I don’t believe it. This is nothing more than a cheap but strategic move to expand marriage recognition of same sex couples into other states. They took time to go to a state and get married there. Something that also sounds amiss because I thought that marriage in Massachusetts’s was only for their own residents.
Either way they have exported the problem and forced the courts (trying to create judicial activism) to address the issue. Sure. The lawyer says its not about same sex marriage in Rhode Island. I believe that… not.
Margaret R. Chambers and Cassandra B. Ormiston were married in Massachusetts in 2004. Now they are seeking a divorce in their home state of Rhode Island, citing “irreconcilable differences”.
Ormiston’s attorney, Nancy Palmisciano said that the key issue is not whether same-sex marriage is legal in Rhode Island but whether a marriage that was legally entered into in another state can be dissolved in Rhode Island….
The issue could wind up in the state Supreme Court and if the justices upheld the second ruling it would mean Ormiston and Chambers’ divorce would be nullified.
Reading the the ‘polls’ one becomes suspicious because they sound like the poll numbers you often can’t rely on during the election cycles. Especially knowing there is an all out agenda to make marriage expansion a reality in all states.
- Many adults in the United States believe gay and lesbian partners should not be allowed to enter wedlock, according to a poll by the Quinnipiac University Polling Institute. 63 per cent of respondents would oppose a law that would permit same-sex couples to get married, while 34 per cent would support it.
In 2004, marriage certificates were issued to same-sex couples by local governments in the states of California, Oregon, New Mexico and New York. In May 2004, the state of Massachusetts allowed gay and lesbian partners to apply for marriage licenses, the first state-sanctioned homosexual weddings in the U.S.
Civil union and domestic partnership laws in Vermont, Connecticut and California grant same-sex couples all state-level rights and obligations of marriage—in areas such as inheritance, income tax, insurance and hospital visitation. There are more than 1,000 federal-level rights of marriage that cannot be granted by states. 52 per cent of respondents oppose the concept of civil unions.
On Jun. 7, a proposal to enact a constitutional ban on same-sex marriage failed in the Senate after a 49-48 vote. On Jul. 18, a House of Representatives effort to constitutionally prohibit any form of marriage other than one “between a man and a woman” fell 46 votes short of the 289 required to pass. 53 per cent of respondents are against enacting a federal amendment to ban same-sex marriage.
Slowly but surely they will create the cultural mindset that everyone is for it… that it doesn’t really matter so what the heck. This latest move through the divorce court is intentional and may be effective in moving it along in the east coast.
Add A Comment