The overhyped and over-the-top "Gay Pride 40th Anniversary" celebrations are hard to avoid, and I'm getting the media's point that we are to feel ashamed if we do not "celebrate" the joys of homosexuality with the other enlightened ones.
Yahoo even had a caption on one of its news photos of the event which read, Yahoo! is proud to support the LGBT community and wishes all a Happy 40th Gay Pride!
Um...was that shout-out really necessary?
Anyway, all this talk of "gay pride" reminded me that a few months back, a gay friend of mine from college agreed to debate me on the (admittedly limited) topic of "gay marriage." Here's what I wrote him to kick it off:
Okay, so here is my basic problem when debating the topic of "gay marriage":My friend's response was positive, and he said he liked the way this debate was going. He said he would get back to me. So far he hasn't, and it's been over six months.
I have an issue with the whole premise of redefining language. If a word means something, then redefining it seems to me a manipulation. For example, if the whole of the English speaking world has understood the meaning of the word "chair" to mean "chair" then I think it is wrong that a small group could start insisting that we understand "chair" to mean "chair and table". It distorts language and clouds understanding, till words become meaningless.
In my mind, the same thing happened with the word "gay". It was co-opted and now means something completely different from what it used to. Young people hear the words of a Christmas song, "merry and gay" and they have no idea how that fits, or perhaps they giggle. Women named Gay had to change their names. Gay suddenly lost its true meaning. That is manipulation of language that I think is political in nature and has nothing to do with the *organic* growth of language. (Would you agree?)
So, essentially, I can't debate "gay marriage" since "marriage" has always been known as one thing (male/female). If we want to call it something other than "marriage", then let's do that. How about "unions" "relationships" or even a new name altogether. But marriage has already been defined for centuries (more, if you leave English for ancient language equivalents of "marriage"), and I just have a philosophical opposition to manipulation of language. I believe language must mean something.
Someone said: "All social engineering begins with language engineering" and I think that is true.
So, that is why I don't believe in "gay marriage" ... because it cannot, by definition, exist.
(That is not the first time I have tried to have honest, friendly dialogue with a liberal, only to be met with silence after my very first question or statement. I could write a whole post on that.)
If anyone can step into his place and tell me where my logic is wrong, please do. I welcome it. I truly want to understand the liberal mindset, but I just don't get it. Why is it okay to turn language on its head to get what you want?