Friday, June 1, 2012
A Facebook Exchange
Yesterday at 7:31pm ·
I was listening somewhat to Neil Patrick Harris prattle on about his upcoming "marriage" to his "fiance" David.
Isn't marriage between a man and a wife?
Check out the definition of wife.
Get a "union" but leave marriage alone.
Don: So who put you in charge of deciding that? I don't recall being asked.
Ed: You're right. You weren't asked.
I said: "Check out the definition of wife."
Did you do that?
Don: You asked if a marriage was "between a man and a wife" but never waited for an answer. First off, since when is "wife" a gender? Second, let me ask again who put you in charge of defining marriage for all of society?
Ed: Wow, you skipped the whole "man and wife" and went to redefine "wife" rather than challenge the definition of marriage as "man and wife". Then you say I didn't wait for an answer,
I'm still waiting.
If you can re-define "wife", why can't I... keep the historical definition of "marriage". Who is anybody to re-define it?
Sample of many definitions:
a woman joined in marriage to a man; a woman considered in relation to her husband; spouse. 2. a woman (archaic or dial., except in idioms): old wives' tale. keep the historical definition of "marriage". Who is anybody to re-define it?
Charity: I have the smartest dad in the whole world! :-)
Fred: I believe you were pretty specific on what you wanted Ed and you get hit with emotion over facts... Gays can do whatever the he'll they want but it doesn't change the fact that they're the same sex as one another and there for it cannot be ...a real "marriage". It clearly means a man and woman and not any other way. Even those people who change their sex aren't really changing their sex, just cause they have or don't have a penis any more doesn't change their sex (there is actual scientific proof backing that up)If they believe in marriage and the oh holy "god" and all his/her/it's meaning then they would respect what marriage is and who its for and leave it alone.
Don: Way to keep avoiding my question Ed. You asked if a marriage is between "s man and s wife". Aside from the fact that you're referring to one party based on gender and the other by duties, where do you come off presuming to define what a marriage is for all of society? The bigger question is this: what business of it is yours who Neil Patrick Harris marries?
Don: Ed's talking about Civil law here, though, so religion has nothing to do with it. Ed simply refuses to mind his own business.
Ron: Yup..Ed you are right! The sanctity of marriage, ( Divorce rate in the 30% range), needs to be Protected. Knowing that Adding "Our Relationships" to the mix would Improve the Success Rate.. (The Good Lord knows you don"t need us to Challeng...e that "Sanctity"), you can have your "Definition of Marriage". Call it what you wish, I feel we waste too much time and resources on the semantics of the issue. Recognize the Union, award us the same respect and rights! We Don't want or need your Approval. Keep Your Definition of "The American Family" as well, it's as narrow and bigoted as the Religious Right that Champions it's causes....
Don: If you step back and look at it, the basic problem here is that "marriage" really consists of two parts: the traditional, ritual-bound union that pretty much every church sanctifies and the set of legal rights that are bestowed by the ritua...See More
Ed: Don, I agree, and many conservatives do.
It was pretty much my point.
Why redefine terms that have been accepted for centuries?
Ron, if civil unions gave you the same rights, but without society's "blessing", would that be enough? Or to you need to force our "approval"?
Don: All that said, I still don't get why Doogie Howser's marital status is your concern.
Ed: What concerns me is what we consider "marital" status.
I understand that you don't care, but I would have to suppose that "any" definition of marriage (ie poly-anything) would not concern you.
Don: It doesn't. I'd like to, just once, hear a legitimate reason why same-sex should be illegal. Please bear in mind that a religious argument is not legitimate and never is when discussing civil law.
Ed: Marriage is an explicit approval of a relationship bestowed by the state. It is not a right.
A large majority of this country does not approve. And doesn't want to be forced to approve.
Civil unions are a recognition sans approval.
Ron: The perception is.. this is less about the "Sanctity of Marriage, and more about the Right's narrow definition of "The American Family", and the protection of it's beliefs and standards. This Lifestyle is Not a Sin, and recognizing these rights is Not a compromise with the devil. Judgement does not suit you Ed.
Don: No, Ed, it's about the fact that Christians refuse to accept that the supreme law of the land is the Constitution, not their private rule book. They're all for freedom as long as it's applied to anyone who agrees with them.
Ron: BRAVO DON!
Ed: "The perception is.." that's your perception, Ron.
It's judgmental of you to call me judgmental.
I'll protect my "beliefs and standards".
Why is that bad?
"The lifestyle is not a sin". I didn't ring that up. I'm not out to offend you.
I like you. but I'm entitled to my beliefs, and not having others' forced on me..
and Don: Show me gay marriage in the Constitution. It is to laugh.
Don: You show me ANY mention of marriage in the Constitution.
Ed: Then why did you bring up the Constitution?