Don’t alter definitions
In Gary Crooks’ July 9 disparagement of those who think it’s apt for nouns – cat, dog, marriage – to retain their fundamental characteristics without being labeled bigot, he used the words “discrimination” and “right side of history.”
Discrimination keeps Crooks from finding himself in the wrong restroom.
Men and women are different. To recognize that, to discriminate, is not bigotry. The essences, the complements of the two halves of the species, are fundamental. It’s why people resist a fundamental alteration of the one word and institution that is reflective and respective of that, namely marriage.
Right side of history? This couldn’t refer to natural history, for as time progresses humans find themselves further afield of nature, gay marriage being the latest, most extreme case. If it refers to human history, a more apt phrase would be left side of history, since gay marriage activism (the last .000001 percent of human existence), was originated by a tiny faction of white Western urban radical liberals obviously savvy at campaign methods: rallying troops, prodding complacent people, guilting fence-sitters, sliming contrarians, spewing misinformation and using inane phrases like “right side of history.”
The “perks” of marriage can be achieved without altering definitions of words.