Quote:
Originally Posted by SECdomination
Civil unions aren't enough? Why do gays (and all their supporters) feel the need to change the definition of marriage?
|
Definitions are changed and added to all the time. A pen is no longer a quill dipped in ink, phones need not be connected by wires, and automobiles aren't necessarily powered by internal combustion engines. But we didn't take up petitions to ban ball-point pens, cellphones, and electric or hybrid cars just because they didn't fit the existing definition. And who would propose banning online bulletin boards such as Greek Chat simply because it's not an actual board attached to a wall? When women were elected to the House of Representatives, they weren't "congressmen", they are called congresswomen. Things change. We progress.
When has mankind - oops humankind - ever constrained itself from experiencing something new out of fear of a definition?
The terms "married" and "spouse" are written into innumerable policies including insurance coverage, probate laws, tax laws, and trying to find out someone's condition at a hospital, just to name a few. Civil union might sound as if it's good enough, but is not the same thing.
Threaded Mode
