Het Couple Faces Daunting Task
Yes, it's true. Now, heterosexual couples in California will have to fill out gender-neutral applications for marriage licenses. The Horror.
It's either Party A or Party B. No Bride or Groom any more. Which has this couple's panties all in a wad. Oh my gosh, it must be such a shock to their delicate systems to not have their gender and sexuality reinforced on a stupid piece of paper that most folks just file away.
Last month, Rachel Bird exchanged vows with Gideon Codding in a church wedding in front of family and friends. As far as Bird is concerned, she is a bride.To the state of California, however, she is either "Party A" or "Party B."
Those are the terms that have replaced "bride" and "groom" on the state's new gender-neutral marriage licenses. And to Bird and Codding, that is unacceptable.
"We are traditionalists – we just want to be called bride and groom," said Bird, 25, who works part time for her father's church. "Those words have been used for generations and now they just changed them."
The words on marriage licenses were changed because California supports equality among all its citizens and allows same sex marriages. Something that's been lost upon these two blindingly privileged morons.
Rachel Bird described her position as "personal – not religious.""We just feel that our rights have been violated," she said.
Yes, their rights were violated. Wow. So those of us who have had to spend our entire lives watching straight people like them have weddings, get benefits and pretty much take every fucking thing with regard to their relationships for granted are now violating these two snowflakes' rights because we actually now have equal rights in their state? Now there's some pretzel logic for you.
Bird and Codding have refused to complete the new forms, a stand that has already cost them. Because their marriage is not registered with the state, Bird cannot sign up for Codding's medical benefits or legally take his name. They are now exploring their options, she said.
Here's an option: Domestic Partner Benefits. Although, that's probably not good enough for her; even though it's most likely a viable option. Of course, they'd have to pay income tax on any DP benefits, so that's probably violating their rights as not-gay-heterosexuals as well. Goodness forbid they have to jump through any of the hoops most gays and lesbians have to jump through every damn day, even though they're doing this to themselves.
That's the really ironic thing about this; they have the choice to sign or not to sign the damn thing. The majority of gays and lesbians in the U.S. don't even have any choice.
Luckily for this couple, they live too far away for me to be able to grab them by the throats and smack the shit out of them with a big 'ol clue stick.
RSS Feed
Comments
Classic line "We just feel like our rights have been violated."
GAH! I think my head just exploded.
Posted by: dj | September 23, 2008 8:13 AM
Actually, DP benefits are only an option for them if they are over 62. HA HA !
Sorry, I couldn't contain the snark. But in the interest of being helpful, here's another option .. MOVE ! Or better yet .. go to VEGAS and ELOPE !
Posted by: Shari | September 25, 2008 6:25 PM
From what you have written, you have no clue what equal rights are. Equal rights are respecting everyone for who they are, what they believe, and allowing them their traditions, no matter what race, religion, sex, etc, etc.
Why are you protecting the rights for one group, at the expense of another? That isn't equality. Why should one group give up or change their traditions just because another group wants them? That isn't equalty either. To have equality, you must have respect for all. In the case of the marriage issue, there is no respect for the heterosexuals.
In this case, this couple who wanted to go through with their tradition that is thousands of years old, are now being told they have to change their tradition and what it stands for. That is not equality, that's dictatorship.
You were right about one thing. Domestic partnership should be equal for all, and I would defend that. But I refuse to allow my tradition of marriage to be forced into something that it isn't.
The gay community can start their own tradition and call it what ever they want, just as long as it isn't marriage, that one is taken.
You will find MANY people who oppose same sex marriage are not against it because they are against gay people. They are against it because they are tired of having to change things at the demand of a few. NO MORE! We are tird of it and we will stand and protect our right to have our tradition unchanged. What many of us will support is the domestic partnership, union, what ever they want to call their new tradition. THAT is being fair and bringing in equality for all.
Posted by: Michael | October 7, 2008 6:25 AM
"Why are you protecting the rights for one group, at the expense of another?"
Wow. Talk about lack of self awareness.
Nothing will be taken away from you. See -- the funny thing is no one is stopping you or this couple from following your "traditions". You are quite free to follow them.
The only change here is that the designation on the marriage license doesn't distinguish between genders. That's it. Nothing else.
Now go read some more, really think about it and try to remove your blinders of privilege.
Posted by: CLD | October 7, 2008 7:52 AM
"allowing them their traditions"
you do realize that all they are complaining about is the words on a piece of paper that hasn't even been there for half the time of actual marriage and if paper dictates tradition you may need to re-evaluate your priorities
Posted by: richard | October 26, 2008 2:48 AM
"From what you have written, you have no clue what equal rights are. Equal rights are respecting everyone for who they are, what they believe, and allowing them their traditions, no matter what race, religion, sex, etc, etc."
Clearly it is YOU that has no clue what it means to have equal rights. If I were to create a dictatorship and take away everyone's right to marry, that would be EQUAL rights. In the California marriage license (one which everyone is now allowed to use) everyone gets designated as Party A or Party B. You are not asking for equal rights by trying to keep it as bride/groom or husband/wife. It is in fact you who is asking for special treatment under the law. Seeing as you are so in favor of EQUAL rights, I guess leaving it as Party A/Party B is the most equal thing to do.
Posted by: Martin | October 27, 2008 4:42 PM
I consider myself an artist and, more specifically, a living work of art. However, I am not so idiotic as to feel my rights have been violated, when a legal document describing me does not expressly refer to me as such. What a pair of typical, all American maroons.
Posted by: billy | November 4, 2008 7:28 PM
Micheal says he wants us to start our own tradition and not take his. This sounds vaguely familiar to separate but equal, and we all saw how well that turned out.
Posted by: patrick | January 30, 2009 7:57 PM