Which cannot be used to affect the law. You cannot appeal to this (which I seriously doubt is true anyway) as a criterion of the lawfulness of such ‘marriages’.
But not by petition or protest, and that’s the important issue. Besides, it does not matter one whit as to the legal standing of such ‘marriages’ if people don’t use the scare quotes.
I thought your pint was that same sex marriages didn’t exist. Nor your complaining how the change occurred. Thus, you must acknowledge they exist.
We don’t need to use the definition to affect the law. We can use the law to affect the law, and ethics to affect the law. Language reflects (and influences, certainly) the development of ideas.
BTW, where are you from? If it’s the US, you use non-traditional punctuation, which I’m assuming you would view as a killing offense.
I don’t. I used the word in scare quotes: ‘marriage’. For reference, putting a word in quotes means that you are really just quoting what someone else said and do not accept it.
I use British punctuation out of habit because American punctuation is stupid. I live in Klmbuss Ahia.
Unless the law is changed by vote or legislative action, which happens all the time. 11 states (and Washington DC) have recognized same-sex marriage through those means in the last five years, and several more may join them in November.
‘Marriage’ please. Scare quotes are required.
That’s priceless.
Oh, semiotician of great worth and skill, you are priceless.
So in real life how do you refer to same-sex people who are legally married in the states and countries that allow them? Do you say they have a “cargo cult marriage” or some other nonsense?
Or else he’ll scare quote you a second time!
I mean, really, how can the comma or period come before the quote is closed?
“I’m not going,” he said. “I was without food and you gave me some fries.”
Does that make *any *sense at all?
Yep, that’s what she is.
So not making sense bothers you all of a sudden? Son, I have some bad news for you.
They’re never required. They’re popular with shitty writers, though.
I am merely pointing that the usage is controversial, and the scare quotes makes that clear.
A curious qualification of your own invention. Lexicographers make no such distinctions. (Interestingly, the one lexicographer I happen to know personally was married to another man. This proved very important when his spouse had a fatal accident several years ago. Without the protections of marriage, dealing with the unexpected death of his husband would have been far more difficult and harrowing.)
He already said exactly that to me earlier in this thread.
So far, his opinion has had zero effect on the rights and privileges afforded to me and my husband by our marriage.
Also note that he completely ignored my posting the etymology of “marriage,” as it doesn’t suit his pre-conceived notions.
If that were true they’d be called controversy quotes.
Scare quotes have several functions. Maybe that is too complicated for you.