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

Skip to comments.

Conn. Doesn't Recognize Civil Union
AP ^ | 7/25/02 | KATHRYN MASTERSON

Posted on 07/25/2002 6:52:34 AM PDT by Tumbleweed_Connection

Edited on 07/25/2002 8:05:54 AM PDT by Sidebar Moderator. [history]

HARTFORD, Conn. -- A gay couple's attempt to have their civil union dissolved was rejected by a Connecticut appeals court Wednesday in what is believed to be the first such test of the law outside Vermont.

Glen Rosengarten and Peter Downes were married in Vermont in 2000, six months after that state enacted the first law in the nation allowing homosexual couples to enter into something akin to marriage.

The Connecticut appeals court ruled that it cannot dissolve their union because Connecticut law does not recognize such relationships.

(Excerpt) Read more at newsday.com ...


TOPICS: Culture/Society; Government; News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: gay; gaydivorce; homosexual; homosexualagenda

1 posted on 07/25/2002 6:52:34 AM PDT by Tumbleweed_Connection
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Tumbleweed_Connection
BWAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAAAAA...
2 posted on 07/25/2002 6:58:20 AM PDT by Chad Fairbanks
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Tumbleweed_Connection; *Homosexual Agenda
Bump
3 posted on 07/25/2002 7:06:14 AM PDT by EdReform
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Tumbleweed_Connection
in what is believed to be the first such test of the law outside Vermont. .....

Was there not a recent ruling Georgia that said the Vermont law was not applicable in Georgia that preceeded the referenced ruling?

4 posted on 07/25/2002 7:09:15 AM PDT by bert
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: bert
Yes, but they were not asking for a dissolution, they were trying to force Georgia to recognize their union as equivalent to marriage.
5 posted on 07/25/2002 7:14:26 AM PDT by Blood of Tyrants
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Tumbleweed_Connection
So. let me get this straight (so to speak).

These "life partners" needed to have their "civil union" "recognized" by the state because they needed to be able to receive all of the benefits and status conveyed by the state's recognition of the union of marriage.

Now, 180 days later they are seeking to have their status recognized so the "benefit" of a divorce can be conveyed upon them.

This couldn't possibly be some legal grandstanding on their part to further an agenda, could it? I mean, it was really lifelong love and commitment for one another that was expressed and recognized by the state at their ceremony in Vermont, wasn't it?

6 posted on 07/25/2002 7:20:11 AM PDT by steve in DC
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Tumbleweed_Connection
Though anyone can get a civil union license in Vermont, state law requires at least one party be a Vermont resident before the family courts will rule on a dissolution. Rosengarten lives in Connecticut and Downes lives in New York.

It appears one has to be a resident, can the other be non-human? An animal? Dead?

7 posted on 07/25/2002 7:23:52 AM PDT by The Iceman Cometh
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: steve in DC
Gay couples are no different from straight couples who form a union in haste, repent at leisure....no, maybe these days they separate in haste. :-)
8 posted on 07/25/2002 7:30:17 AM PDT by ellery
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

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