Hetero Couple Denied Civil Union. Again.

sad bride
Buzz, Love

In a protest FOR gay marriage, a pair of Brits are denied the back of the bus.

Well ain't that some sh*t? The gays have all the good stuff: dual incomes, fashion sense, the ability to convincingly say "taxi." And now? Civil unions. According to the Guardian, a couple comprised of one Tom Freeman and one Katherine Doyle have had their world turned upside down by being denied their own civil union.

A little backstory: In London, a homosexual couple can commit to each other in the eyes of the law and of the crown by way of civil union, whereas a heterosexual pair would must have a wedding. But Doyle and Freeman  (a great name for a Post-War comedy duo) would prefer a civil union to a plain Jane marriage. Newsweek Rallies For Gay Marriage

Doyle and Freeman (a good name for a folk-pop duo) applied to unite civilly last year, but were denied the petition. They tried again this week, and were again denied. Evidently, the Civil Partnership Act of 2004 only applies to same-gender couples and not "breeders," to say nothing of transgendered individuals and Jamie Lee Curtises.

While their attempt to make this union happen is intended to be more civil disobedience than civil, I think it makes sense. All loving couples should have access to the same institutions, regardless of sexuality. If you want to get married by a dude who claims to better understand the will of a bearded guy living on a cloud, go to a church. But if you want to give a person all of your stuff when you die or half of your stuff when they get sick of you, just make it a civil union. The matrimonial industrial complex has run roughshod over us for too long. Sure, kids stand a better chance of "making it" if they grow up in a home with two responsible parents who visibly love one another, have rudimentary education and were not teens when the child was born, but who's to say that kids of a civil union couldn't benefit from all of that? Doyle and Freeman (an okay name for a law firm) seem to think they could.

Let's just make weddings a religious thing and call it an afternoon. The government(s) can still apply the "marriage penalty" to our combined tax returns and we'll all just mind our own business and do our best not to f*ck up any kids who may result from these legally-binding unions. Deal? How Did Marriage Become Religious?