Originally Posted by mineistaken

I understand what you are saying, that if some man is married to a woman and says "I am married" it is the same marriage as before wrong definition was added. I understand this point, but its not the point I am arguing.

My point bellow:

Regarding honda, ferrari and carriage, it devalues word "automobile" in such a way:
Now automobile is something from honda to ferrari. And after it would be from carriage to ferrari - broadens the interval by including something worse than a honda.

So by saying "someone is married" now you won't be able to tell if he/she is actually married or not (because NOT marriage would be called marriage as well).
Meaning that saying "I am married" now carries less weight (=devalued) because it could mean that person is actually married and also could mean that person is using wrong definition.

And yes I support union and even same union rights. I just disagree with adding wrong definition to existing word. New word would have made sense. For example "garriage". Garried and married people would have same civil union rights.

Another vivid example - lets say someone discovers new type of berries. They would not call them blueberries or cranberries just because they taste as good. They would create new word for it.



Yes I support civil unions and same rights. I merely do not agree on using wrong definition.