Speaking about the topic...in my story earlier this week, I wrote that Republicans were working to provide a more "narrow definition" of marriage in Iowa. I didn't expect the word "narrow" to be charged. I heard from a pastor who said the choice of the word shows a bias. I didn't see it that way. In my mind, I chose the word because Republicans are trying to limit which people can get married, which they are. So doesn't that narrow the definition of marriage? What do you think?
By the way, I do appreciate the responses to how something is written. There are times we choose words that mean one thing to us and something else to others.
Posts
3 comments:
Of course it "narrows" the definition of marriage to restrict it to heterosexual couples rather than all Iowa adults. Sounds like the complainer was just trying to work the ref.
Dave,
Republicans aren't trying to "narrow" it. It has always had a "narrow" definition for thousands of years.
Gay rights activists are trying to "broaden" the definition. Remember who messed with the definition first.
It wasn't Republicans.
Vander Hart said it perfectly. We're trying to broaden the traditional definition, not the "narrow" definition.
Post a Comment