RECENT  POSTS:  » NOM spends six figures on North Carolina's Hagan/Tillis US Senate race » Idaho wedding venue can be discriminatory so long as it sticks to new business model » Sunday in Houston: Activists mad that churches were noted for their politicization head to a church—to politicize » Lisa Kudrow thinks my website title is modest, at best » Do you take this man to be your lawfully wedded mission of destruction? » MassResistance's hilarious fourteen-point plan for reinstating marriage discrimination: Get really, really nasty » Concerned Women For America finally learns to call out anti-gay rhetoric » 'Rivka Edelman' responds to me via one of the most bizarre comments I've ever read » Just going to another vendor isn't always easy, isn't good basis for sound policy » Pat Robertson: People who believe in fair nondiscrimination law are 'terrorists, radicals, and extremists'  

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

03/04/2011

Concerned Women defend us from jilted brides, disco suits

by Jeremy Hooper

What do we think Concerned Women For America's concerned staffers are trying to say with this image?

Screen Shot 2011-03-04 At 9.51.35 Am
[CWFA]

That marriage equality will lead straight grooms to run off with their Best Men?

That gays are going to bound into churches and disrupt ceremonies?

That the relative non-inclusion of chest hair, gold chains, and spread collars into American weddings is only being maintained by DOMA's provided constraints?

We're genuinely curious.

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


Your thoughts

comments powered by Disqus

G-A-Y Comments Policy


 
Related Posts with Thumbnails