Same-sex marriage double media standard// gay couple wants privacy during their “divorce”

Dallas same-sex divorce case a first for Texas–

These types of antics and double standards are so typical of leftist, liberal, and  GLBT groups. A gay couple who was married in Massashusetts, moved back to Texas and has now filed for divorce. They want anonoymity. . .

But on Wednesday one of the pair, citing “discord or conflict of personalities,” asked a state district court in Dallas to void the union in what is believed to be the first such action in Texas.

A bit of confusion in the court over this one. Some say they can’t really be divorced in a state that doesn’t even recognize their union, others say they have to be “divorced” becaues they are “married,” or so says the state of MA.

The double standard is this:  while all of this drama is brewing over their maybe divorce , they want their privacy protected by the media and they want their names left out of the papers!!! Go figure!

“We’ll see what happens,” said attorney Peter Schulte, representing the man who asked that he and his former partner not be identified.

“Personal things could happen to us that wouldn’t happen to other people,” the man said Thursday. “My company has an extremely low tolerance for publicity.”

Personal things huh? Personal things like what has been happening to individuals on the Prop 8 donor list and H8 google map. Yeah, I guess they should be worried if they don’t want to be harassed, threatened, stalked have their property vandalized. They only appreciate the desire and need for privacy when it applies to them.

The reason I post it here is to call attention to the fact that this gay couple, whose marriage in Massachusetts is a public act, asked for and received confidentiality in the newspaper. Normally we only give confidentiality to rape victims and others in extraordinary circumstances.

But I have to put the question to you readers who thought Prop 8 donors should not expect confidentiality — “What are they ashamed of?” one of you rhetorically asked — in the Eightmaps.com situation: Why does this gay couple deserve to have their names kept out of the paper? What are they ashamed of? Why is there a double standard for gay married couples? Should there be?

it is very strange to me to have a couple that wants to be married in the eyes of the law and society, but wants to be treated by the media as if they didn’t exist as a couple. What other married couple would expect that kind of privilege?

Always a double standard and unnecessary drama with the pursuit for same-sex unions to be called marriage. The rules apply to everyone else, but never to them. This situation shouldn’t be given all of this media attention in my opinion. The couple is up in arms because if Texas doesn’t grant them a divorce, they will have to go back to MA and establish residency before they can get divorced there. Too bad guys, the law is the law.

“In the State of Texas, marriage is – and has always been – a union between one man and one woman. To prevent other states from imposing their values on this state, Texas voters overwhelmingly approved a Constitutional amendment specifically defining marriage as a union of one man and one woman,” he said in a written statement. “Because the parties’ Massachusetts-issued arrangement is not a marriage under Texas law, they are asking a Texas court to recognize – and dissolve – something that does not legally exist.”

Their attorney argues that the “Full Faith and Credit Clause” of the U.S. Constitution, forces TX to recognize the marriage from MA and therefore grant the couple a divorce, however,

from another federal perspective, the Defense of Marriage Act recognizes only marriages between a man and woman and allows states to do the same.

The  couple appears to be a tad bitter and says that they shouldn’t have to go back to MA for their divorce, and that they shouldn’t be treated differently than any other married couple. Oh really????

“Would you give up your life to do something your neighbors don’t have to do?” he asked.

Look out ladies an gentleman. It looks like this gay couple is trying to lop over into the isle, into a territory [marriage and divorce] that doesn’t belong to them, and revise laws that don’t apply to them. Talk about a legal precedent that we don’t need to see happen. At least Texas residents shut down the gay marriage fiasco and revised their Consitution. I hope their courts stand firm and send this couple packin’ all the way back to MA. If Massachusetts was so eager to get them married, then let them deal wtih the divorces.

I say, why is this couple so worried about a divorce for a pseudo marriage that doesn’t even exist in most states.?Just decide who gets the dog and the couch and call it quits. States who have voted for marriage to remain between one man and one woman, (and the Federal Government who passed the Defense of Marriage Act to ensure it remained so), are probably thinking this whole thing is a waste of time, money and energy. First gays fight to get married and now they want to get divorced. Why don’t they just to to the Dominican Republic or Haiti to get divorced? They grant speedy divorces to Americans for a couple hundred bucks, no problem.

Although the filing in 302nd District Court is apparently groundbreaking for Texas, it’s not a first nationwide.

Two women married in Massachusetts filed for divorce in Rhode Island, but that state’s Supreme Court rejected the move because they weren’t wed there.

Beyond Massachusetts, marriages of same-sex couples are legal in Connecticut, with court actions pending in California and Iowa that could add those states to the list. Civil unions providing rights and responsibilities to same-sex couples are allowed in Connecticut, New Hampshire, New Jersey and Vermont. And domestic partnership laws provide spousal rights to unmarried couples in California, Hawaii, Maine, Maryland, Oregon, Washington and the District of Columbia.

Marriage equality laws are being drafted in New Jersey, New York and other states. And with the Obama administration and power shift in Washington, the Defense of Marriage Act could be reviewed, Upton said.

Implications

He said such actions and the Dallas divorce filing probably will arouse opposition from family-values groups. If the case ends up with the Texas Supreme Court, justices could interpret the current law to the detriment of gays and lesbians in areas such as employment benefits, Upton said.

And if federal issues are involved, “it has the potential to do damage outside the state of Texas,” he said. “It does make me nervous.”

The Dallas case “may make some persuasive arguments,” Upton said. “It will be interesting to see.”

Sources: belief.net

Dallasnews.com



Advertisements

11 thoughts on “Same-sex marriage double media standard// gay couple wants privacy during their “divorce”

  1. To my mind, Texas doesn’t have to divorce these people, nor should they. However, if they want their names kept private then they should be obliged. It sounds like one of them could have problems with his company if it found out. I wouldn’t wish on anybody for them to lose their job, that wouldn’t be right. It is just plain evil to force a person from their livelihood for it just doesn’t affect them but their whole family.

  2. The same thing happened in Maryland a few years back. Ultimately, the legislature there found that they could divorce the gay couple without recognizing a right to same sex marriage, so the courts were able to move forward with the dissolution without disturbing the definition of marriage. While Texas is not Maryland, I wonder if the same thing (or something similar) will happen there.

  3. Here’s the insidious argument: If the Texas courts take on this case and grants a divorce, then by de facto argument, all states must then recognize a same sex “marriage” as legitimate. It’s a sneaky, through the “back door” approach to overthrowing the definition of marriage laws and amendments within the US.

    This is big. This is really big. The LGBT folks have found a “loophole” that could destroy marriage.

  4. Good thinking Euripides, it is a way of giving a token recognition. I would say that they can not get a divorce because they are not married. They do need to undo the legal mess they are in since it probably involves ownership of property. They should go back to what ever state organized this stuff up and get them to set it straight.

  5. I agree Rick, one’s privacy should be respected. Too bad the prop 8 dissenters haven’t respected the privacy of the prop 8 donors. Donors have been harassed, some have lost their jobs, prop 8 supportive businesses have lost customers because of the protesters and backlash, property has been vandalized. It’s all very unnecessary and sad.

  6. I don’t like these kind of loopholes. I say, the states should just ignore this alleged marriages. If the state doesn’t marry gay people then there is no logic in divorcing them, because that marriage wouldn’t be recognized.

  7. Thanks for the info Full with Faith. This is very interesting. I’m really happy to hear that Maryland didn’t have to recognize a right to same-sex marriage. This divorce thing could be very scary moving forward. Especially with gay people being allowed to marry in a few states and then potentially trying to get divorced in the rest of the states, all the while fighting for these states to recognize same-sex unions as marriage.

  8. I agree Secular. It’s insane that states who don’t recognize same-sex marriage and that don’t marry same-sex couples would have to recognize and accept a marriage from another state. It seems to me that this type of situation is a total infringement on states rights.

  9. Wow. I was thinking the same thing as Euripides- If TX grants the divorce in essence they are recognizing SSM and leaving the door wide open. One huge loop-hole is right!

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s