Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Lesbian couple seeks R.I. divorce
AP via Yahoo ^

Posted on 10/09/2007 10:13:01 AM PDT by j_hig

PROVIDENCE, R.I. - A lesbian couple married in Massachusetts should have the same right as heterosexual couples to divorce in their home state of Rhode Island, lawyers for the women told the state's highest court Tuesday.

ADVERTISEMENT

Cassandra Ormiston and Margaret Chambers were married in 2004 after same-sex marriage became legal in Massachusetts. Last year, the couple filed for divorce in Rhode Island.

Rhode Island law is silent on the legality of same-sex marriages.

If the women can't divorce in Rhode Island, their lawyers said the only legal avenue available to them would be for at least one to move to Massachusetts and live there long enough to obtain a divorce.

"It is an absolutely unfair burden," Ormiston said outside Rhode Island's Supreme Court. "It is a burden no one else is asked to bear, and it is something I will not do."

Lawyers for the women told the Supreme Court the only question to consider was whether Rhode Island could recognize a valid same-sex marriage from another state for the sole purpose of granting a divorce petition.

They stressed the case has no bearing on whether gay couples could get married in Rhode Island.

"You have a valid marriage in the state of Massachusetts," Louis Pulner, an attorney for Chambers, told the justices. "No one is asking the court to address the question of whether such marriages would be valid in Rhode Island."

In September 2006, a Massachusetts judge decided same-sex couples from Rhode Island could marry in Massachusetts because nothing in Rhode Island law specifically banned gay marriage. But the courts and the legislature in Rhode Island have not taken any action to recognize same-sex marriages performed in Massachusetts.

Attorney General Patrick Lynch earlier this year issued a nonbinding advisory opinion saying the state would recognize same-sex marriages performed in Massachusetts.

The justices did not indicate when they would rule.


TOPICS: Culture/Society; News/Current Events; US: Rhode Island
KEYWORDS: gaymarriage; homosexual; homosexualagenda; lesbian; samesexdivorce; samesexmarriage
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-8081-85 next last
To: trumandogz

That’ll learn ‘em...


21 posted on 10/09/2007 10:22:57 AM PDT by LIConFem (Thompson 2008. Lifetime ACU Rating: 86 -- Hunter 2008 (VP) Lifetime ACU Rating: 92)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: PBRSTREETGANG

Choke!———G-A-S-P———gurgle.........Snort!.......


22 posted on 10/09/2007 10:23:20 AM PDT by Red Badger ( We don't have science, but we have consensus.......)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: j_hig

Just another of life’s little ironies.


23 posted on 10/09/2007 10:23:21 AM PDT by tennteacher (Duncan Hunter '08)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: j_hig

Divorce should be defined as being strictly between a man and a woman! Allowing this would cheapen the meaning of divorce!


24 posted on 10/09/2007 10:23:21 AM PDT by KoRn (Just Say NO ....To Liberal Republicans - FRED THOMPSON FOR PRESIDENT!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: dfwgator

Sheesh...everybody knows you need to change the carpet every few years.


25 posted on 10/09/2007 10:24:03 AM PDT by ErnBatavia (...forward this to your 10 very best friends....)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: j_hig

“You have a valid marriage in the state of Massachusetts,” Louis Pulner, an attorney for Chambers, told the justices. “No one is asking the court to address the question of whether such marriages would be valid in Rhode Island.”

Riiiiiiigt.


26 posted on 10/09/2007 10:24:44 AM PDT by pas
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Red Badger

Roll Tide!


27 posted on 10/09/2007 10:25:43 AM PDT by tennteacher (Duncan Hunter '08)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: j_hig

One tent at a time.


28 posted on 10/09/2007 10:26:31 AM PDT by Old Professer (The critic writes with rapier pen, dips it twice, and writes again.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: trumandogz

Brilliant


29 posted on 10/09/2007 10:27:00 AM PDT by tennteacher (Duncan Hunter '08)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: j_hig

Marriage is instituted by God for one man and one woman only. These two individuals aren’t married. You can get a piece of paper from the government stating you are a three headed goat, that doesn’t make it so.


30 posted on 10/09/2007 10:28:12 AM PDT by Rodm (Seest thou a man diligent in his business? He shall stand before kings)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: tennteacher

Roll Oxy-Clean!..............


31 posted on 10/09/2007 10:29:32 AM PDT by Red Badger ( We don't have science, but we have consensus.......)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: j_hig
In September 2006, a Massachusetts judge decided same-sex couples from Rhode Island could marry in Massachusetts because nothing in Rhode Island law specifically banned gay marriage.

Massachusetts activists judges, coming to your state next.

32 posted on 10/09/2007 10:29:54 AM PDT by Last Dakotan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: j_hig

Ha! Ha!.....make them stay married!


33 posted on 10/09/2007 10:30:19 AM PDT by AngelesCrestHighway
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: shankbear
Who gets the carpet?

Okay....just ewww.

34 posted on 10/09/2007 10:31:34 AM PDT by americanMel
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: shankbear

Who gets custody of the Pontiac Aztek?


35 posted on 10/09/2007 10:32:37 AM PDT by ArrogantBustard (Western Civilisation is aborting, buggering, and contracepting itself out of existence.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: j_hig

If RI doesn’t recognize their marriage in the first place, what are they worried about divorce for?


36 posted on 10/09/2007 10:33:13 AM PDT by agrace
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Badeye

you are so on the money here


37 posted on 10/09/2007 10:34:20 AM PDT by valoreo
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: valoreo

Maybe. The fact the grounds aren’t mentioned is rather curious. If you are going to go to the courthouse and peruse the filings, its odd you wouldn’t bother to mention it.


38 posted on 10/09/2007 10:36:13 AM PDT by Badeye (Free Willie!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 37 | View Replies]

To: KoRn

Oh, I don’t know. Call it a ‘civil union’ to denote the ‘coupling’ but keep Divorce as the term used to void it.

If gays want to experience the ‘wonder and joy’ of divorce, who are we to deny them?

(chuckle)


39 posted on 10/09/2007 10:37:33 AM PDT by Badeye (Free Willie!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: j_hig

Now the Tubes will have to re-write the song “What do you want from life” with the line, “...a Massachusetts wedding, a Rhode Island divorce!” near the end.


40 posted on 10/09/2007 10:38:53 AM PDT by Disambiguator (Political Correctness is criminal insanity writ large.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-8081-85 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson