“If ye love wealth better than liberty, the tranquility of servitude than the animated contest of freedom, go from us in peace. We ask not your counsels or arms. Crouch down and lick the hands which feed you. May your chains sit lightly upon you, and may posterity forget that you were our countrymen!” – Samuel Adams

First Same-Sex ‘Marriage’ Headed for ‘Divorce’

imagesbannerscp_120x1201Reprinted by permission of the Christian Post

By Lawrence Jones
Christian Post Reporter
Wed, Feb. 04 2009 01:43 PM EST

A lesbian couple who was the first same-sex couple to marry in the United States has filed for divorce. 

Hillary and Julie Goodridge, 52 and 51 respectively, who led the fight to legalize gay marriage in Massachusetts filed for divorce last week in Suffolk Probate and Family Court after announcing their separation in 2006.

The Goodridges were among seven gay couples who filed a lawsuit in 2001 challenging the state’s gay marriage ban. The case led to a state Supreme Judicial Court ruling that made Massachusetts the first state to recognize same-sex marriage.

The lesbian couple wed on the first day same-sex marriage was legalized in the state, May 17, 2004.

Arline Isaacson, of the Massachusetts Gay and Lesbian Political Caucus, said that the Goodridges are a couple like any other.

“Gay folks love like straight folks. We get married like they do and unfortunately, we will be getting divorces like they do, and we really are no different,” she said, according to TheBostonChannel.com.

j0404952Kris Mineau, president of the Massachusetts Family Institute, a Judeo-Christian-based public policy group that fought to repeal gay marriage, had another take on the divorce.

“Divorce is a very painful issue, but I also can’t help but reflect on the pain this couple has caused on the commonwealth and the nation to redefine marriage. And now they’re getting divorced? It doesn’t make a lot of sense,” Mineau told the Boston Herald.

“Obviously, they don’t hold the institution in very high esteem.”

The former couple shares custody of their 12-year-old daughter, Annie.

Meanwhile, a custody battle between a lesbian couple that called it quits over their Vermont civil union is becoming the latest example on how laws on same-sex unions in one state can affect families in other states.

After Lisa Miller split from her civil union with Janet Jenkins, her former partner sought full custody of Isabella, Miller’s biological daughter.

Vermont courts have ruled that Jenkins has parental rights because she was joined in a civil union with the girl’s mother at the time she was impregnated through artificial insemination. Appellate courts in Virginia, where Isabella was born, directed Virginia to fully recognize the Vermont orders giving Jenkins, who resides in Vermont, liberal unsupervised visitation.

Miller left the homosexual lifestyle and became an evangelical Christian when Isabella was 17 months old. Her daughter is now six years old.

At a hearing in late January, a Vermont judge allowed Miller to retain custody, but ordered unsupervised visitation for four days in March, over the Memorial Day holiday and for five weeks in the summer.

Liberty Counsel, a Christian legal firm, which represents Miller, says Virginia courts ignored the state’s Marriage Amendment and marriage laws, declaring all rights arising from same-sex relationships void and unenforceable, by upholding the Vermont ruling.

The Fla.-based legal group says it will continue to pursue legal action in Virginia for Miller and Isabella but stresses the need for the federal Defense of Marriage Act, which President Barack Obama wants to repeal.

The Defense of Marriage Act, enacted under the Clinton administration, defines marriage as a legal union between one man and one woman for purposes of all federal laws, and provides that states need not recognize same-sex marriages from another state.

“If Vermont can declare from the bench that a legal stranger is a mommy to another woman’s child and then have it enforced in a state with one of the strongest marriage amendments in the nation, then, on the issues of marriage and family, our country will no longer be the United States of America but instead will be the United States according to Massachusetts, California, or Vermont,” Liberty Counsel stated.

Copyright 2009 The Christian Post. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.   


Try us out at the new location: American Clarion!


9 Responses to “First Same-Sex ‘Marriage’ Headed for ‘Divorce’”

  1. At least Massachusetts still has one of the lowest divorce rates in the country. Is that the kind of “pain” Kris Mineau is talking about? Ouch!

  2. With the abysmally small rate of longevity characteristic of homosexual relationships, that low “divorce” rate is likely to skyrocket if they continue to allow homosexuals to call their unions “marriage.”

  3. “With the abysmally small rate of longevity characteristic of homosexual relationships”

    Not necessarily disputing your statement but do you have any actual statistical proof that the failure rate of homosexual relationships are any worse than the abysmally small rate of longevity characteristic of heterosexual relationships?

  4. I always do, Bob. I just leave it up to others to do some research sometimes. We tend to learn and remember better when we do the research ourselves.

    A study called “Male and Female Homosexuality” by M. Saghir and E. Robins found the average live-in homosexual relationship (not the average of all homosexual relationships, just the ones that were live-in) was between 2-3 years.(Imagine how low the average would have been if the study counted ALL homosexual relationships)

    A study called “Male Homosexuality” found that few male homosexual relationships last longer than two years, with many men reporting HUNDREDS of lifetime partners.

    University of Chicago sociologist Edward Laumann said in “The Sexual Organization of the City” that metropolitan homosexuals typically move through relationships of less than 6 months.

    A study of homosexual men in the Netherlands (a very liberal and accepting country) published in the journal “AIDS” found the average length of relationship was 1.5 years.

    “Homosexual Marriage: A Social Science View” found a dissolution rate among homosexuals in Sweden (a very liberal and accepting country) 50% higher than for heterosexuals. The lesbian rate of dissolution was double that of male homosexuals.

    According to “The Gay Report,” 38% said the longest relationship (monogamy was not specified either way) they had ever had did not last longer than a year. The study found the average relationship length for lesbians was 38 months. “Homosexual Marriage: A Social Science View” found similar results.

    “The Male Couple” cites a study of 156 homosexual males in relationships lasting 1-37 years. Only 4% had totally exclusive sexual relationships…and all of these had been together less than 5 years

    The same study as one cited above giving homosexual dissolution rates (Homosexual Marriage: A Social Science View) reported the average length of heterosexual marriages in the United states as 25 years.

    Those are just a few statistics. There are plenty more out there for the inquiring mind to find…

  5. To be honest Bob, researching the length of a homosexual relationship (or heterosexual relationship for that matter) is not very high on my to-do list. As far as I m concerned, If one is happy and fulfilled within their relationship than more power to them whether they are gay or straight. I was just curious to see, being the obviously anti-gay everything person you are, how long it would take you to quote the statistics as I know you have them all memorized, bookmarked, and ready to go at a moments notice.

  6. I should have known you had no interest in the truth, or in dealing with the implications of the truth. I should have known reality would bounce off you like water off a duck's back. Sorry to have wasted my time on you. I just have this irrepressible belief that most people have the capacity to eventually open their eyes.

    I'm not “anti-gay” any more than someone who warns someone about smoking, drinking or drug use hates them. How profoundly sad that you're so deluded by the PC Koolaid that you're oblivious to that.

  7. Actually, I was referring to heterosexual divorce. You know, the kind that doesn't need quotation marks.

  8. I should have known you had no interest in the truth, or in dealing with the implications of the truth. I should have known reality would bounce off you like water off a duck's back. Sorry to have wasted my time on you. I just have this irrepressible belief that most people have the capacity to eventually open their eyes. Apparently you're not one of those people (yet).

    I'm not “anti-gay” any more than someone who warns someone about smoking, drinking or drug use hates them. How profoundly sad that you're so deluded by the PC Koolaid that you can stare the truth in the face yet remain totally oblivious to that.

  9. Actually, I was referring to heterosexual divorce. You know, the kind that doesn't need quotation marks.