Wow, spending all that energy on that banal, nit-picking conclusion---I don’t believe it! It is also unfortunately invalid, not to mention, pointless, and at core semantic. And, no, everybody does not know ‘that gay people choose relationships with people of the same sex, instead.’ Nor do we know that heterosexuals choose relationships with people of the other sex. In the beginning, perhaps there was the first instance of cheesecake, and that cheesecake was what we might now term as original or plain or NY, but just because new variations came along, it doesn’t mean they are not all still cheesecakes---or that we can’t even refine the definition of what the general term cheesecake includes or is. These claims are based around historicity, and they have little other value or use. Improving or modifying the recipe for cheesecake doesn’t invalidate the previous cheesecakes or stop the progression of new cheesecakes. The definition of our physical relationships, and also our linguistics are continuously evolving. Language is a symbolic or representative expression that can and does change over time. Perhaps at one time, or in one culture, all marriage was arranged---so maybe those people didn’t use the term ‘arranged marriage,’ they just said ‘marriage.’ But all these kinds of marriages are still marriages, just like all the variations of cheesecake are still cheesecake. If you want to use the term ‘gay marriage’ to differentiate between marriages, perhaps it is fine to do so, but then you probably should also use the term ‘heterosexual marriage’, particularly if you don’t want to show favoritism to one instance over another. But, it is hard to swallow, that the motivation for this overzealous labeling on your part isn’t based upon the belief that one instance must be inferior to the other.
You attempt to get around the discrimination claim by proposing that gay marriage isn’t even really the same kind of marriage anyway, as if you were merely stopping people from putting apples in orange juice, and still calling it orange juice. But what you are more severely doing is deciding on what juice itself actually is, and what single fruit it can be squeezed from. So gay people can marry, just with people who are of the opposite sex. But if they want to marry on their terms, well they can’t---what they can do is just get ‘gay-married.’
Many people may agree that gay marriage is different in the matter-of-fact way that it obviously is, with regard to the sexes of partners. But to what degree they see that difference as being, or meaning, is the important question. Yes, you have stated the obvious, obviously, but to what end?
posted 2 years, 4 months ago
view in context