Date: 2005-12-19 05:46 pm (UTC)
Of course, we have to bear in mind that having a civil union or government-issued marriage license, to me, has no bearing on whether or not people are married. As we have discussed before, I do not believe that the government has the right to define what marriage is and is not.

To me, it would be a live and let live approach rather than terminology. I know that the terminology that I could endorse would, for many same-sex couples, insufficiently express the significance that they feel in their relationship. So, although I may disagree with them ideologically, I would also not want to saddle them with some universal term that did not express their ideology sufficiently either.

So, I understand what a man means when he refers to his husband, and I would prefer that he have the right to use that term .. just not impose it on anyone else. For me, I would prefer that I be allowed to use another term as long as it is respectful. I find myself using "partner" or avoiding terminology altogether. Someone else might use something else. Perhaps this diversity of terminology is more confusing, but I find it superior.
This account has disabled anonymous posting.
If you don't have an account you can create one now.
HTML doesn't work in the subject.
More info about formatting

Profile

sophiaserpentia: (Default)
sophiaserpentia

December 2021

S M T W T F S
   1234
567891011
12131415161718
19202122232425
2627282930 31 

Most Popular Tags

Style Credit

Expand Cut Tags

No cut tags
Page generated Jul. 5th, 2025 10:56 am
Powered by Dreamwidth Studios