Do you think that the use of the term "marrage", in the context of same sex partnerships, is an offront and even perhaps offensive to hetrosexuals?
Are we, as people who are same sex orentated (to whatever degree), not "shooting ourselves in the foot" (so to speak) by mimicking terminology that is sacricent to others, instead of establishing terminology and a heretage that is unique to ourselves ?
I do. I've had this discussion many times over the years as a non-biological parent...
Let's see where this goes...
Regards.
trialbyerror
![[-]](https://gayspeak.com/images/duende_v3_local/collapse.png)
•
I think some people want the legal rights and recognition that go with the term "marriage" more than the status itself. Otherwise, yes, you can be a perfectly great couple without going through those ritualistic motions.
•
Marriage is understood and recognized as something 'special'. We all know that a married person is 'hand off' because they are married.
We also know that married means they are part of a couple, and being part of that couple is different than being just Bf/GF/whatever.
Marriage is the bonding of two hearts together, for life... Yeah I know, instead of 'until death do us part' over 50% marry until it suits them to divorce... but we all have this basic understanding that marriage is supposed to be something more special than merely dating or going steady.
If two men or two women want to have that connection and have it recognized as being on par to straight marriage, then marriage is the correct term.
Frankly - with the majority not following through with until death do us part, I think we need to just drop the pretense, make marriage illegal for all and end the silly notion forever.
Instead have domestic partnership for all, everyone can sign a contract of 10-20 years, and have the change to reup at the end of the contract time.
Marriage, as in love until death is an old, mostly dead concept. A silly, quaint institution whose time has done pass.
•
Ah-ha!
I never implied that whatever the term we may use, let's pick one... Union? should not be in every way just as meaningful and substiantial before society and the law as marrage.
Also, don't knock it. Marrage, for you may be trivial or inconsequential, but for many other's it is the very cornerstone of their everyday existance.
However, marrage is still a hetrosexual institution. b
Why? Because, including all of those very important aspects, it also links children, concieved by both of those parents to their ancestry.
This, which ever way you crunch the numbers, same-sex people cannot emulate.
Instead of invading their institutions, don't you think we should rather show our respect, our strength, our individuality and create those of our own?
RGDS
Trialbyerror
•
And then you get to the heterosexual marriages that can't conceive children and have to adopt. Then they are exactly like homosexual marriages who have to adopt. I really don't see why it is so different in that case.
Also, I think making our own separate term and ritual about being an official couple will do nothing more than set homosexuals apart from heterosexuals even more. We'll be saying, "Yes, we are different. You now have another reason to point fingers at us and tell your children to avoid us."
•
Kyle hit a few decent points there.
The problem with a new word is that it will not be accepted as 'normal' by the majority.
And normalcy is one of the things the LGBT community are seeking, to be tolerated and accepted as being part of the spectrum of humanity instead of being hated.
We are already 'apart' from the rest of humanity because we are, well 'that way'. Why draw more differences between us instead of draw similarities?
As long as we have it named something else it will not be considered - the same.
Sure, Will said a rose by any other name smells just as sweet, but humans are biased and bigoted enough to where if you name it something else they will hate it a little.
•
Marriage
50% fail but the other half work a life time.
If you have goals in life nice to have a stable house hold. You change partners and everything winds up in the courts.
Jump from one guy to the next and you see the same issues surface. You got to figure it's me that needs to change.
•
We have already redefined marriage by stopping the trade of cattle for a woman's hand in marriage.
So when hetero's talk about 'traditional' marriage, they are talking shit so it doesn't bother me in the slightest what they say after saying 'Traditional' marriage or it being a religious ceremony.
•
I hate people arbitrarily creating new words just because someone might take it the wrong way or be offended.
retard became intellectually challenged
fairy penguin became little penguin
children are never wrong or bad at school work anymore oh no! They are 'still learning' or "If little johnny directed as much energy towards writing down the answers as he does participating in class (aka throwing things at other kids) then he would be top of the class"
Marriage is not a religious concept, they appropriated it from far older religions.
We shouldn't have to redefine the same thing under a new work just to avoid some people having hurt feelings.
•
I honestly think that if we create are own marriage institution. We will just be confirming are status as second class citizens,who don't deserve the same rights as hetero couples.
•
