02-06-2013, 10:44 AM
(02-06-2013, 10:19 AM)benthejack Wrote: See its funny though, words are subjective. For a gay/lesbian couple marriage simply means a life-long commitment to each other. Religious folk like to add that it's "between a man and a woman". (similarly I'm sure certain folk would like add that it's between two similar coloured people if they had as much clout as the church.) Although words have definitions, they are often blurry and disputed, I say by all means the govt has a place to cement the definition in a way that makes for more freedom for those involved.It's very sad that something so intensely personal requires government intervention -- and as Abu notes, the lobbyists can alienate certain elements of society who perhaps otherwise wouldn't have given it a second thought. It's also sad that the separation of Church and State, meant to be absolute, is a fair load of bollocks. And it's downright hypocritical for conservative politicians to oppose something we know most of them are doing behind closed doors anyway. I can only assume that their objection stems from the fact that they really get off on doing something a little bit naughty.
It's not just about the word though. My Mum moved to the US to live with her female partner; she had to go through 8 years of leaving the country every three months due to not being able to get a visa. If she was straight she would simply get married and hey presto be granted the rights of a straight person. But because she is a lesbian she gets sub human residency status. She is married now, but because it is a state by state law, it still isn't recognised by the govt. It is a matter close to gay people because it actually directly affects their lives in meaningful ways.
It could be worse
