Can a word have more than one definition?

[roguenuke]

Civil unions would have offered those benefits.

a) They don't currently.

b) Having two different legal contracts for basically the same thing is a huge waste of money. Especially when the only purpose for having the two different contracts is to be politically correct or to not offend religious people, who shouldn't have their religious beliefs as a matter of law to begin with.

 

[NoC_T]

I don't know anyone who would argue that a word could not have more than one definition so I don't understand why people who are against same sex marriage cannot understand that the word "marriage" could have more than one definition.

Why is it so hard to imagine that marriage could have one definition that includes a union between same sex couples and another definition that includes "a union between man and a woman"?

Why is there this ridiculous notion that same sex marriage "redefines" marriage when it clearly only adds to it since it has no affect on opposite sex unions.

Sorry to kick a dead horse, but I'm really trying to understand this particular line of rhetoric that same sex marriage opponents use religiously but which does not even pass the most basic test of reason. If they simply argued, "My God only recognizes marriage between a man and a woman" then it would be fine, but it is almost like same sex marriage opponents are embarrassed to admit that their views are purely motivated by their religious beliefs and instead play semantic games that insinuate words can only have one definition.

Because they know it's bs. They know that God is love. They know that what they're experiencing is something far less than that. They know it's their corrupted religion at fault.

They feel they must explain that which they're not comfortable with, in terms of something they are.

 

[Omgitsme]

Someone said something earlier about marrying metals and it was a good point , it comes from the original biblical definition of marriage, two become one. One man and one woman become one entity in a way and in a good marriage that is how it works, you think we instead of I. Only a man and a woman can "marry" like mixing two metals together. Trying to marry a man and a man or a woman and a woman is like trying to marry silver with silver , it means nothing you end up with silver whereas a man and a woman can merge like two metals that become a new stronger metal when married.

In a homosexual marriage its still two individuals marrying to become a stronger entity.

 

[Omgitsme]

Civil unions would have offered those benefits.

Separate is not equal. So unless all heterosexual marriages are going to be called civil unions then its not equal.

 

[sawyerloggingon]

Separate is not equal. So unless all heterosexual marriages are going to be called civil unions then its not equal.

Sometimes life isn't equal, if you are born a midget you will never play basketball, if you are born gay you will never know the joys of marriage, that's life.

 

[roguenuke]

Sometimes life isn't equal, if you are born a midget you will never play basketball, if you are born gay you will never know the joys of marriage, that's life.

This isn't true. Legal same sex marriage will be a reality in my lifetime, likely within this next decade. I'm betting that it will take the SCOTUS to change the laws for the nation, but I also believe they will do so soon.

So, yes, same sex couples will know the joys of marriage. In fact, besides the legal aspect, many who want to already do know those joys.

 

[Omgitsme]

Sometimes life isn't equal, if you are born a midget you will never play basketball, if you are born gay you will never know the joys of marriage, that's life.

There are physical reasons why a midget cannot play basketball professionally. There are no such physical reasons why homosexuals cannot get married.

 

[sawyerloggingon]

This isn't true. Legal same sex marriage will be a reality in my lifetime, likely within this next decade. I'm betting that it will take the SCOTUS to change the laws for the nation, but I also believe they will do so soon.

So, yes, same sex couples will know the joys of marriage. In fact, besides the legal aspect, many who want to already do know those joys.

I was speaking of the joys of marriage between a man and a woman, if you are born gay you will never experience that just as a person born with no legs will never know the joy of walking. I think being gay is a birth defect, you get the wrong mix of hormones. This isn't a slam just as I wouldn't slam a kid born with no legs, you do the best you can with what you got but when nature screws something up in you you will miss out on some "normal" joys of life.

 

[sawyerloggingon]

There are physical reasons why a midget cannot play basketball professionally. There are no such physical reasons why homosexuals cannot get married.

There are physical reasons gays can't have children, anal sex just never really leads to pregnancy.

 

[Omgitsme]

There are physical reasons gays can't have children, anal sex just never really leads to pregnancy.

Well homosexuals can have children if they have heterosexual sex. But I know what you mean. However none of that has anything to do with marriage.

 

[roguenuke]

I was speaking of the joys of marriage between a man and a woman, if you are born gay you will never experience that just as a person born with no legs will never know the joy of walking. I think being gay is a birth defect, you get the wrong mix of hormones. This isn't a slam just as I wouldn't slam a kid born with no legs, you do the best you can with what you got but when nature screws something up in you you will miss out on some "normal" joys of life.

Somehow I don't think that homosexuals would get any joy from being in a male/female relationship since they are homosexual.

This would be like me telling you that you will never feel the joy of being married to me since I don't want to be married to you and I'm already married. Likely though you don't want to be married to me either. People are attracted to who they are attracted to. And they get their joy from being married to a person they love, not from the fact that they are married to someone who is the opposite sex as them alone.

Everyone has different ideas of what brings them joy in life.

 

[sawyerloggingon]

Somehow I don't think that homosexuals would get any joy from being in a male/female relationship since they are homosexual.

This would be like me telling you that you will never feel the joy of being married to me since I don't want to be married to you and I'm already married. Likely though you don't want to be married to me either. People are attracted to who they are attracted to. And they get their joy from being married to a person they love, not from the fact that they are married to someone who is the opposite sex as them alone.

Everyone has different ideas of what brings them joy in life.

Fair point actually, gays will never know the joys of a male female relationship and hetros will never know the joys of same sex relationships I guess, I never really thought of it like that.

 

[CriticalThought]

There are physical reasons gays can't have children, anal sex just never really leads to pregnancy.

I never really understood the reasoning that marriage has something to do with pregnancy.

1. Marriage is not necessary to have kids.
2. No heterosexual couples who are incapable of having kids are restricted from marriage.
3. Same sex couples can have children through other means such as surrogacy and adoption.

 

[Jerry]

I don't know anyone who would argue that a word could not have more than one definition so I don't understand why people who are against same sex marriage cannot understand that the word "marriage" could have more than one definition.

Why is it so hard to imagine that marriage could have one definition that includes a union between same sex couples and another definition that includes "a union between man and a woman"?

Why is there this ridiculous notion that same sex marriage "redefines" marriage when it clearly only adds to it since it has no affect on opposite sex unions.

Sorry to kick a dead horse, but I'm really trying to understand this particular line of rhetoric that same sex marriage opponents use religiously but which does not even pass the most basic test of reason. If they simply argued, "My God only recognizes marriage between a man and a woman" then it would be fine, but it is almost like same sex marriage opponents are embarrassed to admit that their views are purely motivated by their religious beliefs and instead play semantic games that insinuate words can only have one definition.

We dont want your definition. Go away.

 

[Jerry]

I never really understood the reasoning that marriage has something to do with pregnancy.

1. Marriage is not necessary to have kids.
2. No heterosexual couples who are incapable of having kids are restricted from marriage.
3. Same sex couples can have children through other means such as surrogacy and adoption.

The institution of marriage has to do with social structure. Throughout human history weve expelled same-sex marriage because it doesnt serve superior social order. Homosexuality simply does not serve evolution.

 

[Jredbaron96]

Absolute truth is true absolutely.

Tautology is tautology. "Absolute" in what sense (and what the hell do you mean by "absolute")? Absolute can apply to the absolute and objective existence of a thing, to the objectivity and correctness of a scientific theory, and so on. I'll be willing to accept this premise in the latter case but not the former. For instance, it would be rather presumptuous to say that General/Special Relativity is objectively valid and absolutely true blah blah. For all we know, it might be revised or overturned in the future (former is likelier, but you get the point). However, you would not be wrong in stating that "tornadoes exist" (which is also a tautology but w.e) or "tornadoes sometimes occur in x place" and so on.

Subjective beliefs are either right or wrong compared with what is absolute.

Ok.

We hold gravity to be an absolute truth.

Refer to first statement.

Someone can believe gravity isn't real, but in the end their subjective belief is false when compared with what is absolutely true.

Sure, if you're referring to whether people dispute the existence of existence of gravity or not. Refer to first statement.

 

[CriticalThought]

The institution of marriage has to do with social structure. Throughout human history weve expelled same-sex marriage because it doesnt serve superior social order. Homosexuality simply does not serve evolution.

Superior social order?

Serve evolution?

Not to Godwin this thread, but do you realize how much you sound like a Social Darwinist, Nazi right now?

Your values sound more in line with the Third Reich's justifications for persecuting homosexuals than with American values.

 

[MKULTRABOY]

The institution of marriage has to do with social structure. Throughout human history weve expelled same-sex marriage because it doesnt serve superior social order. Homosexuality simply does not serve evolution.

A handful of emperors of Rome were openly gay.
Gay marriage was also common and encouraged in many many societies.
Even some successful militant ones.

 

[Jerry]

Superior social order?

Serve evolution?

Not to Godwin this thread, but do you realize how much you sound like a Social Darwinist, Nazi right now?

Your values sound more in line with the Third Reich's justifications for persecuting homosexuals than with American values.

You totally just godwin'd your own thread :lol:

Yeah, put gays in concentration camps, that's exactly what I was saying :lol:

 

[Jerry]

A handful of emperors of Rome were openly gay.

No one's talking about anyone being gay. We're talking about same-sex marriage, something even heteros can do. As a strictly-legal-contract 2 hetero men who lack any romantic interest can join civilly and enjoy various legal benefits without any social obligation for those benifits. You talk like marriage is all about sex or something. Sheesh.

Also, those Cesars were not legally married. One had a sorda-kinda ceremony but it was never sanctioned by the state or legal.

Gay marriage was also common and encouraged in many many societies.

Even some successful militant ones.

Name 1.

 

[CriticalThought]

You totally just godwin'd your own thread :lol:

Yeah, put gays in concentration camps, that's exactly what I was saying :lol:

I'm not so sure you weren't.

 

[Jerry]

I'm not so sure you weren't.

Oh you caught me. Yes my passionate support for gays serving openly in the military and being able to adopt is all a clever trap to lure gays into the incinerator in my basement. Awww you caught me, and I would have gotten away with it to if it were for those meddling kids!!

 

[MKULTRABOY]

No one's talking about anyone being gay. We're talking about same-sex marriage, something even heteros can do. As a strictly-legal-contract 2 hetero men who lack any romantic interest can join civilly and enjoy various legal benefits without any social obligation for those benifits. You talk like marriage is all about sex or something. Sheesh.

Also, those Cesars were not legally married. One had a sorda-kinda ceremony but it was never sanctioned by the state or legal.



Name 1.

Since we're talking about legal marriage, off the top of my head I do not know.
However I do know it was not likely they had to share insurance, or finances, or medical issues, etc.
Which would be the only reason it wasn't necessary.
This is not to say male pairs in higher society in times could not easily write legally binding wills or financial arrangements etc to each-other with ease.

 

[Jerry]

Since we're talking about legal marriage, off the top of my head I do not know.
However I do know it was not likely they had to share insurance, or finances, or medical issues, etc.
Which would be the only reason it wasn't necessary.
This is not to say male pairs in higher society in times could not easily write legally binding wills or financial arrangements etc to each-other with ease.

Gays can already go have religious or other personal ceremonies. Gays can already live together, buy property together, leave each-other inheritances regardless of sex or sexual orientation with living will, last will and testament and power of aterney (yes, a hospital HAS to let you PoA in. They are required by law and you can get a sherrif to enforce it with not but a phone call).

No one is stopping gays from living however they want. Several million couples in America and even more over seas live out their entire relationships, to their death, without ever being legally married. Gays can do this also.

 

[MKULTRABOY]

No one is stopping gays from living however they want. Several million couples in America and even more over seas live out their entire relationships, to their death, without ever being legally married. Gays can do this also.

What if they don't want to? And would rather get married?


...what then?

Apparently you have to pass laws designed to restrict their desires to live as they wish.

Hrrm. I see.