Bakers refuse Gay wedding cake - update: Supreme Court rules in favour of Bakers

tbyeah said:
I find it hard to believe you'd genuinely think, "Hmmm do they mean a child or a pet?" if a couple approached you and actually said, "Castiel, we've decided to start a family!"
Click to expand...

I'm not one to assume anything, but like I said, just because you can use such a descriptive doesn't imply that it's the only acceptable definition or that they do not consider themselves a family already, or that they are not a family simply because they do not number 3 or more individual's..which was the cusp of Thompson's quote and a reason why there should be no such thing as Same Sex Marriage.
 
Craterloads said:
Semantics aside, in the context you refer to is still more than just two people.
Click to expand...

So?...that doesn't imply that they were not a family before, in fact the terminology used 'meet our new addition to our family" implies that the family unit was already extant when they added to it...

If a family unit cannot comprise just two people, then does that mean that a parent and child is not a family unit?
 
Castiel said:
I'm not one to assume anything, but like I said, just because you can use such a descriptive doesn't imply that it's the only acceptable definition or that they do not consider themselves a family already, or that they are not a family simply because they do not number 3 or more individual's..which was the cusp of Thompson's quote and a reason why there should be no such thing as Same Sex Marriage.
Click to expand...

I do agree, a dog or something else can form a family. But if some-one felt the need to reveal that to me, I wouldn't consider that they weren't having or adopting a child.
 
RDM said:
It really doesn't surprise me that the only family you have is a fish...
Click to expand...
:D Genuine lol.

Regarding the topic, I like the way some seem to be attempting to make the word family only mean what they want it to (ignoring the myriad of possible meanings & it's subjective nature), thinking that if they can only win the semantic debate the fact their views are completely unfounded, illogical & flawed will just go away.
 
tbyeah said:
I do agree, a dog or something else can form a family. But if some-one felt the need to reveal that to me, I wouldn't consider that they weren't having or adopting a child.
Click to expand...

I agree, if someone told me they were 'in the family way' I wouldn't assume they were getting a dog for example, however it doesn't follow that such phrases or their use defines the use of the word Family as only relating to that specificity.
 
Castiel said:
So?...that doesn't imply that they were not a family before, in fact the terminology used 'meet our new addition to our family" implies that the family unit was already extant when they added to it...

If a family unit cannot comprise just two people, then does that mean that a parent and child is not a family unit?
Click to expand...

I would suggest

We are starting a family = having their first child

'meet our new addition to our family = revealing their 2nd /3rd etc child

Well that is in the normal world, but I'm sure you will find some obtuse example where it's used to refer to a zit.
 
Craterloads said:
I would suggest

We are starting a family = having their first child

'meet our new addition to our family = revealing their 2nd /3rd etc child

Well that is in the normal world, but I'm sure you will find some obtuse example where it's used to refer to a zit.
Click to expand...

That's in your world...it is quite normal to refer to a pet as part of a family.
 
Thompson_NCL said:
The primary purpose of marriage is to create a stable familial relationship for the upbringing of children. We give marriage a special status to encourage people to create these stable relationships and produce the next generation of workers. Love has no real value to society, I don't care if married couples love each other or not. I care that they create stable relationships, raise their kids well and contribute to society.

Marriage is more of a business proposition, one which is intended to endure the ups and downs of romance. The love stuff is just what gets it going. You've only to read the relationship thread on here to see how fickle love is.

A marriage where children are not produced is essentially pointless. It's great that two people are in love and can spend their lives together, I'd even be willing to recognise that as a civil union for legal reasons. But society has no real stake in that sort of relationship, nevermind giving it a tax break!
Click to expand...

Thats a very insulting thing to say, on 1 July and 18 November 1916 thousands of childless marriages ended. N Ireland lost a generation on the Somme, we all had a stake in that. If we run with your thinking, every family that has less than 3 children has no stake in the future. Society is built on total dependence on others, for exsample Alan Turing. We all had a stake in his work, shamefully some stuck it in his back.

What difference does it make to society if they do or don't get married? To them it makes a difference as its what some of them want, but for the rest of us it really makes no difference.

I have a swarm of children and have never been married, why any same sex couple would want to get married in beyond me. Religion has corrupted marrage and claimed it as its own and religion itself is otherly corrupted. Just watch for a future gay King and watch religion corrupt its own teaching to save its own skin.
 
Last edited:
Castiel said:
You don't feed your budgie?? :p

Would you regard your wife as part of your family?
Click to expand...

Yes, but not made it a habit to have it sat in the chair beside me sharing dinner :)

As a couple, partner / wife. Would be a bit odd introducing my wife to you as "meet my family" and it's just my wife stood next to me, don't you think?

With children as a collective, family.

Oh and if it was me, my wife and a pet pigeon. It again would probably not be meet my family. Rather meet my wife and my pet pigeon.
 
Last edited:
Craterloads said:
Yes, but not made it a habit to have it sat in the chair beside me sharing dinner :)

As a couple, partner / wife. Would be a bit odd introducing my wife to you as "meet my family" and it's just my wife stood next to me, don't you think?

With children as a collective, family.

Oh and if it was me, my wife and a pet pigeon. It again would probably not be meet my family. Rather meet my wife and my pet pigeon.
Click to expand...

What if your step-mother was visiting?
 
Craterloads said:
Yes, but not made it a habit to have it sat in the chair beside me sharing dinner :)

As a couple, partner / wife. Would be a bit odd introducing my wife to you as "meet my family" and it's just my wife stood next to me, don't you think?

With children as a collective, family.

Oh and if it was me, my wife and a pet pigeon. It again would probably not be meet my family. Rather meet my wife and my pet pigeon.
Click to expand...

That's not what I asked...I asked whether you regard your wife as part of your family?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom