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

09/16/2008

'Party A & B' poopers

by Jeremy Hooper

Last week we briefly told you about Doug Bird, a California pastor who is raising a stink because the state's civil marriage licenses now use the gender-neutral terms "PARTY A" and "PARTY B." Well today The Sacramento Bee did an entire story on Rachel Bird, Doug Bird's daughter, who claims she is so upset with the language change that she has chosen to forfeit the civil component of her marriage altogether until she gets her way. Here's an excerpt:

"We are traditionalists – we just want to be called bride and groom," said Bird, 25, who works part time for her father's church. "Those words have been used for generations and now they just changed them."

In May, after the California State Supreme Court ruled same-sex marriage legal, the courts mandated state officials to provide gender-neutral licenses and other marriage forms. "Bride" and "groom" became "Party A" and "Party B."

Bird and [
Gideon] Codding have refused to complete the new forms, a stand that has already cost them. Because their marriage is not registered with the state, Bird cannot sign up for Codding's medical benefits or legally take his name. They are now exploring their options, she said.
...
"We just feel that our rights have been violated," she said.

So essentially, because of a couple of terms on a document that virtually nobody will ever even see, this couple is claiming a "rights violation." This despite that the change they are protesting was done SOLELY TO ACCOMMODATE EVERYONE'S CIVIL RIGHTS. 200809161840They are having none of the rights-accomodating "political correctness." And in taking this "stand," Bird and Coddling are choosing to remain unmarried in the binding eyes of the law -- the very thing with which the CA marriage equality fight is 100% concerned.

Now, judging by her father's presence in the anti-gay marriage fight, the chances are pretty great that this is nothing more than a PR stunt meant to demonstrate all of the ways heterosexuals will supposedly "suffer" under the weight of our cruel equality. But if the best Ms. Bird can do is throw a hissy about how a government document refers to her hubby, then we're thinking she might have just disproved the "there's no such thing as bad publicity" cliché.

Couple fight gender-neutral language in wedding license [Sac Bee]

**Not to mention that certain people could have a problem with any of the chosen words. What gives these two the right to say that "bride" and "room" are how ALL heterosexual couples would like to be identified?!?

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


Your thoughts

I fully agree! This nonsense just proves how trivial their arguments are. The best that they can do is feign some artificially construed "irreparable harm". And, the fact that they seem to believe that this is beneficial to their cause just boggles the mind.

"Sticks and stones may break my bones, but I WILL NEVER recover from being called PARTY B!!" It's almost funny!

Posted by: Dick Mills | Sep 16, 2008 8:53:56 PM

this is hilarious. So freakishly hilarious.

The sad sad sad (yet also hilarious) part of this is what will probably NEVER dawn on Rachel and Gideon. They will probably not wake up tomorrow and go....

"My God, we're married, yet, according to the state, it's not legal....the way gay couples have been treated up until the supreme court decision. I'm your wife, but I can't be on your insurance because of a legal form."

I doubt it will occur to them that the "hardship" they feel is both self-inflicted and just a taste of WHY gay couples deserve equality.

Posted by: Jason D | Sep 16, 2008 10:57:04 PM

comments powered by Disqus

G-A-Y Comments Policy


 
Related Posts with Thumbnails