Philo <"The term "marriage" has been perverted to merely mean platonic love, and does not identify the intention to bond to breed."

So, unless you intend to 'breed', one should not be allowed to marry then Philo? Life looks good for infertile people doesn't it?

Sigh... we just seem to go round and round in circles on this debate.
Luckily, like the issue of abortion, common sense will prevail over the hysterical objecters, and Gay Marriage will be allowed eventually.

And guess what? The sky won't fall in, and it won't affect anyone else nearly as much as they imagine it will.

Dear Suse,

How right you are! Remember mixed-marriages. When a woman marrying
a black man was considered "shocking." Today, nobody
cares. It truly baffles me why there is so much opposition to something as natural as wanting to be married to the person you
love with your entire being. Who on earth is it harming when
two adults who are in love want to get married? What are people
afraid of?

Dear Banjo,

There is no reason that any word cannot change in meaning as long as the change is not so fast that we cannot communicate. Words come into usage, become archaic, go out of usage and change in meaning.

The word, girl, is a word whose meaning we think is well-defined. You and I know what is meant by the word. However, several hundred years ago the word meant a child of either sex.

I object to people saying 'very unique' as unique means one of a kind, and there can be no degrees of being one of a kind. Either something is one of a kind or it isn't. However, if the usage of 'very unique' becomes accepted the word, unique, will have a different meaning, and the original meaning may become archaic. I think I feel about the word, unique, the way I think you feel about the word, marriage.

The meaning of the word, marriage, has changed in the past and can change in the present. Inscriptions are fixed in stone. The meaning of words can and does change.

Toni mob are not having a conscience vote. That puts Turnbull off side again.

davidf,
I agree with you about the word unique, I dispair when I hear some one utter 'almost unique'. Something may be rare but cannot be almost unique.

I do not think the meaning of words has to change. Take the words widow and widower, everyone knows exactly what that is, so why change the meaning?

Everyone knows the meaning of the word marriage so why confuse the issue by making it have a double or triple meaning, requiring further explanation.

It is not neccessary, create a couple of new words.

Dear 579,

Most people are getting tired of Mr Abbott's negativity -
they've even given his Party the name - "Noalition,"
and rightly so. He's slowly becoming irrelevant in the
scheme of most people's lives. Unless his party gets
wise - they may learn that the voters at the next election
will take a page out of Mr Abbott's book and say - "No,NO,No!"
to his becoming PM. With Turnbull the party may stand a chance
at the next election but with Mr Abbott - as long as he keep
on singing from the same hymn book - not a chance!