definition

Depending on what dictionary one uses, apparent now is that there is an attempt to change the definition of the word “marriage” in publication. I just became aware of a public dispute over the accepted definition. One such dictionary specifies gender differences and gender preferences as central to need for clarification. This effort to clarify and distinguish I find worthy because after all if we can’t call something what it is, then we can’t communicate properly and we can’t understand situations that we should be familiar with when using words. Fear of discrimination is real when law prohibits behaviors and rights, as has occurred, not in the dictionary, but in the courts having denied civil unions in our state prior to a prop 8 election in support of that ban on same-sex “marriage”. All of us who have abided by one definition of origin, deserve to have it maintained and those referring to their different situation, deserve their own word serve them as well. If new words need to be added, so be it. I applaud those who came to call upon the need for a new word in addition to the traditional word. The dictionary has always expanded to add vitality to idiosyncrasies of developing civilizations. Words enriched our lives as we associate whole new groups of feelings and emotions and memories that come to join the word and those who use it. The two words could co-exist even on the same page “respectfully disagreeing with one another”. I take reduced abridgment to vocabulary seriously. And human rights are incredibly important. A fight against persecutions of others has been my mission as they were important in preserving my own. And there are many who as I do all we can without expecting a thank you, because it is important and not a personal favor. It is narrow-mindedness that causes people to use hateful words and actions… never worthy of validation in my view, and calling upon us to do what we can and should. For example, I once was at a party where I heard a couple of guys using the words spick, homo, kike. Ironically I think that they themselves were either Mexican or gay, or Jewish. They were making a joke, but such social unrest really suggests that they did not know how to handle their own sexuality and that they themselves perhaps were chastised, or felt so. You might think that my being half Mexican would cause me to be angry, but the truth is that they don’t know me, and I did not take such name calling personally. When it’s personal, it hurts, and that’s when people are out of line. Nevertheless, they should have been silenced by anyone there or by me as a friend, or at least told to go home, but since they were not my guests I felt powerless to do either. Back to my point, words cannot be removed from the dictionary if the word is relevant and clear to the majority. And, a census needs to correctly document what that majority is. That’s why we have census. It is derived from the word consensus… to find agreement; to establish truth and statistic that reflects understanding and unity as a society. I don’t believe people wish to change the definition of marriage. I don’t. Let’s also analyze voting. How we vote in our society, is only secret so far as to prevent people from tampering with a consensus, not to hide bigotry, and we elect those who regulate, because we have to trust people worthy of doing this to do so and to fairly tabulate for consensus without do-over or referendum unless something was incorrectly tabulated. The voters must always be more powerful voice than the court. And if they (the vote tabulating bureaucracy) falter, we have the power to remove them and even the justices. So people, please, as you speak out about who you are proudly and courageously, document it truthfully when asked on paper to match your speak, or decline to answer, and one must do either without fear of retribution. Then we can embrace one another as fellow-man and be judged by our maker knowing that we did everything we could to prevent another from making us out to be something we are not or treating us unfairly. And it’s your responsibility to protect your own truth, not to pose as something or lie about your condition. Don’t ask others to take on the case that they themselves must articulate and fight for. Fight for your very own civil rights. Fear is the killer, kill fear. And about vocabulary, those of us who have a dictionary only ten years old deserve to have that definition respected. Why is the word so important? Because its definition is clear and because it is specific to its original definition, even today, by a multitude of people who want that definition to stick, for clarity sake, and for sake of their traditional practice which we deserve to pass on to children should they be straight. If I were gay, I suspect that I would have no objection to sharing the connotation of such a word, but the fight lies in restoring the civil union, and adding that kind of word to the dictionary. I would fight for my civil right to have a legally and socially recognized secular civil unity, because freedom to practice is more important than stealing a definition in print. That’s what I would be doing because it’s not my word as applied to my living arrangement. Think about this as well: we don’t call a roommate, a “spouse”, or a “partner”… Do we? No. We call them a roommate. Attacking the dictionary was pretty damn smart of whoever thought of it. In this way, I could hide from potential judgment and discrimination, piss off traditionalists, erode and discount others who I believed hated me whether that feeling is justified or not, and confuse the hell out of linguists all in one fell swoop. If you’re proud to be gay, and your group has vocalized how proud you are, why hide behind the word now? And if courts strip you of your right to cohabitation or civilly unite, then do what you can to respectfully make amends and find a solution, because, that is a legitimate concern for you. And direct the fight clearly and non violently to ensure your civil right is upheld without denigrating another’s. Unfortunately I have been so active in supporting personal objections to a host of affronts on my civil liberties and yours, that I’m tapped out. I cannot support your fight. That is your fight, and we all have to fight our own battles, ask for help, and expect that one should not fight everyone else’s life struggles for them if they should offer little sympathy. Be proud of – “civil unity” or “partnership”. People need to come to grips with that and afford the recognition therein and legal binding. I don’t remember asking a gay man to fight to protect a faltering institution of mine: heterosexual marriage that I cherish and aspire to have, though perhaps he or she should. And, I don’t remember ever suppressing your rights, because neither happened.

Advertisements
This entry was posted in Health and wellness, Religion and reverence, US Politics. Bookmark the permalink.