Julie, Hillary Goodridge To Divorce, Couple Led Gay Marriage Fight In Massachusetts

BOSTON — A lesbian couple who led the fight for gay marriage in Massachusetts has filed for divorce. Julie and Hillary Goodridge were among seven gay couples who filed a lawsuit that led to a court ruling making Massachusetts the first state to legalize same-sex marriages in 2004. The couple became the public face of the debate in the state and married the first day same-sex marriages became legal.

The divorce case was filed last week in Suffolk Probate and Family Court and was not unexpected. The couple announced they were separating in 2006.

Messages left for the Goodridges were not immediately returned Tuesday.

Comments

[ohioan73]

Judging from some of these comments, I can tell there are some pretty dense people in the world who think of homosexuals as aliens or something inhuman. No wonder gays have such a hard time getting equal recognition.

[dutchman]

I think it's two things - your post highlights one of them, our instinct to distrust what we perceive - rightly or wrongly - as "different". But I'm also reminded of my grandmother's observation that we hate most in others what we can accept in ourselves. There have been studies that show those who profess to be against gays also become aroused when shown pictures of gay sex.

[dutchman]

sorry - that's "can't" - I need my coffee

[omo]

Maybe it's the sensors attached to certain parts of their anatomy that are actually arousing them ? Sheesh. How much money do the shrinks get for this creepy stuff, anyway ?

[erinker]

Yep. Shakespeare was on to something: "The lady doth protest too much, methinks."

[pickwickianmom]

Isn't that the truth? I never think about gay sex, or gays, unless I happen to be hanging around someone who is and then I have to remember that they are when we discuss relationships.

There was a guy who hung around the nature center close by who was obsessed with beetles. He spent all day looking for them and keeping notes in a pack. Beetles are what he thought about and, hence, talked about.

Same with people who get really excited or hostile or upset about gay people.

If you aren't gay, you'll think about it as much as....I don't know....ice cubes.

[robertlockwoodmills]

Assuming they had a pre-nuptial agreement, there won't be any fight over who gets the curling iron. That's a huge relief for society.

Seriously, this shouldn't be a story. The right to marry includes the right to end a marriage. If they had simply chosen to live together and later separated, nobody would even notice. The problem comes when society attaches a sacramental word, "marriage," to a union between two people who might or might not be religious. If separation of church and state means anything, it means that sacramental terms should never be attached to secular matters.

[Chris]

Except there is no "right" to marriage. Regardless of seuxal prefernce.

If it were a right then there woudl be no restriction and if it were a right you would not be able to end it.

[dutchman]

Sorry - end what? The right or the marriage?

[Burnsey]

gimme a break, you have a RIGHT to vote, but there are restrictions placed n that right. Many rights are tied up with restrictions, therefor your argument is a bunch of hooey.

[propitiousmoment]

Actually, according to Loving vs. VA the right to marry the person of one's choice is a fundamental right. That apparently does mean you can end it because you can choose not to be married to that person anymore.

[LauraD]

Someone's never heard of Loving v. Virginia, in which the Supreme Court defined marriage as a "basic human civil right."

Care to try again?

[IRepTheKing]

"..sacramental terms should never be attached to secular matters.."

---------
I agree. That's why there is no such thing as same sex marriage.

[tr24]

co-sign

[LauraD]

Marriage IS a secular matter, genius. It's a LEGAL institution. Where do you freaks COME from?

[dutchman]

Those crazy gays - now trying to ruin the sanctity of divorce!!

Seriously, my sister, who is about to marry hubby #3 just told me that this proves that gay marriage is a mistake. Huh? What is it about gay marriage that exposes so much hypocrisy among heterosexuals? Why are gay married couples held to a higher standard than straight couples? Oh yeah, because it's so easy for us to hate people we perceive as "different", while glossing over our own faults and foibles.

Get over the hate, people. Gays pay taxes, too (actually, a bit more than average). Last I checked, most of them in this country are also American citizens. Perhaps we should start teaching our kids the Golden Rule again, since we've clearly forgotten its meaning.

[IRepTheKing]

I agree we should get rid of gay hatred, but you chose the Golden Rule...? What about the rest of the scripts? The ones about homsexuality? Do we skip those?

[tr24]

Of course, we skip those. They aren't "inclusive."

(Oh and here comes the slavery, fabric blends, etc. red herring.)

[erinker]

Yes, you skip those. The same way you skip the ones about never mixing your fabrics and not eating pigs and slavery and handing your daughters over to be r @ ped by an angry mob. The Bible has ALWAYS been pick and choose for everyone. It has to be. Way too many contradictions not to be. I don't think it is unreasonable to request people start skipping the hate-filled and exclusionary ones.

[amaycatbaker]

The bible only says a man can't lay with man, I have never read where a wo-man can't lay with another woman.

Leave these two alone, marriage should be for everyone, including man with man. So honestly, divorce should be for everyone too.

[PlaceboStudman]

Yes we should skip those. The same way that Republicans skip over the tiny little fact that, by today's standards, Jesus, their Lord and Savior would be considered an inclusive Liberal Progressive

[complice]

What about the ones which admonish us to stay away from shellfish and mixed-fiber garments? Are we to suddenly dispense with those, too?

Wait, what's that? It's only a mortal sin if you happen to find it strange or it has that certain "ick" factor, right? Just another path etic, caffeteria-style "Chri stian" picking and choosing which biblical laws he or she wants to follow according to how easily they bend to fit your needs/wishes.

[twogunmojo]

as for my opinions...i am an expert on them...but i find the comments by bob ostertag to be honest and forthright....some of you could benefit from reading his blogs about why gay marriage is the wrong issue....he is not sure of why gays want to marry either....

[dutchman]

"he is not sure of why gays want to marry either...."

1) to be treated fairly.
2) shouldn't the question really be "why would anyone want to get married?"

Apart from their choice a partner, gays are no different than heterosexuals. If you don't agree, well, you just may be a homophobe. Which wouldn't really bother me if you and your ilk weren't trying so hard to take the rights you enjoy away from the 10% or so of our population that - even though they pay taxes, just like you me, prefer the company of members of the same sex.

Please learn some tolerance. We'll all be better off.

[kissmygrits]

Ditto, dutchman.

[twogunmojo]

try this one...lets say that embryos are involved...how do you determine paternity....what if one woman doesn't want to be forced into child support after the fact...what if one wants to exercise her right to abortion against the will of the other woman...whose reproductive rights come first when you have two women involved...and in which both may have contributed eggs for the un-named sperm donor to fertilize...how is that not a genetic nightmare....and don't tell me that this has been decided already...i don't recall lesbians fighting it out in court over whose womb is more important....

[omo]

There are a LOT of issues involving children and custody which the gay marriage brigade does not want to even think about because it is much more complex than it appears on the surface. I also have serious concerns about the role modeling of same sex behavior in the intimacy of a family setting where children are being raised. This will get me labeled a bigoted homophobe here. BUT. My husband, as a teenager, was in a man boy 'love' relationship with a man who was also in a relationship with his father (my future father in law). This will of course be totally denounced as 'not gay' etc. etc. Whatever.

My point is, from an energetic perspective, to me there is not that much difference between the act and the idea. I am not saying that most gay male couples would physically molest a teenage son.
I do not get however why it is okay for the adults in this situation (one of whom could very well be the child's biological father) to role model this exact same behavior with each other very openly in
the family home. To me this constitutes mental molestation. Sorry but that's just the way I see it.

[dutchman]

Good thing you can't make up the rules all by yourself.

[tr24]

Good point omo! I think we get so lost in the "inclusiveness" and "equality" mantra that believes everyone should be able to get married, that we lose sight of the potential problems down the road. With gay marriage the family structure essential disintegrates and what is left is some faux nuclear family with unforeseen effects on the children (God forbid).

[LauraD]

Sorry, but there are no issues regarding children that gay couples would have to deal with re:divorce that straight couples don't have to deal with re:divorce.

Here's a newsflash for you: It doesn't matter what concerns you have, because it isn't any of your business. The sooner you realize that, the better off you will be.

[PlaceboStudman]

One fight at a time...patience and perserverence win out in the end. The journey of Humanity is not a sprint, it is a marathon.

[ReelBusy]

Now that's equality!

[FZliveson]

My lesbian "sister-in-law" told me this joke:
Q) What does a lesbian bring with her on the second date?
A) A U-Haul

Just goes to show that FEEEEEELINGS are among the worst reasons to
hook-up and play house together.

[dutchman]

Isn't love a feeling? Why get married if not for love? There are few things sadder in life than a loveless marriage, no matter that the sexual orientation of those involved.

[dutchman]

sorry - that's "what" not "that"

[PlaceboStudman]

I think that may be one of the points that no one is considering. People want to throw out the idea of "sanctity" of marriage, and yet, in many cultures, including many Christian cultures, marriage is not about love. It is about property exchange and the beneficial effects of combining family and property. That is why so many cultures still, to this day, retain the ideas of arranged marriages and dowry.

There is nothing less sanctimonious than marriage for the sake of property. And the government has no right or real obligation to condone marriage, heterosexual or homosexual.

[FZliveson]

"Love" is a transient illusion created by biochemistry.....a swirling dance of dopamine, nor-epinephrine, endorphins and several other natural narcotics the body produces to create a state where two humanoids will interact physically, producing offspring, thus perpetuating the species. Ask any couple who has been married for 25 years or more how much the feeling of love kept them together, as opposed to their commitment to see their marriage through to the end. The feelings of "love" are bonuses. The rational foundations for marriage are far more critical. They are, education, religious preference, temperament,
parents relationship, occupation, health, occupation, hobbies, benevolence and more.
The "love" a couple FEEEEELS when they meet and engage physically bears very little resemblance to the love they have after being together for a couple decades.

[FZliveson]

Smith808
You say: "Equality affords the "opportunity," not the "promise" of a lifelong commitment."

In order for "Commitment" to be a commitment, it must be honored.
A "commitment" is the deepest promise possible, short of "covenant."
People who "commit" to live together " 'til death do us part" and who then divorce,
for reasons other than physical abuse or criminal activity by one partner,
whilst having young children (birth to 18 years of age) are weak hedonistic
narcissistic children, who must bear great responsibility for the downfall of the family
structure.

There is more commitment and accountability in a car rental agreement than a marriage.

[Judyisacutie]

Welcome to the world of marriage.

[BlackYowe]

Four years is a very very short marriage. It's pretty pathetic. Having been married myself for almost 29 years I think its shameful people get married if they can make a commitment that will last.

[BlackYowe]

That should say "Can't"

[JSDKoeln]

Well.. in theory I absolutely agree with you. But as in more than 50% of heterosexual marriages, 5 years is about the limit for Marriage no. 1.

I am married (the German form of gay marriage) for almost 3 years now. I hope WE last 29 years. I think we have a good shot since we both had long term relationships before and we're not in denial about the work it takes to sustain a relationship through the years. We look at the rights granted to us as an extreme privilege. The vows we took really meant something to us. This is bigger than only one of us. We take this very seriously.

But, honestly, the gay marriage thing is so new... there are not many role models for us to follow. We have to become the role models for future generations. The relationships between same-sex partners ARE different than heterosexuals. There is a different energy than that of a male-female relationship. It will take some work for us to figure this all out. But, it seems like we're off to a good start... there will always be failures in any new endeavor.

[dutchman]

Who are you to judge? People are people, and people change.

In a sense, I do agree with you (there are only a handful of married couples I can think of that I envy), and yet most of my married friends (I'm in my 40s) seem to be VERY envious of the life my girlfriend I and lead. We don't want kids (actually, we can't), and we have an agreement that if either one of us loses interest, then it's no harm, no foul, and have a great life. We're both mature enough (at least in this one regard) to know that our relationship has to be based on mutual love, trust and respect, and not simply be bound by some legal contract.

But don't let me dissuade anyone, gay or straight, from getting married. If that's your choice, then I wish you all the happiness in the world. To do anything else wouldn't be very Christian of me.

[omo]

Please understand : It's DIFFERENT when children are involved !

[Busbydav]

My straight friend told me last night that she was married before in her late 20's. She knew him for 3 months before the wedding and it lasted a whopping 6 weeks

[omo]

My mother was also married in her late twenties. She had known my father for about three months. That was in 1950. They are still married. To each other.

[PlaceboStudman]

Absolutely agree with you. Luckily for us, divorce statistics, at or over 50% only currently represent heterosexual marriage

[LogicCircuit]

what do you know ... gay people are just like hetro people after all ...

[BlackYowe]

We don't like the same things so we are different. I like men and I like being married. Lesbians like playing the field and don't like men. That isn't the same now is it?

[superlive]

Straight men don't like playing the field? How would you explain the NBA or the US Senate for that matter?

[dutchman]

How do you know that lesbians prefer playing the field in any different proportion than straight men or even straight women? Have you done a census? Have you posted a peer reviewed study?

Try being tolerant of gays. It's really not that hard, and you'll find that carrying around less hate for others does wonders for your outlook on life.

[dutchman]

I'm tolerant and you're not, even though we're both (apparently in your case, since I don't know you) straight. That isn't the same now, is it?

[redfrog]

Drivel. I like some men just fine and I am in a 20+ year relationship with a woman I would marry in a heartbeat. I am not unique in the world you breezily think you know anything about.

[LauraD]

"Lesbians like playing the field and don't like men."

Are you r.e.t.a.r.d.e.d? Lesbians like playing the field? What a stupid thing to say! You have GOT to be joking.

[Smith808]

Equality affords the "opportunity," not the "promise" of a lifelong commitment. What happens next is all up to us - success or failure should never prompt us to question the right to marry in the first place (particularly when it means to exclude an entire class of people).

I wish them the best - they'll need it.

[dutchman]

Beautifully put.

[twogunmojo]

how nasty do you think this fight will get....will one of them be forced to pay alimony in order to keep the other in the gay lifestyle to which they have become accustomed.....what if one of them has decided that they are not as gay as they thought and have begun a hetero relationship....and what about the kids.....do they have kids....and what if they have frozen embryos...who takes possession of them....its not as simple as "they are just like us"

[maribelle1963]

All those issues are solved in a divorce court, issue by issue, just like straight people. (PS some guy divorcing his wife tried to get his KIDNEY BACK THAT HE DONATED TO HER years ago so I don't know if I'd be holding up straight people's divorces as some kind of standard.)

[twogunmojo]

all but the issue of frozen embryos....did they both contribute eggs....did they have one sperm donor or more than one...were they planning to include the father or fathers in the childs life...i smell precedent.....

[GingerB]

You could have every one of those situations in a hetero divorce. Divorce usually isn't simple. This one probably won't be either.

[twogunmojo]

women typically earn less than men....do you think it is possible that one of them is going to scream sexism/descrimination at the first sign of alimony....will she be treated as the lesbian of the house or will she be treated as the woman of the house...

[Laura Mendoza]

the gays is comin'! oh noes!!!111!!!!

Get over yourselves, you christo-fascist hypocrites. I recall that Larry Craig tap tap tapping. It seems like we always have to hear this outcry from you people, and then WHAMO one of your leaders is busted for gay porn, raping a child, tip tip tapping on the door of an airport bathroom, etc. There's a whole website devoted to it.

Republican Sex Offenders. Every last one of them a good, god fearin' christian man who felt all morally superior to the rest of the country. uh huh.

If it weren't for you people, we wouldn't have the sex crimes we do. But you're all in an uproar over this? Take the logs out of your own eye before you try to remove a splinter from your neighbor.

I offer you that from JC himself.

[twogunmojo]

last time i checked it was the aclu that supported nambla....not the rnc...nice of you to assume facts not in evidence about me and my positions on the issues....why do gays want to get married anyway....as it exists now it is basically a christian concept....and you may not believe it but this nation tends toward jesus in a big way....i think that the reason that "gay marriage" will not be much of an issue is that most gays don't want to marry...it goes against the "free and open" lifestyle that young gay men prefer...i have no issue with civil unions that grant all of the "rights" that a marriage does....is it ok with you if i am married to my wife and in a civil union with my lover.....a real answer would be nice...not an attack.....

[erinker]

Yes, it is as simple as "they are just like like us. All those "issues" you mentioned - including children and the fate of frozen embryis - has already been brought to the court system with hetero couples. And why does it matter if one dates a man after a divorce? What does that have to do with anything??

[MonkeyBusinessIU]

I don't get why gay marriage is a big issue. Why would we want to keep gay people from being as miserable as the rest of us?

[GingerB]

Speak for yourself. Some of us have found wedded bliss and continue to enjoy it together even after multiple decades.

[BlackYowe]

Amen Ginger

[dutchman]

Good for you!! Really, that's great, given all the misery that marriage (straight or gay) has caused people. I know it can work (I guess you're proof), but it doesn't always, and divorce certainly shouldn't be used as an excuse to deny the right you and your hubby enjoy from the 10% of our population who pay their taxes just like you do.

[Laura Mendoza]

My point exactly. If they want the 50% batting average of us heteros in marriage, then why deprive them of it?

[joceeco]

You have spoken for me MonkeyBusiness! I still think that, "it is better for a man/ woman not to marry." The religious types will definitely disagree with me , but our favorite guy Paul stated this in the New Testament 1 Cor. 7:1-7. It is only for the burning desire to have sex in our hearts and pants that he states, we should get marry. I don't recall him mentioning anything about love.

[LauraD]

Yeah, but Paul was an arrogant SOB, so it's hard to put much stock in anything he had to say.

[bonum]

contrary to the religiousaholics, marriage is based on contract law. the "sanctity" concept, and it's only that, is based upon a group's perception of that contract hence church-based initiatives.

when are we going to separate state from church, and church from state, especially concerning contract law?

[tr24]

Good luck with that. What book are Presidents sworn in on, again?

[bonum]

thank you, tr24, you're right, many people have been conditioned in the USA to invoke a deity and/or place a hand on a perceived "sacred" book, as though that will make a difference.

personally, a person is either honorable and moral in one's statements, or that person is not, by invoking a deity or placing one's hand on a book, certainly is culturally relevant but not necessarily rational

[Mark Goodall]

The book of lies.

[erinker]

Actually, there is nothing that indicates they must be sworn in on anything. Most presidents choose The Bible for a whole host of reasons. I remember reading that Teddy Roosevelt was sworn in on the constitution but that may be wrong.,

[LauraD]

They are sworn in on whatever book they want, because it's not a requirement of the oath to be sworn in on any book at all. They could use nothing at all, or The Great Gatsby, or Harry Potter and The Half-Blood Prince (all of which have just as much fact as the other literary work to which you refer).

If you're going to make an argument, basing it in fact helps.

[carnelld]

Well, why don't the homo sexuals and lesbians just call what they do "contract law"?

[erinker]

For the same reason YOU don't want to.

[tr24]

Excellent point! If rights is all they desire, then terminology shouldn't matter, should it?

[bella]

Why is this news? Divorce occurs everyday in this country. The only reason this is a so-called headline is because these two people are gay. If it were a straight couple that had work so hard on marriage equality, it would have been a non-story. Just say'n.

[tr24]

The reason this is a headline because these two fought tooth and nail to get married and now look at them headed for divorce. So what was the reason for them getting married again?

[GingerB]

For whatever reason they saw fit. What business is it of your's? They're two consenting adults.

psst... heteros get divorced, too.

[maribelle1963]

They fought "tooth and nail" so that gays and lesbians have the rights of marriage and divorce laws. They won. Get over it.

[BlackYowe]

Maybe if they put their child first or put half as much effort into their marriage as they did in pushing Gay marriage they would still be together. Perhaps they are better fighters than lovers at any rate it is really telling I think. Selfishness is what breaks up marriages the most.

[erinker]

The reason for them getting married was to utilize their RIGHTS, the same as a hetero couple.

[dutchman]

To have the OPPORTUNITY to lead a happy, married life. There are no guarantees that it will work though, no matter what your sexual preference.

Honestly, if people put the same energy into improving the lot of others as they seem to put into denying to those they perceive as "different" the rights they themselves take for granted, the world would be a much better place.

[Pie7]

I remember hearing about, if only they were allow to marriage, there won't be any divorce amongst them. Now this helps us st8r people prove our case as to why we are against this type of marriage.

[GingerB]

Those were the voices in your head. See a shrink.

[maribelle1963]

>>if only they were allow to marriage, there won't be any divorce amongst them

No. That is patently false. No mainstream, reputable advocate argued that. In fact, divorce law protection is one of the things gays have been fighting for.

>>Now this helps us st8r people prove our case as to why we are against this type of >>marriage.

Straight people divorce every single day. This argument is a non-starter.

[Woodmist]

Not sure where you "heard" that nonsense but that's what it is. No one ever said there's be no divorce among gay people. First, that's delusional and secondly it's laughable. BTW, it doesn't help your straight bi...goted case at all. In fact using your insane logic because there are divorces in hetero marriages we should all be against that! That's how lame your argument is.

[joceeco]

I don't think tht anyone said that there would be no divorce amongst gays, but I do recall gay marriage advocates stating that gays tend to stay together longer than str8t folks, marriage just seems to bring out the worst in folks!

[BlackYowe]

It sure shows me that its a mere trophy for Gays because if you can't last more than 4 years you really don't give a rip about being married.