Skip to comments.
Same-sex unions in "Bride" magazine
NY Times via SF Gate/SF Chronicle ^
| July 29, 03
| Bill Werde, New York Times
Posted on 07/29/2003 4:52:03 PM PDT by churchillbuff
Same-sex unions hit Bride's magazine Story's a first for top wedding publication
Bill Werde, New York Times Tuesday, July 29, 2003
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
After 70 years of helping brides walk down the aisle, Bride's magazine has crossed a threshold of its own. The September-October issue of Bride's, a Conde Nast publication, is on newsstands now, and it contains a full-page article on same-sex weddings. ... [snip] Gay and lesbian couples are interviewed about why they want their friends and community to recognize their unions publicly. The article also offers advice on how to be a good guest, encouraging readers "not to panic" if they are invited to a gay wedding. ...[snip] "We looked at what was happening in the wedding industry," said Millie Martini Bratten, the magazine's editor in chief and the editorial director of Conde Nast's Bridal Group. [snip]"And we were answering more readers' questions: 'If two women were getting married, what's the appropriate attire?' " ....
(Excerpt) Read more at sfgate.com ...
TOPICS: Culture/Society; Front Page News
KEYWORDS: condenast; homosexualagenda; homosexuality; samesexmarriage
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-29 next last
To: churchillbuff
This is some sick, twisted sh--.
I would encourage Brides-to-be not to give this magazine a dime. There ought to be a boycott on it.
I'm tired of everyone feeling they have to embrace the degenerate, sodomite, filth.
To: churchillbuff
"We looked at what was happening in the wedding industry,..." and knew we could make some money on it
To: churchillbuff
looks like they're trying to expand their circulation by about one percent...
4
posted on
07/29/2003 4:55:29 PM PDT
by
ErnBatavia
(Bumperootus!)
Comment #5 Removed by Moderator
To: churchillbuff
That's it!! The Supreme Court opened pandora's box! There's NO going back! The QUEERS and their lover Satan have won!
God have mercy on America! :(
To: IloveLisa
"He who embraceth same-sex unions, embraceth not me."
"Yea, verily I say unto you, vanity, vanity, all is freaking vanity"--or merely "all is freaking"
"And, lo!, the union guests went up, and they were clothed in their own nakedness; but the eyes of those that beheld were blinded by the alternative light of the worship of diversity and that which glistened off the slime on the cesspool of wickedness shining round about them; and they were acknowledged to be clothed in satins, laces, and fine clothing fully equal to that of the Emperor."
Translation:
1. I wouldn't touch Brides Maggot Zine.
2. This freaks me out.
3. Appropriate clothing for such a Cell Abrasion.
vaudine
7
posted on
07/29/2003 5:44:42 PM PDT
by
vaudine
To: Im Your Huckleberry
I would encourage Brides-to-be not to give this magazine a dime. There ought to be a boycott on it. Good idea, especially because wedding magazines cost around $6 or so (somewhat more than fashion magazines). Most of the magazines' income comes from advertisements, the prices for which depend on circulation volume.
8
posted on
07/29/2003 5:46:54 PM PDT
by
heleny
To: heleny
comes = come
9
posted on
07/29/2003 5:47:59 PM PDT
by
heleny
To: churchillbuff
Doesn't matter....they're just hoping to make money by going along with the charade that there is such a thing as gay marriage. And there isn't.
Marriage is between a man and a woman, and anything other than that is not marriage. They can flap their arms, hold their breath, and bang their feet on the floor, but they cannot change that fact.
To: Lizavetta
Yep, exactly what they are trying to do.
To: Lizavetta
Totally agree. What a bunch of cowards at Brides Magazine as well as the networks. Gayness is being shoved down our throats and none of them have the courage to ignore it and move on. If you listen to news and catch the previews of sitcoms you would think half the population is gay.
Sorry, I don't buy it.
To: 2rightsleftcoast
Since when was Bride magazine considered a format for a church wedding anyhow?
My blacklist keeps growing.
13
posted on
07/29/2003 8:40:21 PM PDT
by
inchworm
To: churchillbuff
Are the women at least attractive?
14
posted on
07/29/2003 8:41:56 PM PDT
by
Chancellor Palpatine
(.....always remember that in any barnyard full of talking animals, sheep lie.....)
To: churchillbuff
Do they really think that lesbians give two hoots how they look, even on their BIG DAY? Give any of their calling a good look-over and it becomes evident just why they are lesbians to begin with!
If a hetero looked as awful as most of the lesbians do, they would be crucified by a fashion magazine. It's going to be interesting to see how they can make up a fat-a**, spike-haired dyke into Barbie-for-a-Day, complete with strapless wedding dress and tiara!
15
posted on
07/29/2003 8:52:25 PM PDT
by
MHT
To: Im Your Huckleberry
I'm sitting here with an upset stomach and reading this just made it worse. I'm sick and tired of the homosexual lifestyle being shoved down my throat! Since when does minority rule in this country? One would think that their so called lifestyle is the way most people are in our country. All forms of media must stop catering to this deviant form of behavior.
To: *Homosexual Agenda; GrandMoM; backhoe; pram; Yehuda; Clint N. Suhks; saradippity; stage left; ...
This is really getting ridiculous, ping.
17
posted on
07/29/2003 8:56:42 PM PDT
by
scripter
(Thousands have left the homosexual lifestyle.)
To: MHT
18
posted on
07/29/2003 9:00:26 PM PDT
by
nwrep
To: nwrep
Yuck---The blonde looks like Roseanne and the brunette--well, who cares what she looks like. The most important action one could take when encountering a picture like this is to turn the page, quickly!
19
posted on
07/29/2003 9:06:34 PM PDT
by
MHT
To: nwrep
I now know who the brunette looks like--a real-life version of the little guy on the animated series "The Critic", Jon Lovitz's (?) alter-ego. Well, it's nice that the groom almost looks like a guy, or at least a cartoon character.
20
posted on
07/29/2003 9:11:10 PM PDT
by
MHT
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-29 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.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson