It baffles me on why she wants it to be considered Gay marriage in the first place. To call it gay marriage instead of just marriage creates a divide between the two in the first place. If someone wants gay people to be treated the same the first thing they'd need to do is stop separating the two upon discretion. No different than referring bathrooms as white or black bathrooms. Shows me that everyone truly does realize there is a difference.
You know... when I first saw this thread, and the identity of its author, I immediately thought it was just a lame, underhanded attempt at "opening our eyes" to the true nature of marriage. That Chris opened this debate about a deliberate travesty of wedding with the ulterior motive of helping us realise that, deep down, behind the layers of liberal indoctrination, we all share the same, self-evident definition of marriage as him.
In other words, I suspected him of being a narrow-minded near-sighted jackass who believes that some piece of shared cultural baggage constitutes a divinely-inspired, absolute and timeless Law of Nature and Morality... with the corollary that anyone who doesn't agree with him is not just ignorant or insufficiently thoughtful, but rather in wilful denial of the divine truth. Contrary opinions are therefore inherently sinful and ought to be politely listened to, then ignored completely.
I later revised my judgement, and blamed myself for being so negatively prejudiced towards the religious.
Sometimes I wish I was wrong about people in general, and those people in particular.
