Comment: That's quite the leap in logic there, buddy.

(See in situ)


That's quite the leap in logic there, buddy.

Where exactly did I say that words do not have definitions? Oh, that's right, I didn't.

Many words have changed in meaning over time. Sure, it may not do anybody any good if there aren't commonly accepted definitions, but to say that words being commonly used in a manner different from their original meaning is the same as words not having any meaning at all is pretty absurd.

I'm not saying you have to accept a change in the common definition of the word marriage if it comes to be used to refer to gay couple as well as hetero couples, or even a group of polygamists. But if that is indeed the way the definition is headed, there isn't really much you can do about it. That's why it's just best for the government to stay out of the issue of marriage altogether.

Your church that performed your marriage will have a set of standards for what they consider a marriage to be and they will only marry couples who have been determined to meet those qualifications. Isn't that preferable to the current government system of marrying pretty much anybody and everybody regardless of the purpose for their union and devoid any basis of a loving commitment to one another?

I'm reaching up and reaching out.
I'm reaching for the random or what ever will bewilder me.
And following our will and wind we may just go where no one's been.
We'll ride the spiral to the end and may just go where no one's been.
Spiral out.