Breaking News Bar
posted: 8/14/2012 4:21 AM

No more redefining of 'gay,' 'marriage'

hello
Success - Article sent! close
 

No more redefining of 'gay,' 'marriage'

I've honestly had enough -- enough of the Daily Herald splashing the words "gay" and same sex "marriage" all over the paper, and enough of the redefinition of these words. Semantics and the accurate use of words reflect on our collective intelligence as a nation, and are important to me as an educator.

Order Reprint Print Article
 
Interested in reusing this article?
Custom reprints are a powerful and strategic way to share your article with customers, employees and prospects.
The YGS Group provides digital and printed reprint services for Daily Herald. Complete the form to the right and a reprint consultant will contact you to discuss how you can reuse this article.
Need more information about reprints? Visit our Reprints Section for more details.

Contact information ( * required )

Success - request sent close

As children we could sing "Deck the Halls" without having to explain that by "gay apparel" we mean our festive, party clothes, since "gay" really means happy. I don't have a problem with the word lesbian, since I don't believe it ever meant anything else, but "gay"? Nobody's happy all the time. Why can't we just create a new word -- one that isn't already defined?

And let's talk about the word "marriage." I'm sorry if it's not politically correct -- and where did that phrase come from? Whose politics decided what is correct? I do agree that it's not the government's job to decide if "gay marriage" is a good or bad institution, but it's not the media's job either.

Solely by definition marriage intimates the union, the actual union of a man and woman, in a committed relationship. It's not just two people of any gender who love each other, and are committed to loving each other. Physical union, with the inherent possibility that offspring may result, is a required component of marriage.

This physical union is how the human race has survived and flourished, and it requires parts that "match up." Think about it. Since the phrase "civil union" seems unacceptable to many, and really isn't accurate anyway, based on my aforementioned definition of the word "union," let's create a new word for this as well. It worked for "ginormous." Any suggestions?

After all, we can always add to the dictionary. Let's not rewrite it.

Judi Ann Fuller

Naperville

Share this page
Comments ()
Guidelines: Keep it civil and on topic; no profanity, vulgarity, slurs or personal attacks. People who harass others or joke about tragedies will be blocked. If a comment violates these standards or our terms of service, click the X in the upper right corner of the comment box. To find our more, read our FAQ.