marriage

I believe that he defines marriage in this way before starting the article because many people have different ideas of what the institution of marriage means. Therefore, when he puts his definition, and the legal and religious definition, it gives everyone a level idea of what marriage. Though the definition provides good backing to the argument, it does neglect to cover the religious aspect of the institution of marriage. Many people could argue that it is slanted, just in the fact that it is so incredibly un-slanted. Though i personally agree with him, i can see how many people could say that he is not sensitive to the religious institution of marriage, and that the word "marriage" indicates a man and a woman, though the usage of the word "civil union" or something would guarantee the same rights. It really just comes down to the linguistics; whether people want to use the same word or not.