Gay marraige.

Legalize gay marraige?

Yes	88.2%	[ 142 ]
No	11.8%	[ 19 ]
Total Votes:			[ 161 ]

[Oulgut Pleu]

Echostrian

Our beliefs are contrary and irreconcilable, at odds with one another and we are getting nowheres with this discussion. So I therefore take my leave as obviously we are incapable of communication. We should have defined terms sooner as what you call "marriage" I call "civil union" and what I call "marriage" is the term used to describe "holy matrimony".
So by all means have a "civil union" I am not against that so I am sorry for the rudeness of my words in this. But please at least look up where the english language derived the term "marriage" from and you'll find that the original definition of the word is "the sacred union of man and woman...ect." The fact that it has changed since then just goes to show the horridness of the english language as people can no longer speak to one another without first defining the terms which are being used.

And by the way yes marriage the word is derived from latin but it is pulled from hebrew as in the hebrew marriage meant what I have above stated.
And also the latin means this as well, so once again english has failed.

What? When the Romans were getting married before they had anything to do with Jews they were referring to marriage as matrimonium. You think they couldn't develop the concept of marriage without help?

And it really doesn't matter what people used to do or how they used to define marriage. One of the most beautiful things about English is its ability to adapt. Our entire language is nothing but one huge adaption, made to suit our needs. Is it really so horrible for the word marriage to include unions between people of the same sex? You're making it out as being something really horrendous when it's not.

[linx1284]

Trelayne

Echostrian

Our beliefs are contrary and irreconcilable, at odds with one another and we are getting nowheres with this discussion. So I therefore take my leave as obviously we are incapable of communication. We should have defined terms sooner as what you call "marriage" I call "civil union" and what I call "marriage" is the term used to describe "holy matrimony".
So by all means have a "civil union" I am not against that so I am sorry for the rudeness of my words in this. But please at least look up where the english language derived the term "marriage" from and you'll find that the original definition of the word is "the sacred union of man and woman...ect." The fact that it has changed since then just goes to show the horridness of the english language as people can no longer speak to one another without first defining the terms which are being used.

And by the way yes marriage the word is derived from latin but it is pulled from hebrew as in the hebrew marriage meant what I have above stated.
And also the latin means this as well, so once again english has failed.

A 'civil union' does not grant the same legal rights as marriage, hence it is as flawed as every other 'separate but equal' resolution used in the past. Our recent history proves that separate is inherently unequal.

not like he will read but separate but no equal was deemed unconstitutional

[xrcalo]

gays shouldnt marry because evidently they are some form of poisonous reptile from a distant planet (or parallel universe) that supposedly infect the general population with aids and gaydom.