filthy disease ridden queers whine again...
Posted on 04/15/2008 4:00:16 PM PDT by Santa Fe_Conservative
PROVIDENCE, R.I. - Gay couples had to struggle mightily to win the right to marry or form civil unions. Now, some are finding that breaking up is hard to do, too.
In Rhode Island, for example, the state's top court ruled in December that gays married in neighboring Massachusetts can't get divorced here because lawmakers have never defined marriage as anything but a union between a man and woman. In Missouri, a judge is deciding whether a lesbian married in Massachusetts can get an annulment.
"We all know people who have gone through divorces. At the end of that long and unhappy period, they have been able to breathe a sigh of relief," said Cassandra Ormiston of Rhode Island, who is splitting from her wife, Margaret Chambers. But "I do not see that on my horizon, that sigh of relief that it's over."
Over the past four years, Massachusetts has been the only state where gay marriage is legal, while nine other states allow gay couples to enter into civil unions or domestic partnerships that offer many of the rights and privileges of marriage. The vast majority of these unions require court action to dissolve.
Gay couples who still live in the state where they got hitched can split up with little difficulty; the laws in those states include divorce or dissolution procedures for same-sex couples. But gay couples who have moved to another state are running into trouble.
(Excerpt) Read more at news.yahoo.com ...
It's not hard to figure out who plays the "husband" and "wife" in a homosexual couple, and appoint the shaftor and shaftee accordingly.
filthy disease ridden queers whine again...
“Be careful what you wish for, huh?”
LOL “Sorry folks, you can’t get there from here.”
They couldn’t have been married all that long.
Crying for a divorce already and they can’t get one?
The whole deal is just plain goofy!
One word: Assets. In Texas, we have what we call the $49 dollar divorce. It's not really $49, but rather a slang term for self-filing divorces with disputes over divisions of joint property. Usually there is no joint property. What you're describing above is a $49 divorce without the $49 worth of paperwork.
The problem arises when you have joint property that needs to be divided and both parties want:
The time share in Vail.
Raul the Pomeranian.
The Gucci bag in which Raul is carried.
Cher's greatest hits on vinyl.
Elton the anthology on CD.
Ellen a retrospective on DVD.
Melissa Etheridge live at the Hollywood Bowl on Blue-ray.
Mars pattern china (Homosexuals only).
Venus pattern china (Lesbians only).
Andy Warhol memorial phallic sconces from the metro collection.
The good vibrations cornucopia of semi-marital aids.
And most important of all...the video collection
Exactly. And if they don't get their way, they can sue.
Absolutely transparent manipulation.
In a related story, the mayor of Hetero lamented that his town never gets to be destroyed by fire and brimstone like Sodom and Gomorrah did.
In other words, the activists are trying to create defacto recognition of gay marriage in states where it’s not recognized by filing for ‘divorce’ there. Slippery move, but, hopefully, they won’t find a lot of courts that’ll fall for it.
A whole new business opens up for divorce lawyers
Can you imagine the billable hours two old queens would generate just fussing over who gets the Spode?
Brilliant post, acidly funny and spot on. Good work.
Thank you very much.
Yes, and didn’t a Rhode Island court already say it couldn’t happen?
ROTFL
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.