"Marriage doesn't always mean whatever you want it to mean."

[Ravenscroft]

Okay, so things went south fast. Rather than further derail a thread, I said I'd drag my responses over here. Upon reflection, I'm going to back-burner it, maybe permanently.

In my defense, though, the tipping point came with one comment --

poly marriages should be legal there too, along with marrying your pet goat, or whatever else you want it to be.

Yep, where back to how same-gender marriage is going to lead to "man on dog."

 

[kdt26417]

In a court of law, a legal marriage may have a certain monogamous definition. However, outside the courtroom, a couple is free to design their own working definition. This is what I mean when I say it can mean whatever said couple wants it to mean. Redefining it in that way does not make that couple a pair of "liars."

My two V companions are legally married to each other. But they consider me to be part of a three-person marriage with them. I don't have a problem with that, and I see no reason to put them down for having that poly definition. It's their marriage, and their right to define it as they see fit. All three of us realize we'd be subject to a legal definition if for some reason it went to court. I guess you could say we have a public definition and a private definition. That doesn't make us liars. Nor does it mean we are subject to some kind of cognitive dissonance. We are doing just fine.

 

[starlight1]

In a court of law, a legal marriage may have a certain monogamous definition. However, outside the courtroom, a couple is free to design their own working definition. This is what I mean when I say it can mean whatever said couple wants it to mean. Redefining it in that way does not make that couple a pair of "liars."

My two V companions are legally married to each other. But they consider me to be part of a three-person marriage with them. I don't have a problem with that, and I see no reason to put them down for having that poly definition. It's their marriage, and their right to define it as they see fit. All three of us realize we'd be subject to a legal definition if for some reason it went to court. I guess you could say we have a public definition and a private definition. That doesn't make us liars. Nor does it mean we are subject to some kind of cognitive dissonance. We are doing just fine.

Best response ever. Hug.

 

[kdt26417]

Thx