoCal Deek said:

Reasonable people don’t belittle others because of their faith. Reasonable people don’t accuse other people of thinking that other are ‘dirty’. 
 

Something to think about…if you’re open to it. 

 

Well what comes around goes around my friend.  You belittle gays, I'll defend them and belittle you and your archaic religion.  Why can't they be married?  Please tell me.  You have skirted this question for too long.  You've become very defensive when I've shined a bright light on this.  Please, why, in your own words, can't gays be married?  

 

It's a damn word.  Your faith doesn't own it. In my opinion you lost this when you said we should come up with another work for marriage for same sex couples.  How do you feel about interracial marriages? Interfaith marriages?  

[Sundancer]

17 minutes ago, Chef Jim said:

How do you feel about interracial marriages? Interfaith marriages?  

 

I asked this too. 

 

I want a word for when an ugly guy marries a hot woman. That deserves its own word before marriage between men gets a new word. 

[wnyguy]

10 minutes ago, Sundancer said:

 

I asked this too. 

 

I want a word for when an ugly guy marries a hot woman. That deserves its own word before marriage between men gets a new word. 

I would term it "your marriage".

[Sundancer]

7 minutes ago, wnyguy said:

I would term it "your marriage".

 

What a sick burn. 

[Chef Jim]

56 minutes ago, wnyguy said:

I would term it "your marriage".

 

Ugly is subjective.  

[SoCal Deek]

2 hours ago, Chef Jim said:

 

Well what comes around goes around my friend.  You belittle gays, I'll defend them and belittle you and your archaic religion.  Why can't they be married?  Please tell me.  You have skirted this question for too long.  You've become very defensive when I've shined a bright light on this.  Please, why, in your own words, can't gays be married?  

 

It's a damn word.  Your faith doesn't own it. In my opinion you lost this when you said we should come up with another work for marriage for same sex couples.  How do you feel about interracial marriages? Interfaith marriages?  

Keep trying Chef. I’ve told you numerous times that mine isn’t a religion based position. Can gay people get married? Of course they can! They do now. That doesn’t mean our shared language couldn’t be more definitive. Does it? 

[Coffeesforclosers]

23 hours ago, Big Blitz said:

 

This is actually exactly what Christianity preaches.  
 

Is this some sort of self own?

 

Individual responsibility!  

 

Every sect of Christianity on the planet teaches that we are saved by the unmerited gift of God's grace.

 

None of them teach that we are saved by individual responsibility. 

[SoCal Deek]

11 minutes ago, Coffeesforclosers said:

 

Every sect of Christianity on the planet teaches that we are saved by the unmerited gift of God's grace.

 

None of them teach that we are saved by individual responsibility. 

Exactly! 
Very very well said.

It’s what separates Christianity from most if not all other faiths.

[Chef Jim]

2 hours ago, SoCal Deek said:

Keep trying Chef. I’ve told you numerous times that mine isn’t a religion based position. Can gay people get married? Of course they can! They do now. That doesn’t mean our shared language couldn’t be more definitive. Does it? 

Yes you’ve told me many times it’s not religious based after you told me it was based on your religion.  So make up you mind. 
 

More definitive?  In what way?  Is their union so different it’s needs a different word?  You still haven’t explained what your  hang up with them using the word married/marriage?  
 

So according to you they can get married but they can’t call it married.  
 

 

[SoCal Deek]

12 hours ago, Chef Jim said:

Yes you’ve told me many times it’s not religious based after you told me it was based on your religion.  So make up you mind. 
 

More definitive?  In what way?  Is their union so different it’s needs a different word?  You still haven’t explained what your  hang up with them using the word married/marriage?  
 

So according to you they can get married but they can’t call it married.  
 

 

Keep tying yourself in knots Chef.  Just remember how you did it, so you can untie yourself again when you need to go to pee. 😉

[Chef Jim]

6 minutes ago, SoCal Deek said:

Keep tying yourself in knots Chef.  Just remember how you did it, so you can untie yourself again when you need to go to pee. 😉

 

Ahhhh turning myself into knots.  Right out of Billy Boys playbook again.  Well he uses the word pretzel but you get my point.  You're really disappointing me Deek.  I have not tied myself in knots.  That would be you.  First they can't use the word marriage because the "good book"  says that marriage is between a man and a woman.  Then when confronted with that you deny that it's about religion and now it's about linguistics.  Which is it?  I assume it's a bit of both and that's ok.  You still haven't given us any rationale as to why you feel they cannot use the word marriage.  Maybe because you're not quite sure of the reason yourself.  Who knows.  

 

So we will leave it at this.  You have something against same sex couples using a word.  What it is we have no idea but that's ok.  You do what you want and think what you want.  Just do the gay community a favor.  Let them use whatever word they want.  If it offends you let it offend you.   As a comedian said.  "So what, be offended.  Nothing happens!" 

[SoCal Deek]

22 minutes ago, Chef Jim said:

 

Ahhhh turning myself into knots.  Right out of Billy Boys playbook again.  Well he uses the word pretzel but you get my point.  You're really disappointing me Deek.  I have not tied myself in knots.  That would be you.  First they can't use the word marriage because the "good book"  says that marriage is between a man and a woman.  Then when confronted with that you deny that it's about religion and now it's about linguistics.  Which is it?  I assume it's a bit of both and that's ok.  You still haven't given us any rationale as to why you feel they cannot use the word marriage.  Maybe because you're not quite sure of the reason yourself.  Who knows.  

 

So we will leave it at this.  You have something against same sex couples using a word.  What it is we have no idea but that's ok.  You do what you want and think what you want.  Just do the gay community a favor.  Let them use whatever word they want.  If it offends you let it offend you.   As a comedian said.  "So what, be offended.  Nothing happens!" 

Keep trying Chef. I did not say that they couldn’t use the word marriage because of what the Good Book says. And I’m not offended…. no matter how much you’re dying to imprint your anti-Christian bigotry onto others. 

[Sundancer]

1 hour ago, SoCal Deek said:

Keep trying Chef. I did not say that they couldn’t use the word marriage because of what the Good Book says. And I’m not offended…. no matter how much you’re dying to imprint your anti-Christian bigotry onto others. 

 

Simple question: Why do you want two words for marriage? 

[SoCal Deek]

8 minutes ago, Sundancer said:

 

Simple question: Why do you want two words for marriage? 

Simple answer: Because we have multiple words for virtually everything. That’s what language is. 
 

Clarification: (for my friend Chef) mine is a suggestion, not a religious fiat, or mandate 

[Chef Jim]

2 hours ago, SoCal Deek said:

Simple answer: Because we have multiple words for virtually everything. That’s what language is. 
 

Clarification: (for my friend Chef) mine is a suggestion, not a religious fiat, or mandate 

 

We have multiple words for virtually everything.  Yes we most certainly do but you have not explained why YOU are against same sex couple using the word marriage.  

 

Why even make the suggestion?  There has to be some sort of reasoning behind your suggestion.  It's weird dude.  You've tapped danced around this.  

 

Do you feel same sex couples should be able to use the word marriage/married when discussing their relationship and if so why or why not.  This should clear things up. 

[SoCal Deek]

2 minutes ago, Chef Jim said:

 

We have multiple words for virtually everything.  Yes we most certainly do but you have not explained why YOU are against same sex couple using the word marriage.  

 

Why even make the suggestion?  There has to be some sort of reasoning behind your suggestion.  It's weird dude.  You've tapped danced around this.  

 

Do you feel same sex couples should be able to use the word marriage/married when discussing their relationship and if so why or why not.  This should clear things up. 

How many more times do I have to say it to you? I’ve tried just about every way possible…and NONE of them are about any hatred of gay people, as much as you want it to be. 
 

Let me try another. Go to the toy store this weekend and buy a barnyard puzzle for a toddler. I’ll GUARANTEE you that the puzzle will have both a horse and a zebra. We don’t teach our kids that a zebra is a ‘striped horse’. The two things may look alike, but we have different words to describe them. A zebra is no better than a horse, nor vice versa. (In chef terms a yam is not a sweet potato, and a parsnip is not a white carrot….at least I don’t think so anyway).
 

There’s nothing at ALL degrading about having a more precise language. I have no idea why you think there is. 

[Sundancer]

2 hours ago, SoCal Deek said:

Simple answer: Because we have multiple words for virtually everything. That’s what language is. 
 

Clarification: (for my friend Chef) mine is a suggestion, not a religious fiat, or mandate 

 

That's not a WHY answer. That's just an observation that has applicability in some but hardly all circumstances. English famously has far fewer words for snow than other northern languages. 

 

So let's try again: Why do you want two words for marriage? 

18 minutes ago, SoCal Deek said:

How many more times do I have to say it to you? I’ve tried just about every way possible…and NONE of them are about any hatred of gay people, as much as you want it to be. 
 

Let me try another. Go to the toy store this weekend and buy a barnyard puzzle for a toddler. I’ll GUARANTEE you that the puzzle will have both a horse and a zebra. We don’t teach our kids that a zebra is a ‘striped horse’. The two things may look alike, but we have different words to describe them. A zebra is no better than a horse, nor vice versa. (In chef terms a yam is not a sweet potato, and a parsnip is not a white carrot….at least I don’t think so anyway).
 

There’s nothing at ALL degrading about having a more precise language. I have no idea why you think there is. 

 

We don't have different words for horse and zebra because they are different species. If you want to describe a brown horse or a white horse, you add a color adjective.

 

Marriage is marriage. Why do you want two words for marriage? 

[Chef Jim]

3 minutes ago, SoCal Deek said:

How many more times do I have to say it to you? I’ve tried just about every way possible…and NONE of them are about any hatred of gay people, as much as you want it to be. 
 

Let me try another. Go to the toy store this weekend and buy a barnyard puzzle for a toddler. I’ll GUARANTEE you that the puzzle will have both a horse and a zebra. We don’t teach our kids that a zebra is a ‘striped horse’. The two things may look alike, but we have different words to describe them. A zebra is no better than a horse, nor vice versa. (In chef terms a yam is not a sweet potato, and a parsnip is not a white carrot….at least I don’t think so anyway).
 

There’s nothing at ALL degrading about having a more precise language. I have no idea why you think there is. 

 

I'm done here.  You obviously are not willing or unable to articulate why same sex couples can't use the word marriage.  And that's ok Deek.  Many of us have deep rooted feeling about things we can't explain where they come from. 

 

I will leave you with this.  To your last sentence.  Ask a same sex couple who you've just told cannot call themselves a married couple if they feel degraded.  Calling them married is pretty damn precise to me.  But that's me.