Posted on 11/15/2009 6:08:28 AM PST by markomalley
Connecticut’s year-old marriage equality law has meant hard-earned respect for same-sex couples — society’s official acceptance and the state’s unqualified recognition of their domestic happiness.
“For same-sex couples, it’s a life-long dream” said Ridgefielder Barbara Simkins. “Who’d have thought there’d be such a day, that we’d have the same rights as every other human being in this country? But, unfortunately, it’s only in six states so far. I’m very very proud of Connecticut.”
The state’s open-minded law has also made Ridgefield — with its pretty Main Street, nice restaurants, and a gay-owned bed and breakfast — a bit of a wedding destination.
In the year since Connecticut’s law went into effect Nov. 12, 2008, Ridgefield has granted marriage licenses to 33 same-sex couples, according to Town Clerk Barbara Serfilippi, and 25 of the 33 were from out of state.
(Excerpt) Read more at acorn-online.com ...
(BTW, as an occasion of irony, the publisher is "Hersam Acorn Newspapers")
Where is the barf warning ?
Connecticut the Sodom of the Northeast.
I wonder how they serve the breakfast tea?
Ridgefield has always been a wussy town
Don't forget in CT we never got a vote on this. Unlike Maine, Calif even Oregon the people never got a say on this.
I wonder if it's an eye-opener when they find out that even though they can legally pretend to be married, they STILL face all the same issues that stem from the fact that they've chosen an abnormal lifestyle?
The whole effort to legalize gay "marriage" never was about marriage--it was always a matter of trying to convince themselves they're normal, while refusing to address the issue that makes them abnormal.
Are gays required to “divorce” before they supposedly “re-marry”? Or is polygamy, and even bestiality “protected” there too?
I don’t mind “gay” people get hitched up for life, but, sorry, the word marriage is already taken. Get your own word for whatever it is you think you want.
Let's call it "Mehwehage, that bwessed event, that dweam within a dweam.."
I'd say that settles it.
Homosexuals deserve our respect soley because of the way they abuse their sexual equipment and flaunt natural law.
It matters not if they are worthy, honest, honorable people or if they are unworthy, dishonorable crooks or pederasts. A long as they engage in sexual perversions with members of their own gender they deserve the respect of society at large.
And any retro retard left over from the age of the Flintstones who doesn't see the beauty and wonder of homosexual perversions is just a hate mongering homophobe who probably was around to support the impeachment of Chief Justice Earl Warren back in America's sexual Dark Ages.
It’s a nice little town and very expensive. I cycled through their from NY side.
This is typical feel good pat yourself on the back liberalism.
Keep in mind that, amazingly, this is not where it ends. The homo-agenda is an open-ended one, with increasing legislation for forced "respect" for this unnatural and demonic lifestyle in all arenas of the life of an average person. If we don't agree, we will be forced to act as if we do through "non-discrimination" laws and "diversity training" (re-education.) Many who are used to a free society based on Christian ethics may pooh-pooh these concerns as over-reaction, but it is almost impossible to overemphasize the insidious nature of this movement. They are after nothing less than the destruction of Christianity itself; in their most unguarded moments they exclaim as much openly.
Communities like this in Connecticut will push more and more for increasingly vile "gay pride" parades and street fairs similar to those held in San Francisco, with in-your-face public nudity and group sex acts open to public display. Sidewalks and streets covered with semen, blood and feces are the ultimate destination for a community which will not say an unqualified, firm "NO" to such a vile world view.
This fact cannot be emphasized enough. Consider the fact mentioned in the article that of the only 33 same-sex "marriages" performed in the town IN THE ENTIRE FIRST YEAR it's been in effect, ONLY EIGHT were from Connecticut. Overwhelmingly, homosexuals don't want to get "married" because with it comes the implied expectation of long-term fidelity and faithfulness - concepts that are anathema to the homosexual rights movement. They only want the "right" to get married in order to sully the institution.
You’re right, there will be no end to their demands.
If we see nationwide same-sex marriage institutionalized, perhaps through a U.S. Supreme Court ruling, that would simply move the goal posts and set the stage for the next step.
Gay activists would eventually like to see legalized polygamy and group marriage, with any number and any gender of partners. They first want to establish same-sex monogamy, then, having guaranteed that same-sex couples have these rights, move on to other issues.
I wish they were open and honest about their intentions. They don’t want to stop at same-sex monogamy. That is just a transitional step.
It’s intersting that in Massachusetts, where same-sex marriage has been legal for over five years, only about 20% of same-sex couples in relationships has tied the knot. It’s like same-sex couples are pushing so hard for this right, but once granted, relatively few even want to be married.
By "monogamy," understand what the reprobates mean. By their own admission, homosexuals frequently consent to "open relationships" and "monogamy" is nothing more than a nominal label to indicated a steady live-in arrangement.
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.