My meaning of 'marriage' used here is a legal procedure leading to establishing 'family' as a legal union, which is recognised, supported and protected by the state. Parties in such a legal union have been traditionally called spouses. It is not important to differentiate who is a husband and who is a wife, as parties in 'marriage' and 'family' are legally equal.
From this point of view, the same sex marriage is a human rights issue. It is a question of whether the individual must have the absolute right to decide whom to legally choose as a spouse, or the state should continue limiting such a right of the individual? It is a question of whether homosexual persons should be in every aspect equal before the law to heterosexual persons, or discrimination can be justified and continued?

'human rights' is just a code for demanding what one wants no matter how perverse. Why is it that those who bang on about human rights are happy to deny the unborn life (by killing them) and deny children a father and mother. The right of society not to become more perverse by inventing a new form of marriage should be more important than the 'rights' of a few who choose an abnornal lifestyle.

Dear Runner,

Thank you for your message.
'Human rights' are establishing areas where rights of the individual must indisputably prevail over the rights of society.
It is universally accepted that persons must be equal before the law regardless of anything - nationality, race, religion, political views, etc.
Consequently, persons must not be discriminated before the law because of their sexual orientation. Everything what the state and law are able to offer to heterosexual persons must be equally offered to homosexual persons.

Andreas you write

'Human rights' are establishing areas where rights of the individual must indisputably prevail over the rights of society.'

It is against the law to drive a vehicle when full of grog because it is bad for society. The individual right to drive drunk should not over ride the good of society. The individual right to have sex with man or woman is already provided for by law. Perverting marriage for the sake of very few is harmful for society. To normalise something that has such high disease rates and mental issues is not good for society. Again children being denied fathers are having their human rights denied.

As I said in my first post you are being picky about what and to whom human rights are given to. The rights of unborn children are totally ignored when they are murdered in the womb. A Muslim or MOrmon might claim it is a human right to have multiple wives. The defintion of human rights is very elastic with most 'human rights' advocates.

Andreas,
You avocate a word with three different meanings, which would require further explanation. These are three entirely different situations and should have a seperate word for each. Homosexual unions can still be a legal entity and keep the word 'marriage' strictly to mean a hetrosexual union.

Wordsmiths would love to come up with suitable new words for both types of homosexual unions. Some may even have an historical background. Promoting the new words concept may even enhance the prospects of legal recognition to homosexual unions.

i think the word 'marriage' is promoted simply to give the concept of legal homosexual unions more respectability. But in doing so it confuses the meaning of the word

Andreas Berg,
No one is denying anyone the 'right to have a life Long companion'. Such a claim that marriage is denying homosexuals such is fallacious and mischievous lies.

The identifying difference is the nature of sexuality which you deny is an issue. The union of marriage refers to a sexual union of a man and a woman. YOUR CLAIM “In the context of currently ongoing discussion, the same sex marriage should not be viewed as a problem of morality, religion, culture, tradition, and even sexuality.”

In the light of the exclusions you have made above there is no ground you can claim as a right if it is not morality, religion, culture, tradition, or sexuality.

On what ground then is your right claimed? There is ovbviously a devious agenda by the socialists to normalize homosexuality and deny others cultural, traditional and religious views of marriage and homosexuality.