Hi Jenny, Of course people are concerned about words. Words are how we communicate, for the most part. Most words have definitions that are accepted widely enough to be included in current dictionaries.
In the strictest of definitions of biological "genealogy" the primary purpose of entering the names of two individuals of opposite gender in our databases is to identify one as the biological father, and the other as the biological mother of a child. Not to identify any residential, social, civil or religious associations. However, tagging all sexual relationships that resulted in offspring as "marriages" is ridiculous. Those other relationships however are important to defining the "family" environments that existed, and they are important to us as family historians in both recording, and researching our family histories. For example, in my case I was raised by loving, adoptive parents, and for the first decade of my life the only "family" I knew were members of that extended adoptive family. They are, and will remain, family to me. Conversely once I discovered my biological relations I expanded my definition of "family" to include each and every one of them, with whom I am also blessed with having a loving relationship. All of those "family" members, biological and adoptive, are in my database, and I have identified the relationship between myself and my biological and adoptive parents so that I can easily switch between the lines within Legacy Family Tree. The primary definition of "relationship" is simply "the quality or state of being related; connection." If two people create a child then by definition they had a relationship in that creation, no matter how fleeting, or involuntary that relationship might have been. No matter what the nature, or duration of the relationship, if it resulted in offspring then one of the two people involved was the father, and the other was the mother. Conversely as genealogists we have no interest in documenting the dating history of our family members. If a relationship that did not result in offspring was acknowledged by civil or religious documentation, or was recognized by family and/or society as a "marriage" that relationship belongs in our databases if we are recording family history. I'm sure there are additional relationships that I've overlooked, and short of same-sex relationships the end-user is free to document those in Legacy Family Tree to their hearts content. John Zimmerman Mesa, AZ On 20-Jun-13 6:22 AM, Jenny M Benson wrote: > On 18/06/2013 17:10, John Zimmerman wrote: >> Why not simply rename the "Marriage Indormation Window" to call it the >> "Relationship Information Window"? > Because then people would quibble over the meaning of the word > "Relationship" and say that a "one-night-stand" or AI or rape or > whatever does not constitute a "Relationship". > > It has long been my opinion that people (not specifically Legacy users) > get far too hung up on actual words, rather than the intended meaning of > a word or phrase. > Legacy User Group guidelines: http://www.LegacyFamilyTree.com/Etiquette.asp Archived messages after Nov. 21 2009: http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]/ Archived messages from old mail server - before Nov. 21 2009: http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]/ Online technical support: http://www.LegacyFamilyTree.com/Help.asp Follow Legacy on Facebook (http://www.facebook.com/LegacyFamilyTree) and on our blog (http://news.LegacyFamilyTree.com). To unsubscribe: http://www.LegacyFamilyTree.com/LegacyLists.asp
