Quote:
Originally posted by matthew330
It seems to me your fighting for some sort of definition of marriage - so marriage "as a word" apparently means something to you. It doesn't mean 1st cousins can get married, it doesn't mean i can marry a goat, but it does mean i can marry my bud. You are fighting for a definition of marriage, and berating others for fighting for thier's.
I don't believe you think much of marriage, so why bother. Get right to the heart of it. Say what your thinking, marriage doesn't have a place in this society, and then argue that.
|
My argument is that people like you don't have the monopoly on definining how certain words can be used. You pretend that the definition of an acceptable marriage hasn't changed more times than the justification for invading iraq.
I can just imagine a suitable representative for your position circa thirty or forty years ago:
Quote:
|
What proponents of interracial marriage are saying is, we're just broadening the definition just a tiny lil bit, but promise it will stop there. The slippery slope argument is perfectly ligimitimate in this case.
|
-or, probably even further back-
Quote:
|
What proponents of interfaith marriage are saying is, we're just broadening the definition just a tiny lil bit, but promise it will stop there. The slippery slope argument is perfectly ligimitimate in this case.
|
The point is that you cling to exactly one definition for a word whose definition has clearly changed numerous times to fit whatever society is using it. When the crux of your argument against something is based on whether or not to use a specific word, especially when said word has had an evolving definition since before your messiah was born, your position is a sham.