RE: "Jesus would rather kill, not marry, gay people" - Franklin Graham
July 23, 2018 at 2:49 pm
(This post was last modified: July 23, 2018 at 2:51 pm by polymath257.)
(July 23, 2018 at 2:42 pm)SteveII Wrote:(July 23, 2018 at 2:18 pm)polymath257 Wrote: Why do you make such a big deal of the definition???
The relevant definition is the legal one. Not the religious one. Not any definition you imagine going back thousands of years (and which, in fact, doesn't). The legal definition right here and right now.
Seriously, there were more that are perfectly happy with the definition as it is currently used in US law. And yes, the only reason to stick with your imagined ancient, traditional definition is bigotry.
You simply don't want to think that gays can have a perfectly healthy relationship that is approved by the society. because that is what marriage is. And that is ALL it is.
Why? Because that is the biggest objection to the gay marriage debate. Goes right over most of your heads. Instead, you want to go right to "bigotry." Then when pressed, you go through all sorts of machinations (see this thread as exhibit A) to link the two. You can't. It's impossible. There is no such thing at all, ever, of a religious definition of marriage. It predates and transcends all religions and all cultures. Your argument is shit because there is nothing you can dream up to establish the link to bigotry. All you have are assertions, mischaracterizations, and demonization with a health dose of circular reasoning. Well done.
Exactly. it's the biggest objection to gay marriage. And it is an absolutely trivial one considering the legal context. Why the heat over a definition like this unless it is due to bigotry? Seriously. What other reason would there be to get this bent out of shape in having two men in a legal marriage?
All that is required is that legally, the bond between gays is exactly the same as the bond between straights.
