Do You, Party A, Take Party B…
Thus is radical change forced upon a society via underhanded activism and deliberately skewed thinking. With an assumption as to what the society considers marriage to be, a court finds as follows:
The appellate judges determined that there is no legal impediment in New York to the recognition of a same-sex marriage. The state Legislature “may decide to prohibit the recognition of same-sex marriages solemnized abroad,” the ruling said. “Until it does so, however, such marriages are entitled to recognition in New York.”
A court and bureaucracy in another state does its own feint-step, with the following result:
The guidelines from Janet McKee, chief of California’s office of vital records, contained copies of new marriage forms that include lines for “Party A” and “Party B” instead of bride and groom. The gender-neutral nomenclature was developed in consultation with county clerks, according to the letter.
And the governor in the first state takes the opportunity to write the essential definition of marriage right out of public policy:
Paterson spokeswoman Erin Duggan said the May 14 memo is intended to guide the actions of state agencies. It states that agencies must change policies and regulations to make sure “spouse,” “husband” and “wife” are clearly understood to include gay couples.
In just such a way might we as easily contrive to find that a driver’s license entitles one to fly a plane.