Julie Pokela( on left )and her partner, Elizabeth Denny.
Posted on 05/30/2009 11:06:56 PM PDT by smokingfrog
Julie Pokela used to be cautious about how she described her relationship with her partner, Elizabeth Denny.
Girlfriend? Significant other?
"You don't know how people - especially strangers -will react," says Pokela, of Northampton.
[ CHART SHOWING SAME SEX MARRIAGE TOTALS ]
That changed on May 18, 2004, when Pokela and Denny were married in Northampton. After 20 years together, they acquired the right to introduce each other as "my wife."
It's been five years since Massachusetts became the first state in the country to allow gay couples to marry.
Since then, there have been more than 12,350 same-sex marriages in the Bay State.
Gay marriage has also become legal in Vermont, Maine, Connecticut and Iowa. New York and New Hampshire are on the brink. The California state Supreme Court this week upheld a ban on new same-sex marriages, but allowed existing marriages to stand.
[ PICTURE OF TWO LESBIANS ]
Now, at a time when everyone is worried about the economy, there's a hint that legalizing gay marriage might have been a smart financial move for Massachusetts.
Two new studies from the Williams Institute at the University of California at Los Angeles School of Law suggest that the commonwealth has made some money from the matter.
"The Business Boost from Marriage Equality" concludes that between May 2004 and September 2008:
(Excerpt) Read more at masslive.com ...
Oops...had to look at the website. I think that is interesting. So another words all new marriages are 50 percent divorced but after that you could end up in 11 percent or something like that.
Well, in that case I would say the money worries of the country would be over, depending on how many of them are actually crapping gold dubloons. If you see any of these pigeons and don't want them, please contact me here on FR and I will arrange for you to ship them to me. I have a use for them!
As for queer marriages adding anything to the economy or the general well being of a state, that is so much BS.
Julie Pokela( on left )and her partner, Elizabeth Denny.
my divorce rate is 100%. The key to having the golden tough is to be darned careful what you touch.
Body shops would get more business? hehe, loved your comment
Defining Marriage Down Is No Way To Save It
http://www.weeklystandard.com/Content/Public/Articles/000/000/013/451noxve.asp
Exactly what I was thinking. Governator will be pushing another ballot issue in favor of homosexual marriage ASAP, in an attempt to boost the state’s bottom line. We can’t wait to leave this place!
Studies have also found a proliferation of STDs in Massachusetts in the last 5 years: Syphilis and HIV infection rates are on the increase. Yeah, marriage has really solved that promiscuity problem, hasn’t it?
In a bold stroke of hypocrisy, the homosexual activists are disputing the statement in our report that “the rates of AIDS/HIV have gone up considerably in Massachusetts.” They say that claim is “bogus”. But that’s exactly what they were claiming last year when they were lobbying the Massachusetts Legislature for $500,000 more in AIDS money (which they got). Here’s what the Massachusetts homosexual lobby group MassEquality bragged on their website and in an email to their supporters after their successful lobbying effort last August:
“With the rate of HIV infections rising dramatically in Massachusetts, it’s clear the fight against AIDS is far from over. The situation is even more dire for younger gay men and people of color: rates for both groups are rising at alarming rates, and communities of color continue to be disproportionately affected by HIV/AIDS. To tackle this problem, we helped win increased funding to address disparities in HIV/AIDS prevention and care in communities of color by $500,000 this year.”[Emphasis added]
They certainly cried loudly to our legislators that the HIV rate was “rising dramatically”.
http://www.massresistance.org/docs/gen/09a/hawaii/index.html
Does anyone show them their abject hypocrisy, in their own words?
This just follows the pro-homosexual story fomula.
Give a pointless anecdote.
Demonize opposition (especiall slip in anti-religion comment)
Call it about equality.
Throw in some sacrificial children.
and ignore realisty.
The article is BS, there is no reason to move to Mass.
I guess we can just ignore the fact that overall Massachusetts is in severe economic decline, even relative to other states, particularly “red” ones and that unemployment there is higher than in red states and rising faster. And if gay marriages increase and the outflow of jobs, businesses and wealthy residents increases, that’s good economically how?
This is absurd misdirection and misrepresentation as you might expect from a California advocacy group.
Good points. I’m not surprised someone would say that there’s an economic benefit to same-sex marriage. They make it sound as if that’s the most important effect on society, and that it was positive.
But there are other effects on society of mainstreaming this alternative lifestyle, and those effects aren’t measured in dollars and cents. Those effects are ignored by an economic study.
How about reporting studies which have been done, and shown that children raised in homosexual households exhibit much more behavior that we might call “sexual confusion”? Let’s talk about how these kids are more likely to engage in homosexual behavior than other kids. Let’s talk about how the sexual confusion they experience affects their social and emotional development.
Heck these activists might say there’s an economic benefit to these kids going to therapists and psychiatrists for some of the emotional problems they develop.
You wrote:
“If the well-being of the child is your main point, which it seems to be, then in my opinion, which is all I have to go on, it is a simple matter of Parenting 101. When you care more for your child’s well-being and less for your own; when you’re directly involved in your child’s upbringing; when you apply discipline (which society as a whole says is wrong these days) in a controlled way; then you will have stability and, hopefully, a happy, stable, successful child who grows in to a productive member of society.”
Parenting 101 has been handed down from generation to generation in the context of the extended family combined with the husband and wife. For the sake of brevity, I say this bond, fortified by the cultural status given it, creates a natural context for the nurturing of children. The Parenting 101 is automatic.
This natural context is stripped out when the family unit is defined down by cohabitation. Because not everyone who cohabitates will care more for the children's well being over themselves, there will be disaster for children. This disaster will be handed down to future generations. Soon the state will take control and Brave New Worlds will begin.
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.