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 »

01/12/2012

Noun-as-adjective; NOM-as-partisan

by Jeremy Hooper

Q. What does a Democratic state lawmaker get for standing with the "traditional marriage" conservatives?

A. He gets Republican groups like NOM doing that truly silly conservative game where they refuse to use the proper adjective form (Democratic), instead resorting to the noun form:

Screen Shot 2012-01-12 At 12.08.59 Pm-1

But whatever. NOM also uses words like "protect" and "attack" in ways that have been stripped of all context. Why should we ever expect adherence to the English language to trump their partisan politicking?

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