RECENT  POSTS:  » Add 'professional advocate for anti-gay scouting' to list of bygone career choices » NOM to lasso the White House with a rosary. Or something. » NOM's new plan? To beat up its org-crushing loss until it becomes a win. » By the time you read this headline, we'll be ten more seconds beyond stagnant anti-gay 'culture wars' » Video: America cannot wait—to purchase American Family Association radio equipment? Huh?! » Huckabee 2016: 'cause church and state aint gonna marry themselves » EEOC does wonky, under-radar thing that could lay groundwork for definitive nondiscrimination protections » Maggie Gallagher, now that you've lost on marriage, might you lose these deceptive ways as well? » Crowdfunding discriminatory business owners: Perfect statement on anti-gay movement's current affairs » The religious anti-gay crowd: They never understood the marriage fight; now they don't understand their loss  

« Go back a post || Return to G-A-Y homepage || Haul tail to next post »

09/29/2005

Does 'nearly married' mean 'fully insured?'

by Jeremy Hooper

  According to an AP report, there is some confusion among Connecticut businesses as to what benefits they'll be required to offer "civil-unioned" same-sex couples, once such "almost-marriages" become legal in the state this Saturday.

According to us, the bosses best not be confused about our right to the joyous bounty of waffle irons and China pieces afforded to our newly wedded hetero co-workers, or they'll have some extremely pissed-off "cases of the Mondays" on their hands, the likes of which they've never seen. Equality begins with top of the line, shiny, silver appliances.

Bosses have to shift for civil unions [AP via ConnPost.com]

space gay-G-A-Y-post gay-email gay-writer-jeremy-hooper


comments powered by Disqus

G-A-Y Comments Policy


 
Related Posts with Thumbnails