Contour Enthusiasts Group Archives Forums General Common Interests Three's the charm for the Supreme Court

I fully agree that same-sex partners should have equal rights under law that married couples have, but again, I not comfortable with this "union" being called marriage, as THAT is one definition that has stayed static in it's basic meaning, both religiously and secularly over thousands of years, and for good reason. Again, I don't see the benefit of changing a religious and secular tradition (one that is held in the highest regard among even the most different segments of this planet's population, I might add) that at it's very base meaning is understood to be between a man and a woman...

In short, some definitions should never change, given the very meaning and reason behind them.

I'm well used to the fact that the human race will always place a "label" on common concepts, ideas, etc. to easily identify them to other people in terms of making communication easier with each other. Just as gays would wonder about the sanity of being identified as straight by a person, the same goes for a straight person being identified as gay. I sould carry that a step further; the same goes for a union between same-sex couples. I can see where this could easily be seen as a form of "segragation" by way of labels; in my mind, nothing is farther from the truth, though. I simply don't fall for such base idiocy as I know enough about people and myself to not judge them in that extraordinary simplistic fashion.

The term "marriage" is immediately understood as something between a man and a woman. What's so wrong about having the term "union" being used for a same-sex partnership? It would immediately identify that partnership as what it is. Different. Not something to be ashamed of or riddiculed at all. Just different in the fundamental makeup of that partnership. Being different in of itself doesn't identify with inferiority at all.

I feel something like this would serve to cool the flames of religious organizations that are so vehemently against establishing "marriages" between same-sex couples, for whatever reason. I think it could also pave the way for gays to have equal standing in terms of benefits and rights under law that much faster. By simply calling something of a somewhat similar concept and nature by a similar (but NOT the same) name, gains in equality could be made.

Perhaps I'm being naieve and too simplistic here, in that something like this would only further serve aggrivate the situation and scism things wider apart.

Tangent time:

As it is, I think WAY too much attention has been paid to the homosexual vs. straight issue by legal and religious institutions. I've often found the religious argument against homosexuality is extraordinarily weak and has been brought about and espoused by those that have done VERY little research and reading on known norms and the biblical/secular history of the times. Perhaps the most misunderstood section on this is the Chapter of Genesis when referring to Sodom and Gomorrah. The Hebrew text has some VERY ambiguous meanings behind the makeup of the crowd outside Lot's house; NIV says one thing, while the King James Version says another. I won't even get into the moralistic quagmire when Lot offered the crowd outside his house his own daughters to be raped instead of his guests; an offering that went unpunished by God, apparently. If you take an unblinded and unbiased view of this action, the desire of RAPE IN GENERAL was the sin of Sodom; not homosexuality. Point in case: If Sodom was full of homosexual men as certain biblical manuscripts and scholars suggest, why in the HELL would Lot offer his daughters up? I don't know too many homosexual men that are all about raping women...

Again, the makeup of the crowd is in doubt as well. The Hebrew text could mean a mixed crowd or all men; if it was a mixed crowd, you certainly don't bring your women and children along for ringside sets to a gang-rape.

IMHO, this is yet another area where a literal HUMAN translation of the Bible has led to bigotry and hatred towards a group that is different. Interesting thought, no?

There's a LOT (no pun intended) more to this, but I'd have to go to the basement and start pulling out books.

Well, after that HUGE tangent, I think I'll shut it down for the night. Just something to ponder...