The term "partner" - gay or straight - is meaningless

  • Thread starter Thread starter 3DOCTORS
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
3

3DOCTORS

Guest
And I refuse to use it. I will concede to “significant other” or “companion” in some cases, but reserve the right to interpret that my own way, namely, that these two people are very, very fond of each other - and that in the case of “companion” it could mean a good friend who is like a caregiver or something. In other words, these words are vague or euphemistic enough that I don’t feel like I’m “legitimizing” either homosexual relationships or straight cohabitations by letting those in them dictate the terminology with which I shall refer to them.

The reason I don’t like “partner” or “domestic partner” is that it refers to something that doesn’t really exist legitimately in the moral realm and under natural law, but that those who practice a certain lifestyle would have us believe exists.

So I will only use “partner” in contexts such as “my lab partner in biology” or when trying to talk like a cowgirl.

I submit that more faithful Catholics could give witness to a moral truth by not feeling obliged to use the “life partner” term to describe immoral relationships.
 
As I feel unqualified to decide who is moral and who is not, I simply use whatever term the couple in question uses.

I do disagree with your contention that “partner” is meaningless though. My wife is, among many other things, my partner in life. We work together to overcome whatever hurdle life may throw our way. She is my friend, my companion, and the love of my life. And my wife.

However, if you don’t want to call her my partner, we can live with that 🙂

God bless
 
I agree. The term “partner” can just get confusing if you don’t know which context the other person is using it as. Sometimes you could assume someone is in a homosexual relationship if they are not! 😃
It seems very commonly used these days by live-in dating couples as a way to make the relationship sound more significant and mature rather than "boyfriend/girlfriend. I’d rather use “significant other” myself or jusy boyfriend/fiance/husband. If you’re married, I’d imagine you would just call them your spouse. 🤷
 
It certainly means something, especially when the media defines terms for us or the government. Like the term “domestic partner.”

annarbor.com/news/domestic-partner-benefits-new-poll-shows-michigan-voters-opposed/

Apparently, the American Civil Liberties Union dislikes the idea that any partner relationship cannot receive some type of benefits. So, say, I’ve been living with my sister for several years. Do we qualify for “domestic partner” benefits even though one or both of us works?

Or how about this?

ebay.com/sch/sis.html?_nkw=GAY+MARRIAGE+LIFE+PARTNER+WEDDING+CAKE+TOP+TOPPER

I think the average person who is not fully informed might think that this is normal or OK.

Every word or term that is spoken, especially by the media, means something. Those who are pro-abortion accuse pro-lifers of being “anti-choice” or “anti-woman.”

Peace,
Ed
 
edwest2 said:
Every word or term that is spoken, especially by the media, means something. Those who are pro-abortion accuse pro-lifers of being “anti-choice” or “anti-woman.”

Peace,
Ed
Click to expand...
I do not call myself Pro-life… I literally did a dance in my living room when Bin Laden was killed. So that term just doesn’t apply to me.

I am however Anti-Abortion.

I don’t accept someone saying they are “Pro-Choice”… They are Pro-Abortion. If they object to the word then why in the Name of all that is Holy do they not object to the procedure?!?

We need to bring the word Abortion back into the abortion debate.

God bless
 
I work in a call centre and I use the term partner on a very regular basis - whether it is for boyfriend/girlfriend, fiances, live in relationships (gay or straight) or marriages. All get partner - it means I don’t have to guess the relationship someone has with someone else. Whether or not they are married is not relevant to my job, so I don’t have a valid reason to ask, and I won’t ask just so I can pass judgment on whether or not they’re in a moral relationship. Not my business.
 
It is certainly not our business to pass judgement on others. It is our business when the government tries to pass laws giving aid to unmarried “domestic partners.”

Peace,
Ed
 
edwest2 said:
It is certainly not our business to pass judgement on others. It is our business when the government tries to pass laws giving aid to unmarried “domestic partners.”

Peace,
Ed
Click to expand...
What about situations where people live together, but aren’t sexually involved?
 
Yeah, I find using “partner” in that sense is a little silly- I think of a partner in a business firm (or your example, in the classroom). It is also a little funny when a cohabiting couple stay engaged for a decade and refer to one another as “my fiancee.” On the legal side, though, in France, one can register a PACS (“domestic partnership”) with anyone (aunt, live-in lover, etc.). So while homosexuals get their civil unions in France, heterosexuals, strangely enough, prefer the PACS to even a civil marriage, despite the fact that breaking a PACS is essentially a divorce!
 
edwest2 said:
That is precisely my point. Do I get government benefits if I become my sister’s domestic partner because I lost my job?

Here is what happened in Michigan:

jurist.org/paperchase/2011/12/michigan-governor-signs-law-banning-benefits-for-public-employees-domestic-partners.php

Peace,
Ed
Click to expand...
If you were domestic partners before hand well then you definitely should. Domestic Partnership is just that, a partnership in domestic life, it would be entirely reasonable for that person to be treated as the other’s spouse for legal purposes.

Well that’s not very nice of him.
 
Its been my observation that the more and more society peddles the ideas of co-habitation, fornication and homosexuality as viable life choices, the more they wish to distance themselves from terms like “husband” and “wife”.

Using those terms, husband and wife, in of itself, seems to deminish the place of the '“life partner”, especially those of the same sex variety.

I think the term “life partner” is demeanign to the sancitity of marriage, almost reducing it down to some kind of business agreement.

I dislike it as much as I hate people referring to me as a Ms. I’ve never been married, I am a Miss!!!
 
Myqyl said:
I do not call myself Pro-life… I literally did a dance in my living room when Bin Laden was killed. So that term just doesn’t apply to me.

I am however Anti-Abortion.

I don’t accept someone saying they are “Pro-Choice”… They are Pro-Abortion. If they object to the word then why in the Name of all that is Holy do they not object to the procedure?!?

We need to bring the word Abortion back into the abortion debate.

God bless
Click to expand...
Your reaction was unfortunately not uncommon among many people, Catholic or otherwise. The Vatican announced at the time that “a Christian never rejoices in a man’s death.” Words are meaningful, and perhaps we need to bring the word “Life” back into the forefront of Catholicism.
 
vera_dicere said:
Its been my observation that the more and more society peddles the ideas of co-habitation, fornication and homosexuality as viable life choices, the more they wish to distance themselves from terms like “husband” and “wife”.

Using those terms, husband and wife, in of itself, seems to deminish the place of the '“life partner”, especially those of the same sex variety.

I think the term “life partner” is demeanign to the sancitity of marriage, almost reducing it down to some kind of business agreement.

I dislike it as much as I hate people referring to me as a Ms. I’ve never been married, I am a Miss!!!
Click to expand...
Here is the origin of the word:

ebay.com/itm/WONDER-WOMAN-Ms-Magazine-1-vintage-1972-/180826392682?pt=LH_DefaultDomain_0&hash=item2a1a17c86a

Radical feminists who are for abortion, for homosexuality and for any other form of sexual relationship that is not about male-female sacramental marriage, are constantly trying to convince all of us that love doesn’t matter, sex matters, followed by power and money.

God knows my faults and I’m not perfect, but we must all be working toward holiness, not promoting unGodly behavior.

Peace,
Ed
 
Dakota_Roberts said:
If you were domestic partners before hand well then you definitely should. Domestic Partnership is just that, a partnership in domestic life, it would be entirely reasonable for that person to be treated as the other’s spouse for legal purposes.

Well that’s not very nice of him.
Click to expand...
There is no rational reason to treat a roommate as a spouse or the person renting a room in a house as a spouse. It is called “shacking up” and at one time, it was legal to have a woman declared a “common law wife” if she lived with a man for a certain time period.

Domestic Partnership appears to be another excuse to give gay couples legal recognition as spouses in a state that does recognize same-sex marriage.

Peace,
Ed
 
Checking back in with further thoughts . . .

vera dicere, your post is pretty much an echo of how I look at these matters . . . 😉

Myqyl, I have no quibble with you calling your wife “partner” in the way you describe - the worst charge I could level against it would be redundancy, LOL! 😃 A spouse is indeed a life partner in the best sense of such a term.

I have referred to a gay’s or lesbian’s significant other as “boyfriend” or “girlfriend” - even women call their friends “girlfriends.” It seems to be a term that is less politically loaded, more casual, descriptive rather than asking for approval or disapproval of the relationship itself.

When my mom was sick and on Medicaid, I wondered if I should see if I could marry her to make settling the estate easier when she did pass, since then I’d be the surviving spouse and the state couldn’t take the house away until I died. 😛 It’ll be interesting with all these redefinitions of marriage if someone tries this strategy - and even more interesting if it works!

But enough of my nuttier ideas . . .

The term I’ve always understood as appropriate for those sharing living quarters for monetary reasons, and under platonic terms, is “roommate” or perhaps “housemate.” It may recall college dorm life, but it’s perfectly serviceable.
 
3DOCTORS said:
And I refuse to use it. I will concede to “significant other” or “companion” in some cases, but reserve the right to interpret that my own way, namely, that these two people are very, very fond of each other - and that in the case of “companion” it could mean a good friend who is like a caregiver or something. In other words, these words are vague or euphemistic enough that I don’t feel like I’m “legitimizing” either homosexual relationships or straight cohabitations by letting those in them dictate the terminology with which I shall refer to them.

The reason I don’t like “partner” or “domestic partner” is that it refers to something that doesn’t really exist legitimately in the moral realm and under natural law, but that those who practice a certain lifestyle would have us believe exists.

So I will only use “partner” in contexts such as “my lab partner in biology” or when trying to talk like a cowgirl.

I submit that more faithful Catholics could give witness to a moral truth by not feeling obliged to use the “life partner” term to describe immoral relationships.
Click to expand...
I wrote a blog post once about the insidious nature of the word “partner.” It’s very characteristic of the modern left to demand that words relating to status and obligation, like “husband” and “wife,” be swapped out with words in which those concepts are missing. “Partner” perfectly encapsulates the modern view of relationships as temporary and instrumental.
 
3DOCTORS said:
And I refuse to use it. I will concede to “significant other” or “companion” in some cases, but reserve the right to interpret that my own way, namely, that these two people are very, very fond of each other - and that in the case of “companion” it could mean a good friend who is like a caregiver or something. In other words, these words are vague or euphemistic enough that I don’t feel like I’m “legitimizing” either homosexual relationships or straight cohabitations by letting those in them dictate the terminology with which I shall refer to them.

The reason I don’t like “partner” or “domestic partner” is that it refers to something that doesn’t really exist legitimately in the moral realm and under natural law, but that those who practice a certain lifestyle would have us believe exists.

So I will only use “partner” in contexts such as “my lab partner in biology” or when trying to talk like a cowgirl.

I submit that more faithful Catholics could give witness to a moral truth by not feeling obliged to use the “life partner” term to describe immoral relationships.
Click to expand...
How would you describe legally married people? They clearly intend to be life partners. They are committed legally, and recognized by the State. Are they not “life partners”, regardless of the Church’s or your view on the morality of their relationship? Can you see the difference? Loving and caring for someone, is not gender specific. Can you see that?

If you can understand this, then why exercise bigotry with your language?

Forget about sex, and try to understand love. Love is not gender specific. This is not a debatable issue.

Why are Catholics so obsessed with sex? This is the bigger question for this site. Sex, sex, sex, sex, sex, sex, sex… that is the Catholic topic, it seems. MASTURBATION… oh go to hell. Gay sex… OH GO TO HELL. etc…

It is time to get some maturity on the topic, and free yourselves from talking dribble. Move on to more important topics than sex. It is not a big deal, in the real world.
 
Leontes said:
How would you describe legally married people?
Click to expand...
As married.
They clearly intend to be life partners.
Click to expand...
We would hope so.
They are committed legally, and recognized by the State.
Click to expand...
So are business partners.
Are they not “life partners”, regardless of the Church’s or your view on the morality of their relationship?
Click to expand...
Only if they are husband and wife for marriages and only so long as the contracts last if they are business partners.
Can you see the difference?
Click to expand...
Between what?
Loving and caring for someone, is not gender specific
Click to expand...
Oh, what a revelation. That must be why mothers love their sons and fathers love their daughters.
Can you see that?
Click to expand...
Oh, we most certainly do.
If you can understand this, then why exercise bigotry with your language?
Click to expand...
The use of more explicit adjectives to describe people in a relationship is not “bigotry”. It is proper use of the English language. Obviously, someone who is unimaginative, or cognitively lazy, in their use of English will tend towards dumbing down the language by using broadly based descriptive phrases such as “life partner”. That’s what the communists in Soviet Russia did to try to make everyone equal. As we all know, some things can never be equal.
Forget about sex, and try to understand love. Love is not gender specific. This is not a debatable issue.
Click to expand...
Whoever said love was gender specific? That stement’s silliness is in its stating of the obvious.
Why are Catholics so obsessed with sex? This is the bigger question for this site. Sex, sex, sex, sex, sex, sex, sex… that is the Catholic topic, it seems. MASTURBATION… oh go to hell. Gay sex… OH GO TO HELL. etc…
Click to expand...
Why is secular society so obsessed with sex? It is thrown up into everybidy’s faces on TV, in the movies, in magazines, and is fostered amongst the aspirations of teenagers by a rampant advertising culture. That’s why teen pregnancies are an issue. Of course, we well know that the rampant sexuality of secular society is because of the trashing of all moral guidlines.
It is time to get some maturity on the topic, and free yourselves from talking dribble. Move on to more important topics than sex. It is not a big deal, in the real world.
Click to expand...
The lack of maturity is not ours and neither is the ‘dribble’.
If sex is not such a big deal in the “real world”, why is abortion such a growing problem? Why is the transmission of STDs such a growing problem? Why is the growing number of single mothers such a problem?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top