Firstly let me say, I hope you don't take this as a personal attack because I, in no way, mean it to be.

Originally posted by Samantha Puppy
[B]It doesn't mean their marriage isn't valid, but I certainly don't look at it the same way as mine... And I don't mean that condescendingly - I just look at it a little differently. Not worse, not better - just different.


To call something that homosexuals can do "marriage" changes the meaning of the term "marriage", and devalues the action of a man and woman coming together to found a family, since we no longer have a word for that. We lose the word that has been used to describe that by using the same word to name something completely different from that.
These are two statements I completely do not understand.

If civil matrimony and marriage are equal why not call them the same thing. In my mind calling them different things when they are at the fundamental level the same, is saying that one is better that the other. The way I interpret it is Marriage is civil matrimony with the backing of religion, and since it is both it is better. This may not be the way others see it, but it is only understanding I can come up with.

I also don't see why calling the union of a homosexual couple a "marriage" in any way degrads the "marriage" of a heterosexual couple. How does the fact that two other people love each other and are willing to make the same commitments to each other that you made to your spouse in anyway belittle the commitments you made? This makes as much sense to me as saying no one else can get married because there isn't enough love in the world to go around.

[B]Homosexuals have no need of "legalization" of their relationships in today's society, because the law does not go into the bedrooms of consenting adults, anyway. They are free to do whatever they want, already.[B]
I believe this statement to be completely untrue. While it is not illegal to be homosexual and participate in a homosexual relationship in most states (there are still a few where sodomy is illegal), those in committed, long-term homosexual relationships do not have the same rights as those in committed, long-term heterosexual relationships. If one is in the ICU of a hospital, the other is not considered family and therefore not permitted to visit. If they jointly own a home and one dies, the other does not automatically inherit the home through probate, as a heterosexual spouse would. The list goes on and on.

Again, I DO NOT mean this as a personal attack on you Samantha Puppy. I enjoy our conversations/debates too much to do that. But you are not the first person I've heard voice these opinions and I just want to try to understand them.