BOSTON-The lesbian couple whose lawsuit led to legal same-sex marriage in Massachusetts have announced their separation. "Julie and Hilary Goodridge are amicably living apart," Mary Breslauer, a political consultant, said Thursday night on their behalf. Breslauer declined to comment on whether the couple plans to divorce. The Goodridges were among seven gay couples whose lawsuit helped thrust Massachusetts into the center of a nationwide debate on gay marriage. The state's Supreme Judicial Court issued its 4-3 ruling in November 2003 in their favor, saying that gays and lesbians had a right under the state constitution to wed. The Goodridges were married May 17, 2004, the first day same-sex marriages became legal under the court ruling.
A handful of items as commentary: First, we were told that same sex marriage would only improve the value of marriage in our society. The gay community, or rather the portion favoring same sex marriage (not all gays have supported same sex marriage) also implied that they would do a better job with the marriage and separation/divorce rate than heterosexuals. Note also, that the Goodridges were the ones that wanted to put aside their privacy for the sake of the 2003 decision, and now they want their privacy respected--not that we shouldn't respect their privacy, we certainly should since that is their request; but it's just interesting to note, since we were told that their love made them the poster children for same sex marriage in MA and they were courageous for making this bold sacrifice in the name of the cause. So, once again, we have here another example of why marriage must be regarded as a covenant, not a mere contract and as Trinitarian in structure, not modalistic.
The problem here, it seems to me, is that the couple in question were doing what an increasing number of heterosexual cohabitees are doing. Marrying as a sort of last resort when the relationship begins to undergo severe stress, the belief being that a ceremony and some 'inkstains that have dried up on some lines' will bind together an unravelling relationship.
ReplyDeleteThus we should not make too much of this story, even though it is a slap in the face for 'Gay Marriage' advocates. Appeals to the precedent of centuries (heresay notwithstanding) and to the right order of things as instituted by God must be the ground upon which we stand, not 'events, dear boy, events'. After all, how many divorces are there these days, even within the visible Church?
As Christians, we are not pragmatists. Even if all homosexual couples lived together faithfully, and their lifestyle was one of committment and fidelity, we should still have to stand under the word of God against giving same-sex couples the right to 'marry.'
What tripe...who "told" you, or "implied" all these alleged things you're spewing here? Spare me...
ReplyDeleteGarsh, homosexuals are human just like self-rigteous, judgmental, Calvinist prigs.
Garsh, the born again fundy divorce rate is the SAME as the general population.
Puhleeeze...go clean up your own house first before you start the smarmy attacks on others.
No wonder so many people see Christians as hypocrites.
Anon,
ReplyDeleteFor a long time I've heard that fundy divorce rates are the SAME as the general population. I've yet to see any hard evidence. Do you have some links I can peruse?
Um... "Garsh"??
ReplyDelete"Garsh", because "Gosh" has too many theistic implications.
ReplyDelete"Garsh" is the traditional Appalachian way to say "Gosh." Many say it originated because of the extraordinary amount of teeth the mountain men were missing. Whether the story is true is besides the point, it's now usually used to show that you are proud of your 5th grade education and your double wide.
ReplyDeleteWhat tripe...who "told" you, or "implied" all these alleged things you're spewing here?
ReplyDeleteA. I never mentioned the divorce rate of Christians v. gays one way or the other. I didn't say anything about homosexuals being subhuman. I merely noted that marriage is a Trinitarian, not a modal arrangement. If you'd pay attention, both those versions of theism uphold the humanity of all persons by way of the Imago Dei. I'd add that if you wish to attack a Christian on philosophical or theological grounds about this particular issue, then you need to discuss the Trinity. Christians, if they'd pay attention to the deeper relationships between theological constructs in their worldview, are against gay marriage ethically, because they are Trinitarians doctrinally. To make a case that Christians should support gay marriage, you need to demonstrate that the family does not reflect the Trinity, and to do that, you need to refute the doctrine of the Trinity and make a strong case for modalism in order to ground an ethic that supports gay marriage. Now, I've given you the clues to start putting together an argument, but you'll have to figure out how the argument goes for marriage and family as a Trinitarian arrangement in order to refute the argument. Rather than ranting about the existence of God, why not try address Christians on their own terms? The ethic for or against gay marriage, for Christians, ultimately rises or falls on the doctrine of the Trinity. Here, we are, of course, Trinitarians. So will you or another even bother to make an attempt or will you just rant? I'm on vacation still, but it would make a nice diversion to see a skeptic that frequents this place actually go in another direction besides the same old tired arguments about the existence of God, etc.
B. Actually, if you pick up just about any piece of progay marriage lobby propaganda, you'll find that one of the arguments for gay marriage has to do with the divorce rate among heterosexuals being so high. In fact, the argument goes that homosexuals actually have a lower such rate or a rate equivalent to that in heterosexuals, in that they tend to pair off for longer periods when they pair off in a marriage-like arrangement and have a low divorce rate/stay together for longer periods before splitting up, not a high one. So, I'm only borrowing from their own statements here. Incidentally, Massachusetts has the lowest divorce rate in the US. The irony here, being of course, that their poster children for gay marriage have now separated after only 2 years.
Puhleeeze...go clean up your own house first before you start the smarmy attacks on others.
That's not the issue here. The issue is the moralizing of atheists about equal rights, homosexual rights, etc. without the metaphysical machinery in their worldview to ground their actions. Is it your subjectivism that tells you that gays deserve the right to marry? Is it your subjectivism that tells you its wrong for others to oppose homosexual marriage? Exactly how does Darwinism justify morality? Exactly how does Darwinism legitmize gay marriage? Isn't homosexuality a trait that fails to ensure the survival of the species? If so, then shouldn't it be weeded out? For that matter, exactly how long does it take for such genes to be weeded out of the gene pool anyway? You'd think after all these billions of years that one, assuming homosexuality is genetic, would have long ago disappeared. When you can ground your objections within your own worldview without borrowing capital from mine, you're the one not living up consistently to the standards meets out for another.
. I never mentioned the divorce rate of Christians v. gays one way or the other. I didn't say anything about homosexuals being subhuman. I merely noted that marriage is a Trinitarian, not a modal arrangement.
ReplyDeleteWrong…you’re a liar. You most certainly did bring up the “divorce rate”.
Did you read your own post?
You said:
First, we were told that same sex marriage would only improve the value of marriage in our society. The gay community, or rather the portion favoring same sex marriage (not all gays have supported same sex marriage) also implied that they would do a better job with the marriage and separation/divorce rate than heterosexuals
You say "we were TOLD" these two things. I’m asking "who is we?" and "who TOLD you these two things?" Please quote them directly, and link to where they TOLD you this.
Why are you lying now? It’s kinda tough to lie about something when your words are right above these comments.
Are you lying to try and cover up the fact that your arguing against a strawman?
Isn't "bearing false witness" one of those "sins" you bible thumpers are supposed to be "cured" of?
Ooops...guess not.
If you'd pay attention, both those versions of theism uphold the humanity of all persons by way of the Imago Dei.
You’re religion claims that all people are evil and in need of the salvation of your first century Jewish messianic cult savior so your Hebrew tribal deity can forgive himself for “intelligently designing” us the way he did.
The only part of “humanity” that “upholds”, is it's seemingly infinite capacity for inane superstition and credulity.
I'd add that if you wish to attack a Christian on philosophical or theological grounds about this particular issue, then you need to discuss the Trinity.
Your three headed god has nothing to do with same sex marriage. Last I looked, gays of any faith or no religion, can be married in MA. Julie and Hillary were married by a UNITARIAN pastor, not some fundy or Calvinista. You remember…the Unitarians? The movement that gained momentum once Calvin started burning non-trinitarians at the stake?
So the next time YOU want to attack a same sex marriage, perhaps YOU need to get your facts straight and stop LYING about what you were “TOLD” by some nebulous unnamed source.
Christians, if they'd pay attention to the deeper relationships between theological constructs in their worldview, are against gay marriage ethically, because they are Trinitarians doctrinally.
Who gives a crap?
To make a case that Christians should support gay marriage, you need to demonstrate that the family does not reflect the Trinity, and to do that, you need to refute the doctrine of the Trinity and make a strong case for modalism in order to ground an ethic that supports gay marriage.
I’m not making any case that YOU have to support anything. I’m making a case that you’re theological TRIPE has nothing to do with these women. I’m making the case that YOU are lying and arguing against some strawmen when you made your unsupported claim that same sex couples were going to “improve” marriage, or never get divorced.
The ethic for or against gay marriage, for Christians, ultimately rises or falls on the doctrine of the Trinity.
Last I checked, YOU don’t speak for all Christians. But I’m not surprised at your delusions of grandeur. Perhaps Bishop Robinson and Bishop Spong speak for ALL Christians on this matter?
You’re just another twit spewing theobabble and calling it “philosophy”…sorry, your fundy doublespeak has nothing to do with two gay women getting married by a Unitarian pastor.
Run along now, and try an figure out why all the good little Christians are getting all those abortions.
"Wrong…you’re a liar. You most certainly did bring up the “divorce rate”.
ReplyDeleteDid you read your own post?"
You dumb Stupid idiot! He said the divorce rate regarding "Christians verse hmosexuals." You call him a liar but then quoting the claim the homosexuals would do better with the divorce rate than *heterosexuals.* Uhhh, news flash, you moron, "hetersexuals" is not a synonym for "Christian" and Gene specifically said, "I never mentioned the divorce rate of Christians v. gays one way or the other..." So, you freeking moron, learn how to read and pay attention, garsh!
"Isn't "bearing false witness" one of those "sins" you bible thumpers are supposed to be "cured" of?"
I find it funny that this turd just got done saying, "Are you lying to try and cover up the fact that your arguing against a strawman?" He just created a straw man of Christianity, i.e., ignoring the doctrine of indwelling sin. What a piece of work the typical atheist imbecile is. Oh yeah, besides the fact that I just proved that Gene did not lie as out thick-headed illiterate friend accused him of doing.
"You’re religion claims that all people are evil and in need of the salvation of your first century Jewish messianic cult savior so your Hebrew tribal deity can forgive himself for “intelligently designing” us the way he did."
So? gene said all humans were created in the image of God. You bring up "evil" as a counter to what Gene said???? You're dumber than I thought. What the heck does being a sinner have to do with *not* being made in the image of God??? Garsh, you're rebuttals don't even deal with what Gene wrote. How stupid are you?
"Your three headed god has nothing to do with same sex marriage. Last I looked, gays of any faith or no religion, can be married in MA. Julie and Hillary were married by a UNITARIAN pastor, not some fundy or Calvinista. You remember…the Unitarians? The movement that gained momentum once Calvin started burning non-trinitarians at the stake?"
Ypu dumb retarded atheist. Gene *just said* that if you want to attack a *CHRISTIAN* regarding this issue then you'd need to discuss the trinity. For *CHRISTIANS* marriage has to do with the trinity, coventnat, Christ and the Church, etc. You're reply showed that, AGAIN, what Gene said sailed right over your thick skull.
Anyway, was there anything thing else this fundie atheist retard said that needed addressing? Nope. 'nother one bites the dust. 'nother zit headed teenage atheist trying to talk tough to the theist.
"Run along now, and try an figure out why all the good little Christians are getting all those abortions."
Run along now and pop your zits and try to figure out why, if Christians are so dumb, they always make you look like a half-wit whose about as sharp as a baseball.
Oh look...I've got some loving Christian infected with the "Magic Spirit" frothing at the mouth!
ReplyDeleteThis should be fun.
You dumb Stupid idiot! He said the divorce rate regarding "Christians verse hmosexuals." You call him a liar but then quoting the claim the homosexuals would do better with the divorce rate than *heterosexuals.* Uhhh, news flash, you moron, "hetersexuals" is not a synonym for "Christian" and Gene specifically said, "I never mentioned the divorce rate of Christians v. gays one way or the other..." So, you freeking moron, learn how to read and pay attention, garsh!
Hey fanboi…if you’re going to froth at the mouth over this…perhaps you should learn to spell homosexual and heterosexual. You can just call them straights and fags if that makes it easier for your fundy challenged typing ability.
Now let me ask you something fanboi, given that United States is an overwhelming Christian nation, what religion do you think the vast majority of “heterosexuals” getting married belong to?
And again, I’m still waiting who “told” Gene that homosexuals promised they would never get divorced if they were allowed to be legally married?
Can you answer? Are you his lawyer? Or just his gay lover?
I’m also waiting for Gene or you to quote statistics and research that shows that homosexuals separate or divorce in greater numbers than heterosexuals or Christians, or rabid Triabologue fanboys.
So? gene said all humans were created in the image of God.
So I guess god is a homo, since homos are created in his image.
LOL…Your god is a fag!
You bring up "evil" as a counter to what Gene said???? You're dumber than I thought.
Just so you know, I consider it high praise when some home schooled, superstitious, frothy fundy calls me “dumb”.
ReplyDeleteFor a long time I've heard that fundy divorce rates are the SAME as the general population. I've yet to see any hard evidence. Do you have some links I can peruse?
Yep...I sure do Warren.
It's amazaing that these Triabloguing dolts can make stuff up without hesitation, to support their cherished homophobic positions and no one here even thinks to question it.
But I guess that's what you can do when you're preaching to sheep.
Here is the link on the lastest Barna research on Christian divorce:
http://www.barna.org/FlexPage.aspx?Page=BarnaUpdate&BarnaUpdateID=170
Ventura, CA) - Recent legislation, lawsuits and public demonstrations over the legality of gay marriage are just one battlefront regarding the institution of marriage. A new study released by The Barna Group, of Ventura, California, shows that the likelihood of married adults getting divorced is identical among born again Christians and those who are not born again. The study also cited attitudinal data showing that most Americans reject the notion that divorce is a sin.
...
Although many Christian churches attempt to dissuade congregants from getting a divorce, the research confirmed a finding identified by Barna a decade ago (and further confirmed through tracking studies conducted each year since): born again Christians have the same likelihood of divorce as do non-Christians.
Among married born again Christians, 35% have experienced a divorce. That figure is identical to the outcome among married adults who are not born again: 35%.
So it seems the fundies are getting divorced at a 35 percent clip, and don't really consider it a sin...so I wonder why Gene is whining over the break up of a couple of lesbians married in a Unitarian service?
Perhaps he's frightened it will lead to even MORE fundy divorce.
LOL!
Well now, the dummy doesn't even deal with my post. he changed the subject of *my* post into his personal agenda against Gene.
ReplyDeleteWhat I said had NOTHING to do with him citing anyone. My corrections were valid and you just responded to respond.
So, just so you know, simply "commenting" does not mean you've answered anyone. Now, if you want to try again, go ahead. If not, you've been refuted, zit head.
Btw,
ReplyDeleteI'm not frothing at the mouth. I talking just like you are. if you think I'm being an idiot and a mad-man, then what does that say about yourself? Actually, I'm calmly responding to you in kind, showing you how stupid you look. So, thanks for refuting yourself for us again. Your comments about me (which is my acting like you) show that you think you're acting stupid. Have a nice day, retard.
2nd Anon. Are you the same anon who responded to me when I responded to George. If you are then I need to tell you that I got the distinct impression that you were 'baiting' me to attack George personally instead of what he was saying.
ReplyDeleteI get the feeling that you may be a 'plant' You say the some of the most abrasive things in an unChrist-like manner. Perhaps to give 1st anon and other atheists the opportunity to say, "Yeah, see what kind of people all you Christians are." At least that is how it comes across to me.
If what I suppose is not true then I implore you to lace your responses with love, grace and mercy. Atheists are not dumb or stupid. Christians are sinners saved by grace and as Christians we are commanded to love our neighbors. It doesn't mean we agree with everything they do or belief or that we don't speak biblical truth.
1st Anon. I am aware of the Barna report and I agree that as a Christian, it's discouraging.
Unfortunately the report doesn't give a breakdown of the various reasons why Christians are getting divorced? It would be interesting to compare the reasons resulting in Christian divorce rates with those for non-Christian divorce rates. Was the primary reason infidelity, or the fact that one spouse was a Christian and the other wasn't? But since it doesn't specify, any theory put forward would be speculative.
The Barna polls involve the US only and not other countries. I would be interested to compare US rates with those of Christians in other countries. Having lived on three different continents, in general I have found Christians in western countries to be less reformed and committed to biblical and historical orthodoxy. Perhaps it's the influence of liberal and atheistic 'scholarship' ;)
From my personal experience I would have to disagree with your last statement as it's entirely speculative on your part.
So it seems the fundies are getting divorced at a 35 percent clip, and don't really consider it a sin.
The majority of Christian divorces I know of were as a result of infidelity. The bible does give that as a valid reason for divorce.
Anon, I am curious, is your name George?
BEIJING, Nov. 19, according to Xinhua Taiwan's "Today" reported that Chen Shui-bian's four-day fasting guard for medical treatment, including the Oriental Hospital and the Panchiao to spend a wow power leveling total of nearly 20,000 yuan (NT, the same below) medical wow powerleveling expenses, as His health insurance card to stay in Taipei Detention Center, must first serve their own expense, the medical expenses from his detention in custody of the gold deduction, but Chen Shui-bian's custody, only 16,000 yuan deposit, the deduction is not enough, said the detention center, not powerleveling part of the Will be asked to make up for the families or lawyers.
ReplyDelete1 At about noon today, Chen power leveling Shui-bian ambulance ride to live for three days to leave the county medical Panchiao District Court, although the people left, but still have to pay money, including an ambulance referral to spend 800 yuan, into the ring adhere to the intensive care unit Fasting only saline water wow gold and glucose, a day to spend about 1500 yuan, plus medical expenses, hospital fees, in Panchiao hospital guard spent a total of three million yuan.
Chen Shui-bian from the 16 guard for medical treatment, 17, from Yadong to wow gold Itabashi Hospital, because of his health insurance card on the detention center, the first day of the Far Eastern Memorial Hospital linked to the emergency room, registration fees, inspection fees, medical expenses, ambulance It took on the cost of 9500 yuan. After World of Warcraft gold the transfer plus the cost of the nearly 20,000 guard of medical expenses, the Taipei Detention Center will take custody of people to deduct, in other words, Chen Shui-bian have to foot the bill themselves.