They expect a new ring every year! And some people have deep-rooted objections to such relationships. Mimi Swartz has a fascinating story in the current issue of Texas Monthly about The Art Guys Marry a Plant, a performance art piece from Houston's The Art Guys:

...According to Galbreth, the critic had either misunderstood or purposefully misconstrued their statements about gay marriage. “I don’t even care about that,” he’d quoted Galbreth as saying. “It doesn’t even warrant discussion.” What Galbreth had meant was that the issue of gay marriage was already resolved for him—he was for it. But that was certainly not how the story made him sound. Britt had also quoted Galbreth (correctly) as saying that the Art Guys were happy to use interest in gay marriage to promote their piece.

The rest of the article was no better. Britt pointed out that the Art Guys couldn’t really marry a tree “because the Texas Constitutional Amendment banning gay marriage, which voters passed overwhelmingly in 2005, leaves no wiggle room for quirky exceptions.” He also dumped on them for their plans to plant the tree “deep in the woods” instead of allowing it to live with them in perpetuity, like a real spouse. Further, he wrote, the artwork “inadvertently reinforces the ‘slippery slope’ argument that if we let gays wed, next we’ll allow people to marry animals, and so on.”
 


Francis
03/04/2012 19:11

As Romney would surely say, first you have to find a tree of the right height.

Reply

Your comment will be posted after it is approved.


Leave a Reply.