Actually the definition of Marriage would be defined as Husband and Wife.

I do believe there is a legitamite reason for a State to have both Marriages and Civil Partnerships. However, the difference probabbly should not be a choice but rather a status change.

Everyone enters a Civil Partnership, once that couple has a child they enter into a Marriage. Because a society that does not give benefits to people who have children will soon find thier population falling or not growing.

I am under the impression that some Nordic countries are having this problem right now with a declining population.

The definition of 'fag' is a bundle of sticks used when lighting a fire. Which words are we allowed to scew the etymology of and which aren't we?

Well, why doesn't anyone bother adopting the unwanted children in overpopulated countries?

We don't need to be bringing more people into the world until we can feed the ones we have.

Actually, I know quite a few people who attempt to adopt children from other countries. Its not that easy, and costs a lot of money, and the hoops the other country makes you jump through is terrible. (most especially china) Not only that, generally only people who can't have children of thier own want someone elses, and I think its really ignorant to ask people to change that desire.

The word 'fag' is slang, it is not a legal term affecting generations of people to come. 'Gay' also means happy, but thats been changed too.

Also the word 'fag' has gone out of use. Nobody uses that word anymore except funny englishmen who want a cigerette. The word/term/concept of Marriage has not fallen out of use.

I'm not arguing semantics. Explain to me why people who are shot in a drug related affair shouldn't be given all the legal rights and benefits of being a Vetran? or even an Enemy Combatant.

I question the government's right to hold power over the institution of marriage.

Because they are not in the military. And veterans are not only the people who are shot or killed, they are also people who served in a war and survived it.

mar·riage Audio pronunciation of "marriage" ( P ) Pronunciation Key (mrj)
n.

1.
1. The legal union of a man and woman as husband and wife.
2. The state of being married; wedlock.
3. A common-law marriage.
4. A union between two persons having the customary but usually not the legal force of marriage: a same-sex marriage.
2. A wedding.
3. A close union: “the most successful marriage of beauty and blood in mainstream comics” (Lloyd Rose).
4. Games. The combination of the king and queen of the same suit, as in pinochle.





Source: The American Heritage® Dictionary of the English Language, Fourth Edition
Copyright © 2000 by Houghton Mifflin Company.
Published by Houghton Mifflin Company. All rights reserved.

mar·ry1 Audio pronunciation of "marry" ( P ) Pronunciation Key (mr)
v. mar·ried, mar·ry·ing, mar·ries
v. tr.

1.
1. To join as spouses by exchanging vows.
2. To take as a spouse.
3. To give in marriage.
2. To perform a marriage ceremony for: The rabbi married the couple.
3. To obtain by marriage: marry money.
4. Nautical. To join (two ropes) end to end by interweaving their strands.
5. To unite in a close, usually permanent way: “His material marries the domestic and the exotic” (Clifton Fadiman).


v. intr.

1. To take a husband or wife; wed: They married in their twenties.
2. To combine or blend agreeably: Let the flavors marry overnight.




I don't see why either of these definitions couldn't be applied to same-sex partnerships.

As for adopting children, I don't think that is an ignorant need. If people were a little more conscious of the world around them and a little more humane, perhaps they would look beyond their own selfish wants. It doesn't even have to be jumping through hoops to get a child from another country; there are many unwanted, neglected, or abused foster and adoptive children in America, at least. I don't know about other Western countries, but I'm thinking the situation might be similar. I personally am able to have children (physically), but don't have a desire to. If I ever did want a child I would have a foster child or adopt. I would like to go through the experience of being pregnant and having my own child, but I know I could love an adoptive child or a foster child as if they were my own and I don't see any reason to bring more children into the world when there are plenty of unwanted, unloved, and uncared for ones already.

They have survived the War on Drugs. They are part of the people's militia which the second ammendmant gives every citizen a right to be a part of.




1. The legal union of a man and woman as husband and wife.

Why did you not bold the FIRST definition?

1.
1. To join as spouses by exchanging vows.
2. To take as a spouse.
3. To give in marriage.
2. To perform a marriage ceremony for: The rabbi married the couple.

This definition is very important. Especially since it used the word Rabbi,

If you "marry" a Brother and a Sister, they are not married, because it is not possibe for them to be married by the relgious definition of what a Marriage is.

This would also be true between a Divorce' and the High Priest. If they are married, they are not truly married, and when it is found out, lots of bad concequeses have to try to be fixed.

3. To obtain by marriage: marry money.
4. Nautical. To join (two ropes) end to end by interweaving their strands.
5. To unite in a close, usually permanent way: “His material marries the domestic and the exotic” (Clifton Fadiman).
v. intr.

1. To take a husband or wife; wed: They married in their twenties.
2. To combine or blend agreeably: Let the flavors marry overnight.


I don't doubt that people use the word marriage in everyday use to mean various things based on the context, but when you are talking about a legal entity, slang is not really binding.


I do not view someone wanting thier own child as being a selfish need. My sister recently had two children, and since then I have been given a whole new angle on what it means to be a parent.

My sister has changed DRAMATICALLY, and its not just hormonal. My sister has suddenly become aware of every little piece of garbage on the floor, every medicine bottle that's below 5 feet, every person who walks into the house, and every word that comes out of my mouth. Very often asking me to not say certain things around her child. (espceially the word candy or icecream, unless its dessert time)

Its not just because she cares about her Children but also because she is aware of what will affect the child's development. And she can know and spot problem before they become actual problems.

With an adopted child this is still possible, but depending on what age the you get the child at, you can help what the child learns, or how the child was treated by other people. I don't think you can best know what is best for your child when you have not seen how the child has grown and what experieces they have had. I'm not saying an adopted child is any less a child, but it is different.

My brother in law tells me all the time, and my friends who have kids tell me also, that without having a child yourself you can not understand what it means to have a child. Even young grandparents have a very different relationship to a grandchild than the parents do.

Hm. My brother and I were both adopted at birth, and looking in on us, we both maintain at least as strong of a relationship with our parents as any I know do with their birthparents. It's true that when a woman has a child, certain maternal instincts are activated - but that's not to say that adoptive parents can't have equally strong ones. Look at how many children are abandoned at birth around the world by their natural parents, and then look at people like my adoptive parents, who did about as good of a job at raising children as it's possible to do, bias excused.

Perhaps my experience was made somewhat easier by the fact that I actually resemble my adoptive parents more than my birth ones, but beyond a couple "dealing with adoption" conferences I attended when I was ten or so, I've noticed virtually no difference between my upbringing and that of non-adopted children. My cousin, on the other hand, was adopted into my Caucasian family from China; though she looks very different from the rest of us, she's perfectly happy and is rather proud of her dual-heritage, and it wouldn't be accurate at all to say my aunt was any less of a mother for adopting a child (after all, she has a child by birth as well, raised in the same household and circumstances, and there doesn't seem to be any difference in the overall health and happiness of the two of them).

It's true, a child adopted at a later stage in life will take a much greater period of time to adjust to a new lifestyle, but parents who make such a choice are by no means limited in their capacity to raise the child. It depends entirely on themselves and the child in question, whether each has the dedication to work on building a relationship - though, if you think about it, isn't this true for blood-related families as well?

-cough- There goes my little rant of the day.

Call that a rant? Psh. Lyren, if that's a rant, I have no idea what everyone else is doing.

Volcanic eruptions or something.

I didn't try to imply that someone who adopts can't do that same thing and raise great children. We have very close family friends who have adopted 5 children. (being unable to have thier own).

What I ment to explain is that wanting to have your own child is not just a selfish need to spread the seed or boost your ego. If I have a choice between adopting a child and having my own, I think I would be much better at handling my own than a child with a genetic and brain structure that is probably very different than mine. (My grandfather, Father, and myself all tend to have the same ADD type Issues that allows us to connect and solve problems that Doctors have not been able to do)

I just don't like the misconception that the reason don't adopt is because of some selfish drive to spread your seed or something.

I know many people who use the word fag, as slang, insult and in original form. Australia is wierd like that.

As I said, historical use of the word marriage did not imply gender restrictions. In historical China a man would/could marry a younger male and stay with him until such time as he wanted to have children.

Nero, the Emporer of Ancient Rome, was reported to have married a few men at various stages.

It was only the rise in Christianity and it's attempt to smeer sex (and therefore marriage) in a sinful way that turned marriage into being soley about childbirth and therefore a union between men and women.

Blame Judaism for Marriage being focused around childbirth.

Christianity made it sinfull, but Judaism has always held that if a couple can not have children they should strongly consider adopting or getting a divorce.

(I say strongly consider, and not "Have to", because the very act of breaking a vow is not a light thing, and sometimes it is better for someone to stick to the vow rather than have a child depending on a case by case basis)

*Shrug* I don't know anything about Judaism other than the fact that Jesus was a Jew. So, yes, I know nothing.

I havn't studied ancient greece all that much, but are you sure they were considered Married?

Also in China it sounds odd to me to say that those people were married. China was HIGHLY specific about the labels they gave people and relationships. Even more so, 3 generations of a family would live in the house at the same time. I read this book called the dream of the Red chamber, and in it the boys lived together to study for thier exams and they had a special name for thier relationship, but it was not marriage and it was not anything more than schoolmates or Mentor/student.

Well, that's what I've read. But no I am not sure. I've not done a great indepth study on it, but I might look into it further.



Could just be incorrect use of the word.

That's not what I meant, and I'm sorry if I phrased it like that. I just don't see why adopted children, or "other people's children," as I believe you said in a previous post, seem to hold a lower status than one's own. What about the fact that there are just simply children, it does not matter whose, and they are in need of care and love and affection and guidance and nurture?

At any rate, it's not that I begrudge people who want their own children that. I just personally think more people should consider these things. As you said, adoption is usually left to people who can't have children of their own. Think how much better the world would be for the children - who are here through no fault of their own - if more people chose to adopt, though.

The reason I did not bold the other definitions is that I was trying to make a point: there's more than one definition of marriage, and it's not JUST a relationship between a husband and wife.

Correction, No Roman Emperor EVER married a male. Even in ancient Rome where homosexuality was ok, they still could not marry.

Also, Nero was one of the few Emperors of the AD times that no record of homosexuality was discovered. (Pre Christian Rome)

Well I've read evidence to the contrary.

Let the churches have their marriage. However, if the government is to consider you to have the legal protections currently afforded to the married, make them join in civil unions.

Marriage will lose it's government protection - it will be governed by the church. You go to City Hall for your civil union license, and churches can perform marriages on anyone they want.