You can share this debate in three different ways:
#1
#2
#3
Paste this URL into an email or IM:
Click here to send this debate via your default email application.
Click here to login and CreateDebate will send an email for you.
Gays CANNOT consummate their marriage.
Consummation of a marriage is the first act of sexual intercourse between a married couple.
Sexual intercourse is defined as the penetration of the vagina by the penis.
Consummation traditionally, is what validates the marriage contract. Any marriage not consummated, can be broken off without a divorce.
Any "marriage" contract between the homosexual parties, is legally unenforceable, it is null and void because the contract can not be "signed," so to speak.
All credit for that argument goes to: http://www.createdebate.com/user/viewprofile/unownmew
It can be referenced here: http://www.createdebate.com/debate/show/What_would_consummation_of_a_marriage_mean_in_relation_to_gay_marriage/debate
It looks like gays have to change the definition of "consummate" or the definition of "intercourse" in order to make their "marriage" valid.
I propose they just force the government to stop using the word "marriage" (because it is archaic) and start using "Civil Union" for both hetero and homosexual unions.
But hey, that's just me trying to stir the pot and move up the Weekly Leader Board ;)
It doesn't seem like it's really a very complicated connection to make.
Anyways, mainly I just wanted to say I don't think you'd be bringing this issue up if some war vet paralyzed from the waist down (including his penis) got married after his tour.
Haha actually what am I saying... you of all people just might do that.
Very well put, that goes hand in hand with my point quite nicely I think. The way people use the word sex and sexual intercourse is nearly synonymous and people usually consider all those other things sex, so to say sexual intercourse is only vag/penis like Joe said would only complicate things more than it needs to be.
I would find that very Ideal definitions to go by, however the meaning behind the words have already been decided by population, and I think it would be much more practical to take that into consideration. Typically the way intercourse is used does seem to encompass sex, it seems to be a more "professional" way of saying "sex".
"the meaning behind the words have already been decided by population."
That is what you say. Now..., prove it. Line up a whole bunch of illiterate people who have never seen a dictionary and have them tell me that when they say intercourse they mean anal sex. Do that and I will educate them as to the errors of their way. The majority of the people mean penis/vag action when they say intercourse.
Good luck with that... Personally I'd rather use the language for the purpose it was invented and that is to communicate the best I can with people, and trying to convince people that words should mean this and that is somewhat counter-productive to the purpose of the language. I do like to put thought into what words should mean but how they are already understood is important to.
You don't understand. You are one of the FEW who thinks anal sex when someone uses the word intercourse.
The BEST way to communicate with people is to agree on a specific meaning for words. Claiming that you are NOT going to use the dictionary (agreed upon) meaning and instead use what you think the meaning of the word ought to be (regardless of what the majority think it means) is NOT the best way to communicate with people.
The word intercourse is already understood by the vast majority of people to mean penis/vag action; not anal sex. Most people are heterosexuals and most heterosexuals do not have anal sex. Therefore, most people mean straight sex when the use the word intercourse. If you have any statistics to prove me wrong, bring it ;)
You don't understand. You are one of the FEW who thinks anal sex when someone uses the word intercourse.
I do not instantly think of anal sex when I hear the word intercourse comes up, I think of sex in general beyond just oral sex. From how I've seen people use the word "intercourse" I get the feeling that the same thoughts come up. sex, is sex, is sex no matter whether it is male on male, female on female, or male on female, etc. When I hear of intercourse I typically think of sex, and I suspect that it is the same with other people. People will be quick to say that those two men or two women had intercourse, if we didn't think of intercourse as synonymous with sex, most people wouldn't say that.
The BEST way to communicate with people is to agree on a specific meaning for words. Claiming that you are NOT going to use the dictionary (agreed upon) meaning and instead use what you think the meaning of the word ought to be (regardless of what the majority think it means) is NOT the best way to communicate with people.
I didn't say that was the best way to communicate people, you misunderstand me. What I think the word ought to mean is dependent on how it is typically used. I agree with a multiple of dictionaries, and disagree with a multiple of dictionaries as you do. Are you saying that using the words how most people don't think it means is more productive than using the words how people think it means? Joe, the thing here is, I am "biased" to my definition based on efficiency of the language, it is completely see through, and blatantly obvious that your are basing your definition on a personal opinion, not on the efficiency of said language.
The word intercourse is already understood by the vast majority of people to mean penis/vag action; not anal sex. Most people are heterosexuals and most heterosexuals do not have anal sex. Therefore, most people mean straight sex when the use the word intercourse. If you have any statistics to prove me wrong, bring it ;)
That is the first thing they think of specifically because of their sexual orientation, just like when we think of love, the first thing we think of is a man and a woman, does that mean that two men or two women don't love each other? of course not. The same people that think of vag/pen when they hear the word intercourse will easily apply the meaning of intercourse to a man/man or woman/woman relationship therefore the way people use the word intercourse can mean anal sex. Also likewise on the statistics part.
I am not convinced that most people think (or use) the word intercourse to refer to anal sex. I did a sample during lunch and no one said that they associate anal sex with intercourse. Maybe you're hanging out with the very people who do not know when to use "you're" and when to use "your." ;)
I am not convinced that most people think (or use) the word intercourse to refer to anal sex. I did a sample during lunch and no one said that they associate anal sex with intercourse.
If that is the case the I can understand why you hold your stance, but with everyone I've meet, in seems as though intercourse refers to any form of sex that uses one or more genitalia. I have no idea if you hang with people whom are biased however. Maybe we should have a debate to perform the goal of a survey to see what people on this site thinks, therefore the statistics aren't based on people we are familiar with but complete strangers to get better statistical information. I find with everyone I meet that intercourse generally refers to anal sex, vag on vag sex, or vag/pen sex, and that each form of intercourse is merely a more specific form of intercourse. I have never heard anyone with the opinion that homosexuals don't have sexual intercourse so I am too still unconvinced.
Maybe you're hanging out with the very people who do not know when to use "you're" and when to use "your." ;)
I do acknowledge I have a bit of a grammar issues at time with the words "you're" and your, and sometimes I do use the wrong one, and it is somewhat illiterate, and I do think it is better to be more literate with that, however it is irrelevant to this argument.
I did look at MW and apparently you are just making this shit up:
1: connection or dealings between persons or groups
2: exchange especially of thoughts or feelings : communion
3: physical sexual contact between individuals that involves the genitalia of at least one person ; especially : sexual intercourse 1
So not only does "intercourse" have different meaning than the sexual one, but the sexual one specifically references oral and anal sex and being a type of intercourse.
The word "consummate" concerns itself with the very specific form of sex called "intercourse." The word "consummate" does NOT deal with the specific forms of sex called "felatio" nor does it deal with the specific form of sex called "sodomy."
The definitions are very clear. I don't see a reason to obfuscate the meaning of those words. Unless, of course, it is being driven by an agenda ;)
Actually, intercourse is more often defined as penetration by the penis, or simply a going in between things. Sexual intercourse defines a specific type of intercourse, that is, vaginal intercourse. it requires the modifier "Sexual" in order to narrow down the intended definition
A more appropriate word to use in this context would be Coitus or Vaginal Intercourse.
Yes, the agenda of the ignorant and lazy. Gay used to mean you were a prostitute, then it meant happy, and now it means homosexual. Other words should follow sociocultural norms as well; some day, the current definition for 'consummate' will be archaic.
Maybe, someday, in the future, the word 'consummate' will be archaic. But today, right now, in the present, the word 'consummate' has a very specific meaning which can be verified ;)
If you go by a dictionary yeah. But society and culture today dictate otherwise, I believe. I shouldn't have to wait for Merriam-Webster to take a hint.
So..., even though anal sex is covered by the words 'sex,' 'anal sex' and 'sodomy,' you want to make it so that anal sex is also covered by the word 'intercourse?'
Why obfuscate the meaning of the word 'intercourse' when there's no need to?
Why have dictionaries if we are just going to go by street lingo?
Besides, I would argue that most people do not mean anal sex when they use the word 'intercourse.' Most people are heterosexual and most people do not engage in anal sex. Therefore I don't believe that society and culture has dictated the change. Maybe you can direct me to a statistics page ;)
I don't need to make intercourse include those things. They are included in the sociocultural definition already. Granted, one has different partners and outcomes than another, but it's the act that should be defined properly.
Also to say society and culture hasn't dictated this change is saying homosexuals are apart from society, and therefore not equal to others. It is the same as closing your eyes and pretending the sun doesn't exist.
The act is defined properly. Vaginal penetration by a penis is intercourse and anal penetration by a penis is either anal sex, sex, or sodomy. There is no reason to change the definitions.
Just because we have a specific word for vaginal penetration by a penis and a specific word for anal penetration by a penis does NOT mean that homosexuals are apart from society. It DOES mean that we want to be perfectly clear about what we are talking about.
Having different words does NOT mean that homosexuals are not equal to others. Conversely, using the same word doesn't mean homosexuals will be automatically accepted.
I am all for different words to describe different types of sex. What I would like is for intercourse to mean straight or gay, sex in general. I know it won't change the shitty attitudes of today but I feel the definition has changed enough in society that it warrants alteration.
The act is defined properly. Vaginal penetration by a penis is intercourse and anal penetration by a penis is either anal sex, sex, or sodomy. There is no reason to change the definitions
Exactly so why are you trying to change Merriam's definition, isn't that hypocritical?
Just because we have a specific word for vaginal penetration by a penis and a specific word for anal penetration by a penis does NOT mean that homosexuals are apart from society. It DOES mean that we want to be perfectly clear about what we are talking about.
We already are you are trying to obfuscate the word, to most people intercourse means almost any form of sex, or sex regardless of orientation.
Having different words does NOT mean that homosexuals are not equal to others. Conversely, using the same word doesn't mean homosexuals will be automatically accepted.
I agree, however I still disagree with your definition.
1: connection or dealings between persons or groups
2: exchange especially of thoughts or feelings : communion
3: physical sexual contact between individuals that involves the genitalia of at least one person ; especially : sexual intercourse 1
So if "consummation" requires "intercourse," and "intercourse" includes any kind of sex involving the junk, one can use oral or anal sex to consummate a marriage.
The definitions are very clear. Pity there's so many of them, and they so often contradict one another.
Consummation is sexual intercourse, but a more appropriate word to use which carries the same meaning, one which does not carry any social baggage or have a history of being definition warped:
Consummation is the first act of "coitus" between a man and a woman who have become married, and it is this act, which must be done in such a manner that procreation is possible, that validates the marriage contract.
And it is the idea of consummation that defines a marriage in the collective mind of humanity. That's not something you can just re-write on a whim, even if you have the law on your side redefining things as they aren't.
Technically, no they don't. The law says that if anyone is physically incapable of consummation than the other can ask for an annulment, so it doesn't actually have to be done, it just has to be possible. Plus, there is a limit. If you are married for 4 years and the other doesn't complain, you can't get an annulment.
That part of the law can probably be changed because of the overall acceptance of gay marriage.
The idea of consummation can be redefined on a whim however. A pro gay judge can easily expand consummation to include gay sex.
One of the grounds for a marriage annulment is that the marriage was not consummated. So..., even though it's hard to find a virgin anymore, I beg to differ. ;)
I heard otherwise. I looked it up, you are right. Sorry, my bad. It currently says that if they are not physically able to then it can be annulled. Maybe I heard that it changed to that from the couple had to actually consummate. Either way, you view that not being able to consummate is grounds for annulment is correct.
Sexual intercourse between two men or two women is still considered sex. There is no official definition for any word, pie could mean carrot, and carrot could mean pie. The important thing I think in taking into account with language are what the words typically mean, or imply, their history is somewhat relevant to however words change, and consistency of our language's workings. Dictionaries try to define words taking into account practicality and its typical meanings so dictionaries are good, but they aren't language law since they are always changing and tend to disagree with each other. Nobody denies that homosexuals have sex, majority of people I know considers sex between two men or women sexual intercourse, if not what should we call sex between two men? Should we stop using the term "anal sex" and call it something else? It's just not consistent with how we use our language, however if you ask any random heterosexual guy to explain sexual intercourse, they will most likely explain heterosexual intercourse as that is the first thing that pops to mind. I'd suspect that is what happened with that dictionary, but I disagree, homosexuals do have sexual intercourse and therefore whether or not marriages need to consummate, homosexuals marriages do.
What good is it to have dictionaries if we are not going to abide by their definition?
I'm just saying their definitions aren't 100% law, they are good, because they do a pretty good job at defining words.
What good is it to have a language if we can't decide on a definition?
Well just in America there is about 300,000 people, I think it is is unrealistic to expect people across the world of any language to be on the same page about what means what, especially one of the biggest languages in the world. We are all on the sane page for the most part making the language beneficial, but the fact that we have semantics is because language can get debatable.
Sexual intercourse is NOT anal sex. Sexual intercourse if penis/vagina action ;)
Sexual intercourse is sex, therefore if we accept your definition of sexual intercourse and therefore sex, and sex can't involve the anus, then the term "anal sex" contradicts itself.
The word "consummate" concerns itself with the very specific form of sex called "intercourse." The word "consummate" does NOT deal with the specific forms of sex called "felatio" nor does it deal with the specific form of sex called "sodomy."
The definitions are very clear. I don't see a reason to obfuscate the meaning of those words. ;)
Oral sex is Felatio. Anal sex is sodomy. Panis/vag action is intercourse.
I think this argument is a much more efficient argument and almost made me change my stance a little only for a second though ;), but I don't think people ever refer to heterosexual couples have anal sex as sodomy, nor does this change the fact that people typically still refer to anal sex as intercourse.
Felatio is a very specific form of sex. Sodomy is a very specific form of sex. Intercourse is a very specific form of sex.
Felatio, and Sodomy, yes, intercourse however no, not in the way we use it.
The word "consummate" concerns itself with the very specific form of sex called "intercourse." The word "consummate" does NOT deal with the specific forms of sex called "felatio" nor does it deal with the specific form of sex called "sodomy."
The definitions are very clear. I don't see a reason to obfuscate the meaning of those words. ;)
I think with dealing with definitions it is important to keep in mind, how separated or united we may or may not become, I think it is more efficient for the language to try and keep us all on the same page (well as best as we can). Your definition does not accurately reflect the way people use those words typically, and the way we use those words typically aren't inconsistent with our language.
It is NOT MY definition. Look it up in the dictionary. Just because you may have been using the word incorrectly or misunderstand the actual meaning of the word, does not mean that your definition is correct. The definitive answer is in the dictionary. I am not making this shit up. ;)
It is NOT MY definition. Look it up in the dictionary.
When I said your definition, I meant it was yours because it was the one you chose to promote, I understand it is a legitly from a dictionary.
Just because you may have been using the word incorrectly or misunderstand the actual meaning of the word, does not mean that your definition is correct. The definitive answer is in the dictionary. I am not making this shit up. ;)
The dictionary definition isn't necessarily "correct", as I have said pie could mean carrot and carrot could mean pie, all language really is, is a bunch of sounds strung together with meanings attached to them, and with text, little pictures we refer to as "symbols" strung together with meanings attached designed for these two forms of language to correlate with each other. I can find different dictionary definitions for one word of which they all disagree, not fully 100% disagree but do oppose each other in some way. For example here is another dictionary definition (I like this dictionary as I find it's definitions to be the most agreeable definitions that should be used)
"
1
: connection or dealings between persons or groups
2
: exchange especially of thoughts or feelings : communion
3
: physical sexual contact between individuals that involves the genitalia of at least one person"
Your definition is not more accurate because there is already a word for anal sex. There is no reason to include anal sex in the definition of the word intercourse. If anything, your definition obfuscates the meaning and creates more confusion. The fact that it creates more confusion makes it impractical. ;)
I disagree, I think your word does what you are claiming mine are because most people generally see intercourse being capable of referring to anal sex. Want to hold a debate or not to see?
I don't see how they are stupid for thinking a word means X. Everyone thinks a word means something, by that logic both you and me and nearly every person on earth is stupid, while those incapable of learning language are smarter than us ;)
They are stupid because they are content in thinking that they are correct instead of educating themselves, by looking at a dictionary, and learning the 'real' definition.
You are basically telling me that I am stupid for picking up a dictionary, looking up a definition, and making a sound argument based on that definition. You are basically telling me that I should just assume what the word means and go with it. I should just base my arguments on made up words.
If that's the future, then I'm glad I'm not going to be part of it for much longer ;)
We both have freaking dictionary definitions, you are not the only one with a dictionary definition... I think I've repeated that several times. You are making this a lot more cut and dry, black and white then it really is. We are not saying words should mean whatever the hell anyone wants it to mean, but the meaning dictated by society is relevant here, and easier to go with (I'd argue consistency may override society though).
Oral sex is Felatio. Anal sex is sodomy. Panis/vag action is intercourse."
I think this argument is a much more efficient argument and almost made me change my stance a little only for a second though ;), but I don't think people ever refer to heterosexual couples have anal sex as sodomy, nor does this change the fact that people typically still refer to anal sex as intercourse.
Felatio is a very specific form of sex. Sodomy is a very specific form of sex. Intercourse is a very specific form of sex.
Felatio, and Sodomy, yes, intercourse however no, not in the way we use it.
The word "consummate" concerns itself with the very specific form of sex called "intercourse." The word "consummate" does NOT deal with the specific forms of sex called "felatio" nor does it deal with the specific form of sex called "sodomy."
The definitions are very clear. I don't see a reason to obfuscate the meaning of those words. ;)
I think with dealing with definitions it is important to keep in mind, how separated or united we may or may not become, I think it is more efficient for the language to try and keep us all on the same page (well as best as we can). Your definition does not accurately reflect the way people use those words typically, and the way we use those words typically aren't inconsistent with our language.
The definition I referenced accurately reflects the way in which people typically use the word "intercourse."
The majority of the people are heterosexuals. The majority of heterosexuals do not have anal sex. The majority of the people mean straight sex when they use the word intercourse. They do not mean anal sex.
True, when people think of intercourse they first think of what intercourse means for them, however it seems to me that these same people still think intercourse is more flexible than that. It is the same exact situation with love, when heterosexuals think of love, they think of heterosexual love, should homosexual's love use a different word, even though most people acknowledge that homosexual love is still love? when I think of music the first thing that pops up in my mind is rock, does that mean all other forms of music is not music?
With regards to the word, "Love" - there is only one definition and that definition is gender (sexual orientation) neutral. It can be used to refer to both heterosexuals as well as homosexuals.
However, we have specific words to refer to specifics sexual acts. We have the word sodomy, to refer to anal sex, and we have the word intercourse, to refer to straight sex. There is no reason to introduce anal sex into the definition of the word intercourse because we already have a word for anal sex; sodomy. If we did NOT have a word for anal sex, you could argue that we could use the word intercourse in order to refer to anal sex. But that is not the case. ;)
With regards to the word, "Love" - there is only one definition and that definition is gender (sexual orientation) neutral. It can be used to refer to both heterosexuals as well as homosexuals.
same with intercourse.
However, we have specific words to refer to specifics sexual acts.
Your point? I understand there is a difference with the world love and intercourse with that, but I don't see the relevance in it.
We have the word sodomy, to refer to anal sex, and we have the word intercourse, to refer to straight sex. There is no reason to introduce anal sex into the definition of the word intercourse because we already have a word for anal sex; sodomy. If we did NOT have a word for anal sex, you could argue that we could use the word intercourse in order to refer to anal sex. But that is not the case. ;)
There are actual words for specific kinds of love?
Correct on all accounts. Language should not be a rigid, cold structure. Rather, it should be flexible, able to bend with the views of society and the times. We have dictionaries to define words commonly (or not so commonly) used, and what they used to mean as well.
Dictionaries are a tool. They are not the dictators of a language, but rather an indication of it's state of being from the last time it was printed. They are milestones, in other words.
EXACTLY! Thank you. This view I feel is much more productive to the use of our language, from my personal experience, homosexuals are considered capable of intercourse by most people, at least how it seemed to me, which the other two debates were invented to do statistical research on that, on this site.
It is socially accepted, both in straight and gay communities, that intercourse just means 'sex'. This includes gay sex and straight sex (I can't say that last one without a, ahem, straight face).
Whats wrong being gay? Or lesbian? I don't find anything wrong with that. You cant help who you fall in love with. Stop being such a douche bag about it. If it ain't you then leave it alone.