`  :Sorry to butt in... but I read your essay JamesH1934.  At issue would be the negative wording that you use throughout the essay, and one does not have to read far into your essay to see this: ``unnatural joining of two bastardized words`` is very strongly negative right off the bat.  Your position is that prior to the 20th century these words had different meanings, but what you fail to realize is that marriage was at first an economic and social situation for the benefit of the families of the bride and groom, and/or the husband, and establishing a legal, and official lineage for the child.  :Your position about the intentions of marriage are based upon a current and modernized view of marriage that is directed by a moral group.  I don't deny that this is a modern intended use of marriage, and it is the current moral ideal upheld by many institutions, but to claim that marriage was intended for making a good environment for children?  Well, technically, it was really just for establishing a defined legal lineage of children.  :Also, the change of the word ``gay`` is yes, accurate, but did you know that the word ``Lord`` comes from ``Loafward`` as in ``breadwinner``? and ``bead`` actually is a cognate (genetically related word) to the German word ``bieten`` which means ``prayer``, which is what ``bead`` actually meant?  (Using a rosary you counted your beads (prayers) which eventually became counting beads (the small parts of the necklace.)   The position of your essay is constantly against the ``activist homosexuals`` subverting terminology in order to obtain recognition of their goals.  I'm certain that you would not disagree with me, if I were to say that the definition of ``computer`` were something much like: ``a machine for manipulating data according to a list of instructions``, and many people would be surprised that very early on a ``computer`` was a person, who performed simple mathematical operations, typically only addition.  Should we say that this term was ``subverted`` by ``activist programmers`` seeking to remove computers from their careers?  :There is no such thing as ``Gay marriage``. There is only a counterfeit sterile union pretending to be what it is not. a question you may not have considered.  A man and a woman may both be physically infertile, and incapable of having children, should this automatically annull their marriage as you would annull a same-sex marriage?  If so, I would need to inform my parents, my friend's parents, a community group leader and his wife, and many many other people in the world who are currently in socially accepted marriages.  :This is the reason why ``your essay is clearly to express a particular moral point of view``.  I hope that I've been able to shed some light on what words your are using to convey your moral point of view.  `