Why You're Not Married
February 25, 2011 8:56 AM   Subscribe

Gay Marriage Clears Maryland Senate*. More and more states are recognizing civil unions for same sex couples and things are looking up, but for us regular folk sometimes it's not the law that keeps us from getting married.
posted by d1rge (16 comments total)

This post was deleted for the following reason: Framing has kind of tanked this from the get go, maybe a different go at this on another day, maybe hold off until it actually clears the house so this isn't a "gay marriage legalized, maybe, who knows" situation if anything is still in doubt? -- cortex



 
*Still has to pass in the House, governor pledged to sign it into law if it does.
posted by d1rge at 8:59 AM on February 25, 2011


Previously (in part.)
posted by ryanshepard at 9:01 AM on February 25, 2011


I flagged this because implying that "regular folk" and "people who want to marry someone of the opposite gender" are equivalent is a shitty thing to do.

BUT NOT AS SHITTY AS LINKING TO THAT HORRIBLE ARTICLE FROM HUFFPO
posted by Sidhedevil at 9:02 AM on February 25, 2011 [7 favorites]


So gays aren't regular folk, is what you're saying. Nice.
posted by randomname25 at 9:03 AM on February 25, 2011 [1 favorite]


Can an opposite sex couple obtain a civil union?
posted by Karmakaze at 9:05 AM on February 25, 2011


Well, not to be glass half-empty and all that, but more states are also double-banning unmarried-couple civil unions, let alone marriages, meaning any union that is "substantially similar" to marriage. (Even though the fuckers already have a "no gay marriage" law on the books.)

I don't think d1rge meant anything with the "regular folk" wording, but whatever.
posted by blucevalo at 9:05 AM on February 25, 2011


I think this is actually a double, per ryanshepard's link, unless the first link is what makes this new.
posted by filthy light thief at 9:06 AM on February 25, 2011


Yea, really didn't mean anything derogatory by "regular folk." Sorry!
posted by d1rge at 9:07 AM on February 25, 2011


Can we all just pretend that the last link in this post doesn't exist? Even aside from being a double, it's complete derail-bait and not related to the rest of the post.
posted by burnmp3s at 9:07 AM on February 25, 2011 [1 favorite]


Meanwhile, here in Indiana...
posted by Thorzdad at 9:09 AM on February 25, 2011


d1rge, I don't think you meant to be homophobic or biphobic. But you used language that was. We're allowed to say OW when you step on our toes, even if we know you didn't mean to.
posted by Sidhedevil at 9:09 AM on February 25, 2011 [1 favorite]


it's complete derail-bait and not related to the rest of the post

The title of the shitty article is used as the title of the post, so I think d1rge meant to relate them. Maybe this needs to go away and another post that is just about the Maryland decision and what's going on in terms of marriage equality, and that doesn't contain the unfortunate error of "regular people", could take its place?
posted by Sidhedevil at 9:11 AM on February 25, 2011


I'm a straight married folk and I'm anything but regular.
posted by shakespeherian at 9:11 AM on February 25, 2011


item, I give you permission to say "ouch" if you want to. "Yow!" is also acceptable.
posted by Sidhedevil at 9:12 AM on February 25, 2011


I'm a straight married folk and I'm anything but regular.

Prunes!

Also, nice to see you, shakespeherian.
posted by Sidhedevil at 9:12 AM on February 25, 2011


That huffington post link is insane brilliance. Some parts are WHAT. THE. HELL and others are oh so true.

And by regular folk I thought you meant bowel movements. My bad.
posted by Brandon Blatcher at 9:13 AM on February 25, 2011 [1 favorite]


« Older Yeah, I was into the Mad Annuals before they were...   |   The Internet Wishlist Newer »


This thread has been archived and is closed to new comments