Some people do seem overly married to their ideas of the meaning of some words...

Personally I rather like wedded, as has been suggested, with its etymology of 'to pledge'. But couples will describe their relationship using whatever language they wish regardless of laws and even that seldom describes the 'quality' of it.

'Live and let live' seems a simple enough ideal.

Anyone who asserts 'live as I think you should' might be bigoted. Anyone who asserts 'live as I insist you must' certainly is... and frequently hiding behind a god!

Dear Trevor,

<<Anyone who asserts 'live as I think you should' might be bigoted. Anyone who asserts 'live as I insist you must' certainly is... and frequently hiding behind a god!>>

Absolutely so and the modern gods are the state and its government.
(otherwise how can one explain all this turbulence about the privilege of getting a piece of paper from them)

Churches used to do the same and now they start feeling the other end of the stick - I hope they learn their lesson and I hope that in future nobody either wields a stick or needs to feel its other end.

//the modern gods are the state and its government.//

They can't be. It violates the Babel fish argument.

We have definite proof of the existence of the state and the government. God cannot prove it exists for proof denies faith, and without faith God is nothing. QED.

' "Oh dear," says God, "I hadn't thought of that," and promptly vanishes in a puff of logic.'

One wonders why there is not a word, or words, to define the meaning of a same sex union in the English language.

Three replies to my post objecting to the use of the word marriage and yet not one put forward any reason to use the word.

This reinforces the view that the reason some homosexuals want to use the word marriage is to try and instill some degree of respectability into their lifestyle.

This then makes their motive for change fraudulent and deceitful.

yup, what I meant by "ulterior motive"

No-one needed to, Banjo.

<<Three replies to my post objecting to the use of the word marriage and yet not one put forward any reason to use the word.>>

Your augments against using the word failed when challenged. I've noted several reasons multiple times across multiple threads regarding why the word “marriage” should be used to describe legally-recognised same-sex unions, so please excuse me if I no longer feel the obligation to bore everyone with them yet again.

Here's three reasons briefly:
1. there's no reason not to;
2. equality;
3. arguments against using the word "marriage" are driven by ignorance and a desire to portray same-sex couples as inferior or bad.

The arguments against same-sex marriage are virtually identical to the arguments against interracial marriage (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A8JsRx2lois).

Today’s homophobes are tomorrow’s racists. But hey, at least you get to have some sense what you’ll look like to future generations.

<<This reinforces the view that the reason some homosexuals want to use the word marriage is to try and instill some degree of respectability into their lifestyle.>>

It sounds like you're implying that there is somehow a lack of respect owing to it. How is this so?

By the way, I liked your comment regarding cleanliness earlier. By that logic, lesbians can use the word "marriage" and so can gay male couples who don't engage in anal sex (assuming that’s what you were referring to) - and there are a lot of them. Furthermore, heterosexual couples who have engaged in anal sex would need to cease using the word "marriage" to describe their relationship.