Lawrence couple to seek same-sex marriage in California / LJWorld.com

Archive for Wednesday, June 11, 2008

June 11, 2008

A Lawrence couple is hoping to become the first same-sex couple from Kansas to get married legally in California.

Mike Silverman, 35, and Dave Greenbaum, 37, plan on getting their marriage license at 8:15 a.m. June 17 in San Francisco. A recent California Supreme Court ruling legalized gay marriage.

The two have been together for more than 12 years, and said they plan to wear Kansas University attire.

"We wanted to show that we are proud to be from Kansas, and we hope that our home state one day soon will live up to its founding values and recognize marriage for all its citizens," said Silverman.

The couple had a Jewish ceremony nine years ago recognizing their relationship. They said they wanted to get married in California to provide legal protections for their relationship and make a statement in favor of equality in Kansas.

In 2005, Kansas voters approved a constitutional amendment banning same-sex marriage. But Silverman and Greenbaum said Kansas should recognize the California marriage license because of the U.S. Constitution's "full faith and credit clause" which requires states to recognize other state's actions.

Discussion

LJWorld.com doesn't necessarily condone the comments here, nor does it review every post.
Read our full policy. Also, read about banned accounts and harassing comments.

11 June 2008
at 3:27 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

ihatelv (Anonymous) says…

This is newsworthy why???I'm sure KU is proud to be associated…..
11 June 2008
at 3:41 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

Logan72 (Alia Ahmed) says…

Congratulations, Mike and Dave!
11 June 2008
at 3:48 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

thetagger (Anonymous) says…

To quote the late, great Richard Jeni: Gay people wanna get married. And I say, Let 'em. This is America. Gay people have the same right to lose half their s*** as the rest of the population.( Rant ) This is what I get about people who are anti- gay marriage. They usually fall back on one of three arguments. The first being, “Well, it's the way it's always been.” Kinda like how it always has been illegal to marry someone of a different race. … Oh wait, they changed that! Wow, fancy that. The institution of marriage has survived a great change once before, and quite well, thank you very much. It can do it again. The second argument is “We want to keep the act of marriage sacred.” Did you know that around half of all marriages in this country end in divorce? Not a very sacred act anymore, is it? I see all these votes for banning gay marriage, but never a vote to ban divorce. Hypocrites! The third argument (usually, but not always, reserved for adoption conversations) is “Well, how do we explain it to the children? They'll be confused when one of their friends has two mommies or two daddies.” Guess what folks? Remember those divorce things I just mentioned? Well there are some kids who need to have explained to them why daddy doesn't live with them anymore, and why there's a new man in mommy's life, and why daddy brings a new woman around when he comes for visits. Pretty complex for a kid. Yet it happens everyday. Explaining why someone has two dads is no more complex than that. ( /Rant )
11 June 2008
at 3:49 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

toe (Anonymous) says…

Maybe after a few more ceremonies, the marriage will take.
11 June 2008
at 3:49 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

jimincountry (Anonymous) says…

ljw, why!!?? How does this kind of stuff make the news?! Cheney's daughter is homosexual……..okay, maybe that is news. But this?
11 June 2008
at 3:52 p.m.

Permalink

packs_of_wild_dogzz (Anonymous) says…

This comment was removed by the site staff for violation of the usage agreement.
11 June 2008
at 3:53 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

thetagger (Anonymous) says…

After all that, I forgot to say: Good for you, Mike and Dave. It's unfortunate you have to go half way across the country to simply be not-discriminated-against, but at least finally you can get what you have waited a long time for. Congratulations!

11 June 2008
at 3:55 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

Easy (Anonymous) says…

Hope they stay in Cali, but we probably couldn't get that lucky
11 June 2008
at 3:59 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

plainspeaking (Anonymous) says…

gee, Easy, you don't like gays, homeless, hippies or Downtown Lawrence. let me guess - are you Cartman from Southpark?
11 June 2008
at 3:59 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

Weezy_Jefferson (Anonymous) says…

Do you even know them , Easy? My guess is “probably not.” Let me guess what, then, motivated you to voice your snarky comment….
11 June 2008
at 4 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

LakeShawnee (Anonymous) says…

While their intentions are admirable and I support them, it seems that neither of the two are lawyers. It has been long recognized, through conflict of laws principles and the tenets of family law, that sister states reserve the right to only recognize those marriages they themselves deem appropriate and within the purview of their own public policy. Thus, any privileges and immunities clause argument the couple wishes to put forth probably wont get them anywhere. Therefore, as gay marriage is against the enumerated public policy of the State of Kansas (even expressly as it is in our State Constitution now), it is highly doubtful that any Kansas court would recognize this California contract and lend it credibility when it comes to any sort of dissolution of this couple's relationship (whether it be via death or separation). Remember, legally there is no benefit to being “married” except for tax breaks and rights upon dissolution of the marital agreement.
11 June 2008
at 4 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

tinlizzy (Anonymous) says…

Congratulations!
11 June 2008
at 4:01 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

LakeShawnee (Anonymous) says…

Pardon me, Full Faith and Credit argument….
11 June 2008
at 4:03 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

agtprovocateuse (Anonymous) says…

Congrats!
11 June 2008
at 4:10 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

Dani (Anonymous) says…

Good for them but regardless of whether it's legal in California, Kansas isn't going to recognize the marriage so they still aren't going to have any legal protection in Kansas. See KSA 23-101 and KSA 23-115.

11 June 2008
at 4:13 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

Solomon (Anonymous) says…

I'm not really familiar with the “Full Faith and Credit Clause,” but wouldn't it also require California to not recognize gay marriages of Kansans since the Kansas law/constitution prohibits it?
11 June 2008
at 4:14 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

geniusmannumber1 (Anonymous) says…

Reality_Check: Saw an article earlier today: “A study issued this week by UCLA's Williams Institute for Sexual Orientation and the Law projected that gay men and lesbians will spend $684 million on cakes, photographers and other services over the next three years unless voters reverse the high court's ruling in the fall.”plainspeaking: +1
11 June 2008
at 4:29 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

none2 (Anonymous) says…

thetagger (Anonymous) says:”To quote the late, great Richard Jeni: Gay people wanna get married. And I say, Let 'em. This is America. Gay people have the same right to lose half their s*** as the rest of the population.( Rant ) This is what I get about people who are anti- gay marriage…”–––––––––––––––––You forgot #4 and #5 which I'm surprised some fanatic hasn't brought up by now as a result of this article.#4) It isn't fair to grant gay marriage if you don't allow it for fluffy too. She has wanted to marry her master since the day she was brought home from the humane society.#5) It isn't fair to those that have really enlarged hearts and thus need to have licenses for 3, 4, 5, 6… etc number of partners.
11 June 2008
at 4:36 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

vpete69 (Anonymous) says…

LOL @ this article.
11 June 2008
at 4:39 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

dweezil222 (Anonymous) says…

Solomon, interesting point… I'll have to look into that.
11 June 2008
at 4:46 p.m.

Permalink

Bone777 (Anonymous) says…

This comment was removed by the site staff for violation of the usage agreement.
11 June 2008
at 4:52 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

cutny (Anonymous) says…

Nice one bone, way to wear your intolerance and bigotry for all to see while you hide behind your anonymous little screen name. That's takes courage!
11 June 2008
at 4:53 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

none2 (Anonymous) says…

Easy (Anonymous) says:”Hope they stay in Cali, but we probably couldn't get that lucky.”–––––––––––––––If you are wanting a cheap way to stay in California, I wouldn't waste my time hoping there is a gay couple from Kansas living there that you can come out and stay with.Check out timeshares as they can be really affordable. Or if you REALLY want to stay cheaply for the short term, try youth hostels. Don't worry if you aren't college age as most of them actually are open to any age. I had a great time at the beach in San Diego when I stayed at a youth hostel there. Luckily that year was an El Nino, so the water was warm. Normally, the Pacific currents there are from Alaska which is VERY frigid!

11 June 2008
at 4:57 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

Bone777 (Anonymous) says…

Cutny - I didn't think that was bad. I just have a natural aversion to that behavior.By the way, Nice birth name…Cutny..sounds Greek…
11 June 2008
at 5:01 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

gogoplata (Anonymous) says…

The homosexuals make a good argument. I do think it is an equally good argument for poligamy. My problem with homosexuality is a moral one. When I read the Bible it is clear to me that homosexuality is sin. But who am I to force my values on two adults who are free (or should be free) to make thier own choices. If we are going to punish homosexuals shouldn't we go after adulterers as well. If you look at the teachings of Jesus he said that to look at a woman with lust is to have already commited adultry in the heart. How many heterosexual men can plead innocent on that one? I have already acknowledged the fact that I am a sinner but for those who have not yet faced that reality it is often offensive to them when they are confronted with it. As Christians we have the responsibility of teaching about sin and the forgiveness available through our resurrected savior Jesus Christ. But we can avoid further alienating homosexuals by not forcing them to live as we would have them live. God in flesh did not use force so why do many Christians see force as the means to changing lives? Government is force. We would be wise to get government out of marriage.
11 June 2008
at 5:08 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

kujayhawk (Anonymous) says…

Hetrosexuals have done enough damage to the institution of marriage, maybe it's time to give somebody else a shot.
11 June 2008
at 5:12 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

kujayhawk (Anonymous) says…

and to gogo….maybe we should get religion out of marriage as well since I know many so called “Christians” who have a tough time being faithful to their spouse Monday thru Saturday, but beat that Christianity drum awfully loud on Sunday.
11 June 2008
at 5:20 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

gogoplata (Anonymous) says…

Good idea kujayhawk. Piss on all the faithful Christians who honor their vows.
11 June 2008
at 6:02 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

jayhawkerincali (Anonymous) says…

When are we going to learn that religion and it's warped views on society is going to be the demise of the human race?
11 June 2008
at 6:10 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

none2 (Anonymous) says…

gogoplata (Anonymous) says:”Good idea kujayhawk. Piss on all the faithful Christians who honor their vows…”–––––––––––—I don't think he was trying to piss on those Christians who honor their vows, but rather the ones who are hypocrites and cheat or swing, but then turn around and then condemn others on Sunday.I will give you this much honoring vows is a VERY noble undertaking. Unfortunately, it doesn't get the rewards it should in this life. The gays and lesbians who are willing to honor those same vows should have the same opportunity to do so…The only problem I have with gay marriage is that it appears that a sizable number of the gay men think monogamy is a board game. It is one thing to want the “same” rights, but when you want special rights, then everybody that is against it has a legitimate point. I have as little respect for a gay couple that wants or claims to be married yet don't honor vows as much as I do for married swingers. They make a mockery of the very thing they claim to want — rights and legitimacy at least in the eyes of the law. Unfortunately, there hasn't been a way to revoke marriage from heterosexual people who make a mockery of vows, so I doubt there will would be such for gays either.
11 June 2008
at 6:32 p.m.

Permalink

Bone777 (Anonymous) says…

This comment was removed by the site staff for violation of the usage agreement.

11 June 2008
at 6:32 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

lori (Anonymous) says…

Congratulations and best wishes, Mike and Dave!
11 June 2008
at 6:41 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

Bone777 (Anonymous) says…

Revised:I like the thought of a “Union Ceremony” as a option for gay marriage, with all of the legal rights of marriage, but the religion left out.If a man wants to kiss the hairy knuckles of another mans hand, it is his right to do so.I don't know how God feels about homosexuals, but I'll ask Dave and Mike when we get to heaven. The devil made me do that last one….
11 June 2008
at 6:52 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

none2 (Anonymous) says…

Bone777 (Anonymous) says:”If a man wants to kiss the hairy knuckles of another mans hand, it is his right to do so…”…–––––––––-So your real issue is when, because of their age or race or testostrone levels, one or both of the males develops unsightly secondary body hair? If so, I have a suggestion… Send them white gloves for a wedding gift. White gloves during a wedding use to be very popular.
11 June 2008
at 7:10 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

Bone777 (Anonymous) says…

and a pair of white pants…
11 June 2008
at 7:29 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

none2 (Anonymous) says…

Bone777 (Anonymous) says:”and a pair of white pants:”–––––––––––––-Did you mean 2 pair, or were you hoping to see more of one of the grooms?
11 June 2008
at 7:52 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

Bone777 (Anonymous) says…

No just one…
11 June 2008
at 8:13 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

justfornow (Anonymous) says…

I have a niece and her boyfriend getting married in two weeks, why isnt that News?
11 June 2008
at 8:14 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

yourworstnightmare (Anonymous) says…

If any couple deserves benefits from the state for a stable relationship, it is this one.They have been together 12 years, much longer than most of the 50% of heterosexual couples who get divorced.The state has recognized that a couple, two people, is the most stable partnership and most beneficial to society and to raising children.The Constitution ensures that all have equal access to the law.Do the math, screamers.Or, just go ahead and scream until you are hoarse. Your posts are rather amusing, if not pathetic and sad.

11 June 2008
at 8:18 p.m.

Permalink

yourworstnightmare (Anonymous) says…

This comment was removed by the site staff for violation of the usage agreement.
11 June 2008
at 8:33 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

justfornow (Anonymous) says…

I have always suspected that yourworstnightmare was a little fruity, now its confirmed.
11 June 2008
at 8:34 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

peachesncream (Anonymous) says…

awwww nightmare are you a lil put out that your poor neice didnt make the news today? best wishes to her and her hubbie , and best wishes to mike and dave….
11 June 2008
at 8:34 p.m.

Permalink

justfornow (Anonymous) says…

This comment was removed by the site staff for violation of the usage agreement.
11 June 2008
at 9:10 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

none2 (Anonymous) says…

Justfornow, If your relatives are not in the news, perhaps it was because you didn't submit it?”Submit a wedding announcementThe Lawrence Journal-World will publish Lawrence residents' announcements at no charge according to our own specifications. We do not publish announcements of couples with no local ties beyond being students at Kansas University. All announcements must have a contact name and phone number for confirmation purposes. The deadline for wedding announcements is noon Wednesday for Saturday's paper. During holiday weeks, the deadline will be noon Tuesday.”
11 June 2008
at 9:44 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

like_n_Lawrence (Anonymous) says…

Congratulations Mike and Dave.Someday all of the closets will open in Lawrence.
11 June 2008
at 10:18 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

ontheotherhand (Anonymous) says…

Bone777 and Easy: I happen to know Mike and David and I hate to burst your narrow-minded little bubbles but I'll bet that if you guys added as much value, class, and intelligence as these two, well … then I guess we would hear from two less idiots.I am truly shaking my head at the people who do not think this article/info is newsworthy. Do these people live under rocks? Perhaps interviewing them (the people who live under rocks) would be “newsworthy.”
11 June 2008
at 10:24 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

dtaylor (Anonymous) says…

Bone777, I can say in all honesty that if you and Mike and Dave end up in the same place, then I will finally believe the people who tried to tell me that there really is a hell. And I will also believe that Mike and Dave must have done something really wrong to be stuck in the same eternity as you.I tend to believe that the world is filled with self-righteous people like Bone who make the rest of our lives hell on earth while he tries to get to heaven after he dies. Wow.

11 June 2008
at 10:25 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

Bone777 (Anonymous) says…

ontheotherhand - I apologize for my insensitivity. I was just trying to get a rise. Good luck fellas…
11 June 2008
at 10:34 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

notajayhawk (Anonymous) says…

yourworstnightmare (Anonymous) says: “They have been together 12 years, much longer than most of the 50% of heterosexual couples who get divorced.”Got a citation for that claim, maybe?”The state has recognized that a couple, two people, is the most stable partnership and most beneficial to society and to raising children.”If the 'state' you're talking about is the one we're in, or any one of a number of others, they have recognized that the hypothetical couple you are referring to (most stable partnership with the most benefit to society and children) consists of one man and one woman. Did you forget that part?”The Constitution ensures that all have equal access to the law.”As they do - anyone in this country (of appropriate age and barring certain immediate-family restrictions) can marry one person of the opposite sex.”Do the math, screamers. … Or, just go ahead and scream until you are hoarse. Your posts are rather amusing, if not pathetic and sad.”Tell me, does the moron who wrote this - “Maybe because no one gives a crap about you and your pathetic family? Hmmm?” - qualify as a “screamer?”
11 June 2008
at 10:37 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

DaREEKKU (Anonymous) says…

All marriages should be banned. Marriage is a religious ceremony and thus should not exist within government. The government should only recognize domestic partnerships. If you want to enter into a marriage and have the word “recognized marriage” stamped on a piece of paper….then you can take your archaic ideas to a church, sign a contract and do it there. Don't give me your “religion” this and “bible” this and “moral” that argument. Those arguments are about as useless as homo is with giving navigable directions. Those arguments are your opinions (not facts) and all people deserve equal opportunity….and that doesn't mean the equal opportunity to an exclusive heterosexual marriage…that means the opportunity to marry whatever consenting adult they want….so there!
11 June 2008
at 10:39 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

justfornow (Anonymous) says…

Nature has provided us with a penis and a vagina to reproduce…… anything else is abnormal.
11 June 2008
at 11 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

justfornow (Anonymous) says…

Hellfire will rain down on all of us because of the deviants.
11 June 2008
at 11:02 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

denak (Anonymous) says…

I'm not really familiar with the “Full Faith and Credit Clause,” but wouldn't it also require California to not recognize gay marriages of Kansans since the Kansas law/constitution prohibits it?Solomon,The answer to your question is “no.” The U.S. Constitution is the supreme law of the land. It supercedes all other laws. A state law can not be in direct violation of the Constitution or it can be overturned.The 14th amendment states “…No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.”This amendment is important in that it guarentees an individual the right to due process as well as the recognition of his or her rights in all 50 states and U.S. territories.In terms of marriage, what it says is that unless the state has a compelling substantial interest, in denying the right to marriage to two individuals, then that marriage should have legal recognition in all 50 states. As it stands now, only a few states recognize “gay marriage.” State bans on “gay marriage” are being challenged because they violate the right to due process and equal protection the 14th amendment guarentees.This is why this issue is eventually going to end up in the Supreme Court.DenaP.S. Congrats Mike and Dave and all other engaged couples, homosexual or heterosexual. Good Luck!
11 June 2008
at 11:07 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

emily_litella (Anonymous) says…

I remember when Mike Silverman wrote a letter to The Pitch saying that as a stockholder in Hallmark he was disappointed that they didn't offer benefits for domestic partners. He didn't realize when he made that up that Hallmark was a private company and didn't have publicly traded stock. So, since he used his name and city, I gave him a call and asked if he was aware Hallmark didn't sell stock. His stammering was very funny to listen to. Mike used call-back and kept ringing my phone. Desperate that I wouldn't answer, he called the police and lied to them too. He told them that I had called him and made gay slurs and threats and that he had it on tape, The police came to my house and told them he was lying and that they should go call his bluff on the tapes. I reminded them that it is a crime to file a false report and that I had no idea what his orientation was nor did I careBottom line: he's a liar and he got caught multiple times. So Mike, if you're reading this, get real mad and call the police or your lawyer. I'm still laughing!!!
11 June 2008
at 11:09 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

justfornow (Anonymous) says…

Hellfire and brimstone is coming down as we type for those that accept this abnormal behavior.

11 June 2008
at 11:19 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

justfornow (Anonymous) says…

Alright ya got me, I'm not sure what hellfire or brimstone mean anyway, just trying to save 30 bucks and entertain myself. Congrats Mike and Dave hope you have a long and prosperous marriage
11 June 2008
at 11:21 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

igby (Anonymous) says…

Marriage is such a blown-out circus of hum-drum prison-trail night-mare on elm street bankruptcy blues and chid-support hellish payments; the hell is in the details. Hope you all are having fun! at lease your both spaded.
11 June 2008
at 11:39 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

dweezil222 (Anonymous) says…

justfornow, shouldn't you be on a street corner in Topeka with your picket sign?I want to clear up something about this whole question of whether it's better to have government or religion control the institution of marriage. Remember, when the notion of monogamous (or even polygamous) marriage first developed, the two were not adequately separable; religion and government were one and the same. Governments, acting under color of religion, created the notion of marriage as a method of social control, albeit one with fairly decent reasons behind it, such as preventing disease and such. But the primary function was for purposes of delineating units of people for census-taking and other population measures.That being said, what rational basis do we have for not permitting same-sex marriages? They can be tracked just as adequately for census-type purposes as can hederosexual marriages. We've pretty definitively established that homosexual partners are no more susceptible to disease than straight partners. Religion, in its modern context, has no place in delineating who marriage is limited to. For one, the Constitutional guarantees of separation of church and state should prevent it; for another, moralistic arguments based on faith have no meaning whatsoever to someone who doesn't share your beliefs. What right do you have to force your beliefs on them — and if your beliefs happen to be Christian, even the most fundamentalist of faiths tend to agree that faith is meaningless unless voluntary.While I fully expect that this debate will drag on for years while cases labor through the court system to the Supreme Court, it will eventually be decided, and without a clearly articulated rational basis which is more than empty moral statements, will ultimately fail any test for Fourteenth Amendment compliance ever articulated by that Court so far. Even those states with state Constitutional amendments will be overturned at that point, on grounds of federal supremacy. I know that terrifies all of you right-wing backlashers, but you better get used to the idea.
11 June 2008
at 11:45 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

emily_litella (Anonymous) says…

Mike's letter to The Pitch…http://www.pitch.com/2001-05-10/news/letters/…Priceless
11 June 2008
at 11:49 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

justfornow (Anonymous) says…

dweezil222 (Anonymous) says: justfornow, shouldn't you be on a street corner in Topeka with your picket sign?Maybe……. this is part of the entertainment, Thanks.
11 June 2008
at 11:54 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

KU_Dude (Anonymous) says…

Does anyone know if Cool & Marion have set a date for their vows as well?
12 June 2008
at 12:07 a.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

pace (Anonymous) says…

Congratulations. of course Lawrence and ku should be proud of them. I am. This community is enriched by people brave enough to stand up for their rights. If your religion says don't dance, then you should have the right not to dance. people should have the right to love and commit their life to the person they love. They deserve the emotional and financial benefits that marriage can bring to one's life.
12 June 2008
at 1:40 a.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

EXks (Anonymous) says…

mazel tov!!Lichiam, Lichiam, to LIfe!

12 June 2008
at 6:50 a.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

blue73harley (Anonymous) says…

Congrats!
12 June 2008
at 8:04 a.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

kujayhawk (Anonymous) says…

“I remember when Mike Silverman wrote a letter to The Pitch saying that as a stockholder in Hallmark he was disappointed that they didn't offer benefits for domestic partners. He didn't realize when he made that up that Hallmark was a private company and didn't have publicly traded stock.”If he works(ed) at Hallmark, it's very possible he is(was) a Hallmark stockholder.
12 June 2008
at 9:44 a.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

acg (Anonymous) says…

Congrats guys, I hope you have a great and happy life together. After reading some of these posts, it only reaffirms my thanks to the gods above that I am not some of you people. I just can't wrap my head around hatred and bigotry in the name of a deity that's supposed to be all about loving your neighbor.
12 June 2008
at 9:57 a.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

vpete69 (Anonymous) says…

I used to work for a cable company doing internet installs. I went to this house one time where 2 gay guys lived. I turned on the computer to install the drivers for the NIC, and the wallpaper on the desktop was a picture of these 2 guys, naked and spooning. You know what gets me about that? The fact that both of them were sitting there watching me do the install, and knew damn well what was going to come up on the screen. Be gay if you want, you have the right. But quit throwing it in my face with news articles and desktop wallpaper.
12 June 2008
at 10 a.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

yellowhouse (Anonymous) says…

what marriage truly ismarriage is when two people begin a new startWeaving together their lives with their heartTwo people joined together now and foreverA bond that man could tear apart neverA miracle of pleasure to last through the yearsSharing their joy, laughter and tearsGoing forward together, all others forsakeA journey of love only two can take.For what were two peopleHas now become wholeAnd through the wings of a marriageLove can enter the soul.–––––––––”And now abideth faith, hope, love, these three,but the greatest of these is love!” I Cor. 13:13 Congratulations!http://powervsjustice.blogspot.com/search?updated-max=2008-01-20T12%3A59%3A00-08%3A00&max-results=100
12 June 2008
at 10:11 a.m.

Permalink

vpete69 (Anonymous) says…

This comment was removed by the site staff for violation of the usage agreement.
12 June 2008
at 10:31 a.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

none2 (Anonymous) says…

vpete69 (Anonymous) says:”I used to work for a cable company doing internet installs. I went to this house one time where 2 gay guys lived. I turned on the computer to install the drivers for the NIC, and the wallpaper on the desktop was a picture of these 2 guys, naked and spooning. You know what gets me about that? The fact that both of them were sitting there watching me do the install, and knew damn well what was going to come up on the screen. Be gay if you want, you have the right. But quit throwing it in my face with news articles and desktop wallpaper.”–––––––––––––––––-You would have loved my Dad's house. He has a few black velvet paintings of women with big breasts, with their crotches spread so that everything is obvious. He had ebony wood carvings of breasts too. All of this is tastefully displayed in his living room. (I think he didn't get many Jehovah Witnesses coming into his house.)Don't try to call him gay or bi though; he would have punched your lights out.
12 June 2008
at 10:36 a.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

tinlizzy (Anonymous) says…

vpete69— You know, there's plenty of straight people that use naked or nearly naked photos as their desktop wallpaper. If those bother you just as much, then your problem is with having sex thrown in your face while you're at work, not gay people. If you don't have a problem with the pictures, perhaps you should examine why you think it's okay for straight people to display their sexuality but not gay people.

12 June 2008
at 8:40 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

EXks (Anonymous) says…

Be gay if you want, you have the right. But quit throwing it in my face with news articles and desktop wallpaper.vpete69–––––-Ok sure, vpete…(or is it little peepee?) ..Be HETERO if you want, you the the right. But quit throwing it in my face (LOL!!!)
12 June 2008
at 9:51 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

packs_of_wild_dogzz (Anonymous) says…

hey why can't i say queer? queers say queer all the time. geez, lighten up.
12 June 2008
at 10:47 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

commuter (Anonymous) says…

I agree be gay all you want but stop throwing it in my face. Too bad your marriage is not recognized here.
12 June 2008
at 11 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

hallmarker (Anonymous) says…

kujayhawk,He never worked at Hallmark. Employees' profit-sharing is not in tradeable shares of stock.