RECENT  POSTS:  » Where art thou, Jeremy? » Video: Ad for blemish remover/ tourist spot for our new, bettered America » Whether justified or Kim Davis-ed, individualistic rage rarely outplays broader truths » Kim Davis: The almost too perfect coda to the marriage discrimination fight » Anti-gay clerks are going to have to do their jobs. Because of course they are. » Jeb really wants to remind voters of his anti-'same status' plan for gay couples » Maine: NOM finally forced to hand over its tiny, out-of-state, incestuous donor roll » This delusional primary: Huckabee claims 'same-sex marriage is not the law of the land' » The 'Yeah. Duh. Of course' phase of this fight » Trailer: 'Stonewall'  

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


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