RECENT  POSTS:  » Audio: Bored on an apparently too factual weekday, Richard Land pushes 'gays are sexually abused' lie » It seems when you equate gay folk with those who sleep with animals, it sticks; funny how that works » Video: A new low for Robert Oscar Lopez; anti-gay 'bisexual' peddles offensive claims on Bryan Fischer's show » Southern Baptist's ERLC dedicating national conference to gay people, discrimination; better luck next year, homeless » Photo: NOM thinks its discriminatory cause is young and hip; adorable » An inside look at POTUS's evolution circa 2011–2012 » More animus from Texas' key 'protect marriage' guy » GLAAD: Why would we silence unwittingly helpful voices like yours, Peter LaBarbera? » Photo: NOM fully (and finally) owning its wholly faith-driven root » Our winning movement wins another one: Judge says Ohio must recognize out-of-state marriages  

« 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