|
Reitsuki Kojima
Witchhunter
Join date: 27 Jan 2004
Posts: 5,328
|
04-02-2006 12:17
From: Shirley Marquez Marriage is the word used in all the relevant federal laws, and likely most of the state ones as well. In order for gays to get equal protection under those laws, the term used for their union must be marriage; otherwise, the existing laws won't have any effect. Similarly, to invoke the court precedents for equal protection that have been used to require one state to recognize marriages performed by another, the word marriage must be used.
Separate but equal never is. History has already shown that. We could argue that we might do better to remove the word marriage from all civil law and leave it strictly for religious use -- but that would require the rewriting of huge numbers of laws,and it isn't going to happen. So the only way to get equal rights is to use the word marriage. People trying to argue the language game have missed that; in the current legal framework, to get equal rights and responsibilities, you have to use the word. I have an innate resistance to cobbling together new laws out of old when the laws could be re-evaluated. Of course I realize my solution will never happen, in my life time. Doesn't mean I don't think its the best solution, and what I personally will push for.
_____________________
I am myself indifferent honest; but yet I could accuse me of such things that it were better my mother had not borne me: I am very proud, revengeful, ambitious, with more offenses at my beck than I have thoughts to put them in, imagination to give them shape, or time to act them in. What should such fellows as I do crawling between earth and heaven? We are arrant knaves, all; believe none of us.
|
|
Michael Seraph
Second Life Resident
Join date: 9 Nov 2004
Posts: 849
|
04-02-2006 14:51
Got to love those Conservatives, they tell us the problem is the terminology when the problem is bigotry. If we'd only just call marriage something else we could sneak it by the ignorant bigots that make up the majority of the Republican party.
|
|
Kendra Bancroft
Rhine Maiden
Join date: 17 Jun 2004
Posts: 5,813
|
04-02-2006 15:28
From: Reitsuki Kojima Language, however, has evolved through subjective understanding.
If you want to get right down to it: No word is inherently religious, duh. Obviously. The meanings assosiated with the word are another story, however. Do athiests get married? |
|
Michael Seraph
Second Life Resident
Join date: 9 Nov 2004
Posts: 849
|
04-02-2006 15:31
From: Kendra Bancroft Do athiests get married? Not only do they get married, they get divorced less often than Baptists. |
|
Neehai Zapata
Unofficial Parent
Join date: 8 Apr 2004
Posts: 1,970
|
04-02-2006 20:17
From: Reitsuki Kojima Language, however, has evolved through subjective understanding.
If you want to get right down to it: No word is inherently religious, duh. Obviously. The meanings assosiated with the word are another story, however. Does that mean that over time "buttsex" could become a religious term?
_____________________
Unofficial moderator and proud dysfunctional parent to over 1000 bastard children.
|
|
Ananda Sandgrain
+0-
Join date: 16 May 2003
Posts: 1,951
|
04-02-2006 21:09
From: Neehai Zapata Does that mean that over time "buttsex" could become a religious term? Most of the times I've seen it used it was in a religious context.  Law is a little more amenable than requiring that every case of the use of the word "marriage" be changed to "civil union". All it would take is one (federal) law stating that the terms are equal and that every case of a civil union carries all the rights and responsibilities of a marriage. I mentioned this as an idea before, not because there's any reason to stop pressing for full marriage, but because I believe supporting incremental measures in that direction will help change public opinion and understanding that a de facto gay marriage will not be the end of the world. |
