Same-sex Marriage.

[_wenglund]

Please forgive me, but I neglected to mention that on this thread alone, along with being told I am a "douche bag," a "lonely loser," a "f#@$tard," a "bigot," "homophobic." I "act like crabs," "half brain," "stupid," "mentally challenged," "intellectually deficient," devious, unfashionable, pretender, and passive-aggressive, I was also informed that I am judgmental.

I truly have my work cut out for me. Much appreciation to one and all for making me acutely aware of my failings.

I will check back to see if there are even more gapping holes in my armor in desperate need of repair.

Thanks, -Wade Englund-

[_krose]

Nah, just completely wrong about this.

Oh, and a creative speller, of course (as are many people, including some other posters here). I believe you might have been looking for "gaping" rather than "gapping."

[_wenglund]

... the several millennium-old definition of marriage...

You keep saying things like this. How is it that you don't know it isn't true?

Chalk it up to "mental deficiency."

Marriage as an exclusively monogamous love match is a very recent phenomenon in most societies.

That would be an excellent point were I speaking to the plural vs. singular usage of the word, rather than how the word, itself, is essentially defined.

It's too bad you have become overwhelmed and decided to resort to feigned self-deprecation.

That is an extraordinarily gifted way of interpreting my explanation for leaving. It underscores the suspicions of others about my surrendering in the face of unquestioned defeat as well as my apparent duplicity. At least I had just enough intelligence to figure that I would learn more about my failings in my leaving. It has been instructive.

Thanks, -Wade Englund-

[_wenglund]

Nah, just completely wrong about this.

Naturally.

Oh, and a creative speller, of course (as are many people, including some other posters here). I believe you might have been looking for "gaping" rather than "gapping."

I am embarrassed to say that I anguished for a few seconds over which of the two spellings to use, and as is my want, I picked the wrong one. How fitting.

Thanks, -Wade Englund-

[_krose]

I am embarrassed to say that I anguished for a few seconds over which of the two spellings to use, and as is my want, I picked the wrong one. How fitting.

Are you sure you don't mean "as is my wont"?

Sorry for piling on. I just can't help myself now.

[Guest]

Marriage as an exclusively monogamous love match is a very recent phenomenon in most societies.

That would be an excellent point were I speaking to the plural vs. singular usage of the word, rather than how the word, itself, is essentially defined.

On The Origins of Marriage

Our current word "marriage" comes most closely from the old French word "marier." This derives back through the Latin for the institution of marriage, to the word for married man, to just the word for male or masculine. The first instance of the word being used in English dates to the 13th century. Oddly absent from these descriptions are the timeless arguments that marriage is a union between a man and a woman.

... these arguments really started coming into being when modern anthropologists began imposing Western views and observations on foreign cultures. Even these definitions, however, have been argued over based on the number of people involved in the marriage and the legal repercussions.

Further, the word marriage is used to imply a close union of any sort. Being married to your job is an easy enough phrase to hear and not be offended by.

[_wenglund]

Are you sure you don't mean "as is my wont"?

I wasn't sure until I just looked it up. Now I am sure. Thanks for the informative correction.

Sorry for piling on. I just can't help myself now.

Don't apologize. I am gratefully gaining in knowledge.

Thanks, -Wade Englund-

[_Darth J]

Wade, I'm sorry to interrupt your pity party that inevitably follows when your arguments are refuted, but did your copy and paste from your blog mean you would like me to show how those links don't support your arguments?

Also, am I to take it that by now deciding that you knew that your own Reason magazine source refuted your thesis, that you deliberately misrepresented what your source said?

[_gramps]

Please forgive me, but I neglected to mention that on this thread alone, along with being told I am a "douche bag," a "lonely loser," a "f#@$tard," a "bigot," "homophobic." I "act like crabs," "half brain," "stupid," "mentally challenged," "intellectually deficient," devious, unfashionable, pretender, and passive-aggressive, I was also informed that I am judgmental.

I truly have my work cut out for me. Much appreciation to one and all for making me acutely aware of my failings.

I will check back to see if there are even more gapping holes in my armor in desperate need of repair.

Thanks, -Wade Englund-

I told you, Wade. Stick to dancing, and finding a 'mate.' You can pal with Teryl Givens, and do something positive in life. Please, Wade, consider this option I suggest. You will be much happier, and you will get in the sack a lot sooner than if you try to convince people that you have any clue about marriage.

Thanks, -gramps-

[_wenglund]

On The Origins of Marriage

Our current word "marriage" comes most closely from the old French word "marier." This derives back through the Latin for the institution of marriage, to the word for married man, to just the word for male or masculine. The first instance of the word being used in English dates to the 13th century. Oddly absent from these descriptions are the timeless arguments that marriage is a union between a man and a woman.

... these arguments really started coming into being when modern anthropologists began imposing Western views and observations on foreign cultures. Even these definitions, however, have been argued over based on the number of people involved in the marriage and the legal repercussions.

Further, the word marriage is used to imply a close union of any sort. Being married to your job is an easy enough phrase to hear and not be offended by.

I will raise your Google Machine quote with one of my own:

"The first recorded evidence of marriage contracts and ceremonies dates to 4,000 years ago, in Mesopotamia. In the ancient world, marriage served primarily as a means of preserving power, with kings and other members of the ruling class marrying off daughters to forge alliances, acquire land, and produce legitimate heirs. Even in the lower classes, women had little say over whom they married. The purpose of marriage was the production of heirs, as implied by the Latin word matrimonium, which is derived from mater (mother)." (See HERE)

If I was speaking to the etymology of the English word "marriage," rather than the meaning of the concept across languages, cultures, and time, then you may have a point.

And, if I were speaking to the secondary connotation (like "married to one's job"), then you may also have a point.

Try as people might to massage the word "marriage" so as to support of their favored position, and this by trotting out various types of marriages and marital practices and connotations, they can't escape the simple fact that, by and large, and throughout the several million years that marriages have been know to occur, and with the rare exceptions cropping up since the mid 1970's, each of those types of marriages included, at the very least, a man and a woman, and not a man and a man or a woman and a woman.

But, here I am embroiled in a dispute, and that is contrary to my aforementioned promise. Shame on me.

Thanks, -Wade Englund-