[extropy-chat] FWD [SK] Re: Just curious, it's not natural!

[Anna Taylor]

Anna wrote on Mon Oct 30:
>>> >Why wouldn't the gay communities want their own
>>> >word for their union and still keep the basic
>>> >laws for spouse and marital?

On 10/31/06, Terry Colvin <fortean1 at mindspring.com>
forwarded:
>> Maybe because they're forming a union, joined for
>>life, and creatin a family -- so there's a perfectly
>>good word for that already in existence.

That word is already taken.  It describes the "Union"
between male and female.  

>>In any case, it's not "scriptural" -- the
>>institution predates and is independent of any
>>particular scripture.

No. Laws are institutions that predate.  If gays want
to be married, I again will repeat, I have no problem
with that.  I believe they should have every right to
the same benefits and laws as a "married" couple
should have but I think it should be defined by a
different word.  

>>>I can't pressume to understand the relationship
>>>between 2 men or 2 women and who am I to judge what
>>>"Union" they want but as a heterosexual woman,
>>>don't I have every right to keep word "marriage"?.

>> Sure you do. Your marriage won't suddenly become
>>a "flerm" just because someone else got married. Did
>>all heterosexual marriages suddenly change somehow
>>in 1989, when Denmark recognized gay marriage?

It's not about recognizing gay marriage.  I have the
upmost respect for gays, I would never disrespect any
choice of sexual behavior unless it violates rights. I
feel using the word "marriage" as a symbol of the
union between 2 men or 2 women violates my right as a
heterosexual female.  Why is that so wrong?

>> What you don't necessarily have is the right to
>>deny the word to other people.

Why? If the word had already been established, why
wouldn't I have the right to keep it just the way it
is? The "Union" between man and woman.
What I don't understand is why the gay community would
not choose to represent itself as a self-sufficient
member of society and choose a word that describes
what their future "union" may one day represent.

I am aware that most don't believe in the sanction of
a woman and a man.  That's their choice.  I do.  Not
the laws, not the piece of paper but the choice to
want to procreate with somebody and evolve as humans. 
It's not my scenario, at the present time, but I do
believe that it should be a right and that "right" is
the term defined by the word "marriage".

Just an opinion.
Anna









__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around 
http://mail.yahoo.com