Marriage Does Not Define Same Sex Unions

This term is what is used to define a union between a man & man or a woman & woman. It is being incorrectly used and I think the gay community should be offended.

Here we go again.

Maybe. It's been on everyone's mind more than it probably should. It has been discussed on this blog more than once. Mostly because this is where I put my possibly offensive political and religious opinions.

So what's different?

Nothing, everything. I'll start with quickly defining marriage. It is used to define a union between a man and a woman. The word marriage actually includes both man and woman in it's etymology. The latin "matrem" means mother and the latin "monium" means the action, state or condition of. Together they define the creation of a state where the woman becomes a mother. The word actually defines traditional marriage.

But the world has changed.

Not really. 95% of women on the planet have been married to a man by age 49 (1). That means 95% of women know what marriage means. By sheer volume of understanding, the definition of marriage stands.

But the laws & rulings?

There have been laws passed and rulings made in the last decade that have been trying to change the definition of the word. We can all vote to change the meaning of water, but water is still two hydrogen and one oxygen in a chemical bond and no amount of money and lawyers will change that.

So gay folk can't get married?

Yes. Society has bombarded them with the idealism of marriage their whole lives. Why shouldn't they want to add that label to their unions? They love each other, they want to start a family, they want to be just like everyone else...but they're not.

How rude!

Stop right there. What is wrong with not being like everyone else? They go on parade celebrating their differences. They fight in court to have rights applied to them as a seperate protected group (and rightly so). They have gone out of their way to point out how they are proud to be different.

But they're not?

This argument is much like a stereotypical Feminist demanding to be a man. Not demanding the same rights as a man, but demanding to legally be a man. Not a sex change, that's a whole other discussion. She demands to have her birth certificate say man, her employment records to say man, her tax returns to say man, legally a man in every way, but she's still a woman. A true feminist would find this idea offensive. What is wrong with being a woman that you would need to legally be a man? Fight for the rights not the label.

How does this apply to gay marriage?

They're fighting for the wrong thing. The label does not define them. They will forever be fighting people to agree with their new label when it does not fit them. Just like a the woman above arguing with someone that she's a man when clearly she's not. I think the gay community should be offended.

Well, they are mad.

They should celebrate the virtues that make them who they are. Not try to conform to a label that they can never live up to. The gay community needs to understand this before they find that their victories are hollow.

Hollow victories?

Yes, this is not like slavery. Slavery was about denying human rights to people who are human. Gay marriage is about fighting to obtain a label to define something that label does not define. Many of the rights are already available and more are being won every day without the offending label. So it doesn't matter if you are fighting to call alcohol water, when what you want is the right to drink alcohol.

And can get drunk?

This is not something that goes away with the generations. 100 years from now they will still know the etymology of marriage. They will still know that 2 men or 2 women cannot have children on their own. They will still know that a happy household with a mom & dad produce happier and healthier children. If it looks like a goose, walks like a goose, honks like a goose it's not a duck, but it doesn't mean that geese are lame.

Honk if your gay!

Do not hate your brother's & sisters because they disagree with you. My gay friends are dear to me and I am tired of them hurting over something that shouldn't have hurt them at all.

Be equitable.

How Men Are Percieved

I've been very happily married for nearly 14 years. I have four children ages 11, 10, 8 & 5. I've been very active in the lives of my wife and kids. I enjoy their company and I get the feeling they feel the same. Why am I telling you this? This is not how society sees me.

Probably dresses like a freak.

I heard that. No, this is not going to be a post about how society needs to stop judging people by how they look. We've been beaten over the head with that enough.

My head's still sore.

I'm probably going to make it hurt in a different way. Years ago I was out with my oldest two kids at the park, they were probably 5 and 4 and I was out giving their mom a break so she could nap with the third (she cleaned the house instead). My kids are really friendly and when they saw other kids at the park they instantly ran off to play leaving me to watch them in amusement on a bench a little ways off.

Sounds nice.

It was. They were happy, I loved watching them and it was a nice day out. As time went on though I became increasingly aware of moms at the park watching me. A couple of them were whispering to each other looking in my direction. I looked around so see what was going on.

It's the clothes right?

Stop that. I was dressed normally. I didn't think much of it and went back to watching the kids. A homeless man wandered through the park looking through trash cans. One of the moms took this opportunity to leave. That's when it hit me: I was the only other man at the park, sitting alone, watching children with a smile on his face.

Man you're creepy.

That's what they must've thought. I decided to call each child over to inquire on their status. You know: "Are you having fun? Are you thirsty? Do you need to use the potty? Stay away from the mud." The usual questions. After that the moms seemed less disturbed with my presence.

Until that point I was a pedophile. When did the default position on a single man become a pedophile? Now when I go to a park I have a mental timer counting down the time between child check-ins. If it goes too long I can feel my status change to pedophile.

From what?

Good question. Years more of watching my own children with and without my wife has taught me that without my wife I become a "deadbeat dad." That's the next step up. The only reason a solitary man would be at the park with his children is because he must be divorced and cannot entertain the children at his apartment. This is usually aggravated by the fact that I worked during the week and would be out with my kids on a Saturday.

And thus have custody.

Yep, that's my assigned time. While I won't say that Pedophiles and Deadbeat Dads don't exist, I do take exeption to those being my default assignments. I've compiled a list of defaults for men:

• Man: Pedophile
• Man & Kids: Deadbeat Dad
• Man & Wife: Boyfriend
• Man, Wife & Kids: Cheating Husband
• Man, Kids & other women have talked to wife: Good Husband

Most single men do not hang out at parks and so they probably are not aware of this social dynamic. Once you have kids, you become painfully aware of how much the world hates you. Try taking your kids for an ice cream at McDonald's. If your wife isn't there: Deadbeat Dad trying to buy your kids affection.

It only costs $1.50/child.

Has the news really jaded us so much that we expect that anyone we do not know is, by default, bad? I grew up an only child and so I didn't have a lot of empathy for other people not like me (though I thought I did). Having children has opened me up to a new set of social graces. They have taught me how to percieve the people around me and I like what they see. Older folks are nice people who know a lot and are trying to help, people your age are potential playmates and younger kids are people who might need help.

Children are so naive.

To a point yes. We can't leave ourselves completely open to harm by others. We can find ways to see the best in others and maybe, just maybe, I'm not actually a pedophile.

Be charitable.

The Definition of Marriage

I decided to look up the definition of marriage the other day. I was curious as to the exact wording that would be used. I was surprised to see what they had done.

All sources clearly state that marriage is defined as a union between a man and a woman. No surprise there, this definition has been clearly defined in nearly all societies in history. Though they might recognize other unions, genders or relationships, the clearly defined rules of marriage has always been assigned to a man and a woman.

The entymology of the word relates it both to a man and a woman. The latin matrem (meaning mother) and monium (meaning action, state, condition), together meaning a relationship where the female becomes a mother. This can only happen in a male-female relationship.

Imagine my surprise when some of the dictionaries included a secondary definition including same-sex marriages. The defining of words is a unpassionate discipline that does not bend to the whims of society. If a word falls into general use in society, it's definition needs to be established and subsequently published. If a word is used as slang by a small group and fails to gain such widespread usage or understanding it is not to be entered and called slang. But there it sits, begging the question why?

How about widespread usage? How many people in society use the word "ideal" to mean "idea" (ie. I have a good ideal)? Or how many say "I have more then you" when they mean than? Do you find those definitions in the dictionary? No. Well, what does society think?

Didn't same-sex marriage just become legal in several states? Not by the will of the peoople. In fact, not a single US state has voted in same sex marriage. Whenever the people have been asked to define marriage they have said again and again that it means a union between a man and a woman. Those states that currently allow same sex marriage only do so because millions of dollars were paid to lawyers to make it so. And serving a small group's interests does not a definition change.

Common use is where we derive definitions from and the common use for these alternatives to marriage requires modifiers to avoid confusion. When someone in the media or just a person on the street wants to tell you about the civil union of a homosexual couple they say phrases like "same-sex marriage," "gay marriage" and "homosexual marriage." There is a reason for this, when the general public hears the phrase "married couple" they know that means a man and a woman. Without the modifiers the word's meaning is clear and understood.

If I were to mention dry water an idea pops into your mind contrary to the word water. There are scientific publications that refer to a silica coated substance that is 95% water. It is dry to the touch and could be very useful in chemical applications. If that term were to gain widespread usage would dictionaries then add the "dry" definition to the word water? No, of course not.

By adding the same-sex entries definition of marriage, dictionaries have taken a political stance on the issue. As a percieved neutral source, this is a violation of the public trust in such institutions as dictionaries. I find this unconsionable, irresponsible and damaging. What other definitions can they be persuaded to change?

Be defined.

Vaccinating Against Ignorance

One of Lisa's friends recently posted a video advocating a new cure for Autism:

So the basic gist is a couple really wanted a baby. They got a healthy baby. The doctor gave the baby evil vaccines that caused autism. The mother did research and found a homeopathic doctor. He cured the baby. He is now asking for your donations to help spread the word.

Clear Enough

I have a few problems with this video. The first being how parents stated in the video that they didn't see any symptoms until 2 months after the vaccinations. It takes less than two weeks for a vaccination to clear a person's system. If there was any damage to be done, it would have happened in those two weeks and would have shown up in that time. Even stretching out the time scale to a month still leaves another month without symptoms. My guess is that the child was going to develop autism with or without the vaccines.

But the studies...

You are right. There have been studies that say they show a correlation, but none have provided solid evidence (Weak Study Example, Article on MMR & the CDC). I do understand how someone could come to this conclusion. Statistics show as number of vaccines have increased the number of autism cases have increased. Also children receive a lot of vaccinations before the age of 5. Nearly all autism cases are diagnosed before age 5 and probably within a few months of a vaccination shot. So it is easy to see how a logical causation theory might evolve. However, the number of wireless devices, tickle me Elmos and complaints about Corporate America have increased during that same time. Children also go to McDonald's, grandparent's houses and have their diapers changed around the time of vaccines. Who's to say none of these are the cause?

OK, what else?

Glad you asked (I might've gone on ranting about the vaccines cause autism thing, I mean don't get me started on Jenny McCarthy. My friend Matt ranted about the vaccines are bad thing, I'm ranting, anyways). She found a book on Homeopathy and thought it looked promising. Really? Is this the same Homeopathy I've heard about? Here's a very good explanation of what Homeopathy is:

I can boil the whole industry down to one word "placebo." Placebos only work when the person they are given to thinks that they should work. Five year olds are not aware of psychological disorders, let alone having one. Also if it is in fact autism then the problem is caused a chemical imbalance or a genetic disorder. Either way it slows the development of certain parts of the brain causing a problem that cannot be fixed by a diluted solution or any other medication. That would be like trying to fix someone cut off at the knees with a pill. Unless you have a leg growing pill, that would be handy.

So, it worked.

Did it? Or did it work like a placebo on the parents? The child improved (which is totally awesome). I don't think it was the Homeopathic Acupuncturist (which is, by the way, not a doctor). If you take the Homeopathic remedy for a headache and you get better it doesn't mean it was the "Headache Medicine." On the box of homeo-aspirin it says it might take up to 12 hours to take effect. The average headache is gone within 12 hours.

But, the Testimonials.

They're just that, testimonials. I can say anything I want about a product. I can even create circumstances where people will believe and repeat what I say about the product. It does not, however change the fact that it is wrong and does not work. Learn for yourself if the information is true. An informed person is a safe person. Unless you've intercepted top secret Mafia/FBI/KGB/LDS/CIA/MSN/TLA papers, then you're in big trouble.

Be sensible.

This Friday

I've never been one to memorialise anything. Other people's pain to me is just that, other people's pain. So, 8 years ago, when a tragedy happened thousands of miles away I reacted the same way I always do. I noted the tradgedy and went on with my day. The problem was the rest of my world couldn't seem to let this one go.

The terrorist attack that hit the United States on the 11^th of September 2001 seemed to linger on, and on, and on, and on. I really couldn't appreciate the true tradgedy of the disaster. Especially when other disasters were happening around the world. January 2001, 20,000 people died in India as a result of and earthquake, torrential rains and mudslides Venezuela 1999 killed 15,000, the North Korean famine from 1995-1998 killed an estimated 1,500,000 and no one was broadcasting it on TV on some channel 24 hours a day.

Now that the infamy has had sufficient chance to fade I am able to think about it without wincing. It was terrible, it was trajic and it was done to civilians. How weak. Worst of all, it was in the name of religion. How sad.

Here is a video placed on the LDS website commemorating the event happening this week (Spanish):

Hopefully we learned what we needed to from this experience. Some things are important (family, friends, our fellow men, etc.) and some are not (hate, ignorance, bigotry, etc.). If we're lucky, we can tell the difference.

Be peaceful.

Countereducationism

There is a movement in our society pushing us toward a more uneducated union. It's not being directly advocated for by any group in particular. This is more of a side effect of some cultures, religions and celebrities and I want to talk about it.

Countereducationism

I created that word to describe this phenomena.* It means a movement of people who want to undo education. If you were to ask any group of people if they wanted to undo education they would give you a resounding no. So I don't think this is the direct intention of any group of people. I say group because there are probably individuals that do think this way. This IS America after all. Enough babbling let's get into specific examples:

Medical

The medical field is somewhat of an enigma to most of the population. Primarily because it takes so long to gain the necessary knowledge just to "practice" medicine. The average person does not have enough information about the big picture of medicine to make any educated guesses about what may or may not be a good idea. As a result we will sometimes second guess a recommendation that doesn't sound right. Some have taken it too far and say that doctors are trying to hurt us for their own gain. Here are some of the countereducation that is out there:

• AMA - "the AMA has worked diligently to block much in the way of real progress in order to control medicine and shut out competition." -Natural News

  I've heard this many times. It's usually in response to the AMA's reluctance to support some new, nontraditional type of medicine. Over the years when I've taken the time to look up the arguments on both sides of these issues I always find that the AMA says "Needs more testing." They never outright ban a medicine or procedure unless it is obvious (like feeling the bumps on your head to determine your personality). So what's wrong with asking or a little more scrutiny? I'm sure the answer has something to do with the offended party's pocketbook. Either way their response is to try to undermine society's trust in doctors and traditional medicine. Doctors trained to heal you = bad. Not doctors with no training and a hunch = good. Brilliant.

• Vaccinations - "the escalation of vaccines [means] the escalation of autism." -Jenny McCarthy

  Whether it's stopping a STD vaccine or trying to connect vaccinations to autism there are people trying to tell us that vaccinations are bad. There is no direct evidence to prove this. There were some studies that point this direction. Luckily there were further studies that showed there was no link between the measle vaccine and autism. The opponents ignore this information and continue to tell us vaccinations are bad. As a result measles are on the rise and children may die. Yay countereducation!

• Faith Healing - "Homeopathy is extremely effective. When the correct remedy is taken, results can be rapid, complete and permanent." - ABC Homeopathy**

  We all know that some religious leader putting his hands on you does not mean that you stop seeing the doctor. If there is some miraculous healing then the doctor's confirmation is icing on the cake. I am seeing a new type of faith healing that does not involve religion. It's called Alternative medicine and it includes homeopathy, ancient (insert culture here) remedies and dietary healing. Most of them don't provide any targeted medicine and rely on the regular healing time to show their products effectiveness (ie. cold remedies saying they take 2-4 days to work when it takes 2-4 days to get over a cold anyway).

  The problem here is they want you to try these remedies instead of going to the doctor which isn't a problem when you have a cold, but what about if you have cancer (search cancer natural remedies**)? Many cancers are highly treatable if you actually go to get the treatment. The countereducation here is again to distrust the people most highly trained to help.

Science

Science has given us radio, Television, high gloss printing, the Internet and computers which have in-turn delivered all the information necessary to distrust the very system that brought us these things. Discoveries about the world around us have been coming at an increasing rate and, often enough, previous results were found wrong by new findings. We see this all the time on the News and for some reason, instead of saying "cool! We learned more about our universe" the masses seem more likely to say "see, science is wrong again." Here's what I mean:

• Physics - "My own calculations have shown that it is quite plausible that these little black holes survive and will grow exponentially and eat the planet from the inside." - Otto Rössler

  Yup, the world's gonna end and the CERN is gonna do it. Really? 20 countries spent 4.4 billion on the project and failed to do the math? Greed should tell you that if politicians are gonna set aside that kind of money for anything they're gonna make sure it's not a waste to begin with.

• Dating - "radiometric dating has serious problems" -ChristianAnswers**

  Sorry, it wasn't the kind of dating you were thinking of. So, radiological scientists are full of crap and are scrambling to justify their funding. If there was one small group that measured the dates of everything and we all had to accept their ruling I would agree with this assessment.

  The truth is there are hundreds of labs capable of doing this work and they all double check the work of the others. Also the theories behind the process are tested, retested and confirmed. All these different sources have independently arrived at the same conclusions. If everyone who counted a basket of apples said there was 7 apples, then it is easy to conclude there are 7 apples in the basket. Even if you're not an apple expert.

Education

There is a need to debunk our educational system. When speaking with people who do well despite their lack of education they will often brag about how they didn't need a degree or that they make more than someone else who has a degree or even that a degree is entirely unnecessary in the real world. I don't mind that they think they've done all right without a degree, but there is no need to denounce the whole institution.

I have known the children of these types of people. Many of them think the same way as their parents and have not pursued an education. Sometimes they do well and often they don't. Their situations would have been avoided if they had only pursued a higher education. Unfortunately they tend to behave as their parents further spreading the misinformation. There are further examples.

When I was in Chicago, in the hood, I often observed a culture of failure. They believed they would fail in life either by not receiving opportunities (lotto, inheritance, reparations, etc.) or by having opportunities denied (by the man) or by not being good enough to get an "out" (by being a Rap Star, Athlete etc.). They also believed that success was rare and that they had no control over it.

Yay stupid!

The Rap Culture, Redneck Culture, Barrio Culture have all filtered their way into the American conciousness for good or for bad. The bad is the celebration of stupidity.

• Rap Culture - I worked with a missionary that had good diction and a large vocabulary. He was even tempered and intelligent. He was also black and was shunned by black people as being too white. By the same token, if you don't speak like an uneducated black person you are without street cred. You could never hang with rap crews. In fact, the more stupid things you have done (murder, theft, raketeering, pimping, etc.) the more cool you are in the Rap Community.

• Rednecks - Despite the fact we all like to laugh at Redneck jokes there are a lot of similarities to the Rap Culture. The more stupid you are, the more people want to emulate you. Jackass would be a good example of this. Pro wrestling would be another.

• Celebrities - What used to be a part of the previous two paragraphs has developed into its own culture. We watch celebrities with too much interest wanting to be just like them. The stupider the better. To such an extreme that the TV Neworks got wise and invented Reality Shows. Now we can be celebrities, just as stupid and without the money.

The fix?

I don't know. I usually come up with suggestions before I post the blog, but not this time. I could offer that we should all support education and help to educate all those around us. I guess if we did we wouldn't have contestants for Are You Smarter Than A 5^th Grader?

Be educated.

 

* The major root is educ which means to draw out something hidden (similar to deduce). Add -ate (to do or done) and -ion (turns it into a noun) at the end and we get education which means the results of drawing out that which was hidden. Now we arrive at the problem I mentioned above and I add counter- (against, opposite) to mean undoing education. Tack on an -ism and it's a system of belief.

** No link, I don't want to help them out by linking to them.