'gay marriage'...merely a misnomer, or actually offensive?

[silverpatronus]

i always mentally replace the term 'gay marriage' with 'marriage equality'...but i wanted to see how others viewed it. can't start a poll so...

a) do you find the term 'marriage equality' more accurate for what liberals are trying to achieve?

b) do you find the term 'gay marriage' merely misguided, or actually offensive?

[TexasMexican]

1. have a gay old time...

n/t

[LittleApple81]

2. I find marriage misguided. There should be a legal contract for

everybody. Then if you want "marriage" you go to your church. Marriage is a church matter. The legal contract allows you to specify certain conditions and obligations of a legal union.

[truthspeaker]

13. Marriage IS a legal contract

The religious aspect is secondary.

Learn history, people.

[DrWeird]

3. I find people who find "gay marriage" offensive offensive.

They're a bunch of god damned bigots.

Fucking savages.

[Warren DeMontague]

4. And I will second that by saying

that if anyone is outraged by your outrage, I will become outraged.

[mike_c]

5. I'm perfectly comfortable with the term "gay marriage..."

...or whatever anyone wants to call their partnership. I do agree with the previous response that "marriage" ought not to be a civil institution at all, and that the state should view all partnerships, no matter what sexual orientation, as "civil unions." People who want their partnerships endorsed by their favorite religion should deal with that issue separately-- the state has no business mingling in the "sanctity" of religious views regarding "marriage."

[jobycom]

7. Marriage was civil before religious

The Church stole it. I don't think the government should care what term the Church uses, we should call it marriage, and let churches catch up how they want to.

I don't like the idea of demoting marriage to a mere legal, tax arrangement simply because gays want to marry. To me, that demotes gay unions by demoting non-gay marriages so that they will be on the same lower level. We should elevate gay unions to the same social status as non-gay marriages, and use the term, because otherwise we are surrendering it to the church, and we are creating a second-class status.

Churches can decide what marriages they want to accept and sanction, and which they want to reject, based on their own little club requirements. I no more care what churches think than what the Long Beach Yacht Club thinks on that, or any, issue.

[mike_c]

10. sorry, I didn't mean to suggest...

..."demoting marriage to a mere legal, tax arrangement simply because gays want to marry." Quite the contrary, I think that from the state's perspective EVERYONE'S familial union should never have been anything else, no matter what term we use to describe it. "Marriage" is a fine word-- but the state should not apply it beyond the legal ramifications of close partnerships and their civil consequences, IMO. That would divorce the term from any moral baggage (no pun intended).

I too don't give a rat's buttocks what any religious institution has to say about the matter, as long as their doctrine is kept separate from civil law. I think the current brouhaha over "gay marriage" undermines any pretense of church/state separation.

[Shredr]

16. Beautifully put (nt)

[CaliforniaLady]

6. It's about MARRIAGE EQUALITY!

That's why over 4,000 couples got marriage licenses in San Francisco.
Domestic partnerships were already legal in California and the Mayor of West Hollywood recently opted for a domestic partnership with his mate.

[Warren DeMontague]

8. I don't think it's offensive OR misguided...

Look, the word "marriage" probably isn't going away any time soon. I'm about as liberal as a person can get,
(well, to be more accurate left/libertarian: Political Compass Reading Economic Left/Right: -4.38 Social Libertarian/Authoritarian: -6.97)
and I don't believe in an invisible man in the sky, and I'm a secular humanist/taoist for whom the closest I've ever come to a real religious experience has been at Grateful Dead shows.. But I still choose to be "married" to my wife, we had a nice wedding (with minimal references to any dieties) and even though I think the 1950's Leave it to beaver ideal of family life is horribly outdated, it doesn't preclude me from being very happy that we're married, on our own terms and in our own way. Okay, so, that's Marriage.. Is "Gay" offensive? Most of the gay people I know self-identify that way, with that word. I think the critical thing is to talk about gay marriage in the context of marriage equality. Reminding people that it's not about them or whether or not they have a "problem" with gay people (too f*ckin' bad, I say, but, anyway...) but rather about the fundamental issue of fairness and equality.
Of course, the line I've heard coming from the right lately is- "Gay People CAN get married! They have the same right to marry someone of the opposite gender that everyone else does!"... Assholes.

I see where you're coming from, but I don't think the problem is with calling it "gay marriage". I mean, bottom line is, gay people haven't been able to marry. Maybe once they've been able to for a long time, it will no longer be necessary to distinguish what they want to do from what everyone else does-- i.e. marriage will just be "marriage". But I fear that's a little ways off.

[silverpatronus]

12. thanks for understanding impeachdubya...

i think it's possible judging from some of the responses that i didn't make my stand clear enough. i find the term 'gay marriage' offensive yes, because it signifies some kind of separation from 'regular marriage'. i believe that marriage is marriage, whether the parties involved are the same sex or not. just clearing that up for those who may not have understood what i was trying to say.

[Warren DeMontague]

17. What's Truly Offensive

is, that whatever you want to call it, they still generally can't do it.

[countmyvote4real]

9. Marriage is marriage. Commitment is commitment. Sex is…

Well I guess it depends on the definition of “is.” Whatever. Equal is equal or it’s not.

[DBoon]

11. Marriage is a contract

WOuld we talk about "gay incorporation"? Or a "gay fee-simple deed"? Or a "gay limited partnership"?

Marriage in the eyes of the law is a method for dividing up proterty and certain other rights among two closely affiliated individuals.

If we talk about gay marriage, then should we also talk about "heterosexual marriage"?

[ClassWarrior]

14. I don't find it offensive.

But I do know that there are many people who are comfortable with granting all people marriage rights, yet are uncomfortable with thinking about homosexual sex. And so to them, the term "gay marriage" conjures up uncomfortable images. It's a tough one to get past. That's why I prefer using language like "marriage equality" or "marriage rights" or "marriage discrimination," which is more accurate at the same time that it's less emotionally charged in a negative way.

[ClassWarrior]

15. People should understand that...

...you're not discussing the issue of gay marriage itself, nor even plain old marriage. You're discussing language, and how to use it wisely to win the battle for the mind.

[thebigmansentme]

18. democrats got the right idea

institute gay marriage.

just don't call it marriage.

problem solved ?...

[missedherniceguy]

19. A misnomer

It should be same-sex marriage. Brothers, sisters and whomever wants to be married should be allowed.