(Gay Divorce Rate up in Massachusetts) After love, inevitability

http://www.boston.com/news/local/articles/2004/12/10/after_love_inevitability/

BRIAN MCGRORY
After love, inevitability
By Brian McGrory | December 10, 2004

Probably it was inevitable, but still, it seems kind of quick. Not six months into the era of gay marriage in Massachusetts, the first divorce filings by gay and lesbian couples have unceremoniously landed in local probate courts.

Some of those same marriages that began with shouts of joy and heartfelt vows on city hall steps across the state are ending with no fanfare -- and no small amount of handwringing by local officials, at least one of whom believes the divorce filings have exposed a fundamental flaw in marriage law.

Probate courts are forging ahead, able if not necessarily ready. In the first case in Suffolk County, a divorce petition jointly submitted by two gay men, the word "wife" is repeatedly crossed out with "husband" scrawled in its place.

"That's something that the Supreme Judicial Court has the responsibility to change," Richard Iannella, Suffolk register of probate, said somewhat sheepishly.<snip>

What a surprise.

But that little piece of logic won't stop the press from whipping themselves into a frenzy about the "epidemic of gay divorces in Massachusetts!" that is besieging our nation!

Run for the hills! The gays are divorcing!

Geez. Sometimes I wonder why I was born in this stupid country.

that divorce is occurring -

not that it has risen.

And the article cites some real life cases - and the fact the Mass Forms for divorce are still looking for a male and a female!

I thought "Divorce rate rises" would be funny - since that is how I expect Rush to put it very soon!

:toast:

:-)

It's good to find humor rather than just collapsing into tears over the utter stupidity of the people running the country!

Straight marriage is undermining the very cornerstone of the gay family.

we'd give health insurance benefits to all and screw the idea of marriage, prenups, money, and everything else. At that point we might see fewer divorces.

have the same types of issues as anyone else.

1) Bigotry and hatred against them.

2) Fighting over the same wardrobe.

:-)

Sorry - I am a dog person - and while I also like cats, I do not understand why the group of cats had to stay together?

:toast:

:-)

If they were siblings, for instance, it would be a hardship on the cats to be separated.

If the cats aren't related, they might hate each other and be happier separated. It depends, though.

Of course I never considered issue 2. That's funny.

Don't have to be a gay couple to have THAT problem. Multiple adult households + cross dressers = oh my lord.

Half my jeans came from my best friend's former roomate. I am pretty sure the owner of said jeans still has my prom dress, and a few weeks ago I realized I was wearing my husband's best friend's best tie. There is a purple ladies' jacket in our household whose original owner nobody can remember, and I know AlienGirl has my god-daughter's dad's ex-wife's pants. Fortunately for everyone else, nobody in this extended family has the same size feet as me. The shoes are sacred! Borrow Grandma's antique slip if you want, as long as it comes back clean, but touch the shoes and you'll HURT! :-D

:-)

There is no other explanation for pin-stripes showing up in my closet.

Pants! It's all about the PANTS!

Oh, and I also still have your tacky flip-flops--BWAhahahaha!

Tucker

Just channelling Jerry Falwell for a minute there.

:shrug:

Nobody ever seems to have any.

Because there really are no rational arguments against it.

But someone asked me to try, and this is the best I could come up with:

Gay marriage would require some health insurance companies to provide couples with twice as many gynecologist appointments.

That is an extremely lame argument against gay marriage, but so far it's the only one I could think of.

The bottom line is, gay marriage = good.

Republicans marrying = bad.

***** Marriage = 1 Democrat + 1 Democrat *******

The rest end in death! :scared:

Tucker

Now THAT is funny!

we were all wondering how long it would take. And I think some of the judges wanted the first case :-) (By the way, all the judges I worked with were in total agreement with the Goodridge decision)

And everyday we would see divorces for people that were married only a few months just as much as people that were married for 40 years. Divorce doesn't discriminate.