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

[AudsMom]

See everyone..­.just like normal people.

People are not as different and unique as they like to think. Everyone has the same core issues. Time for equality on ALL levels everyone..­.

[EgyptianMysterySchool]

I always said, "If the LBGT community is dumb enough to get married, then let them."

You get what you ask for. It's amazing how many perfectly good relationships are ruined by the chains of marriage. What I don't get is this, for a community that is, by-in-large, non-religious why are they fighting so hard to take part in a religious ceremony?

To all of my LBGT friends out there let me pass on a little wisdom I learned from being married - you're commitment to each other makes you married, not the paper, not the ceremony, not the title, not the government, not the priest, your commitments.

This couple fought so hard to be recognized as married by the government that they didn't realize everything good about marriage they already had (except the legal/tax/insurance issues). Labels are for food not people - fight for rights, not labels.

But who am I to tell you what to do.

[PlaceboStudman]

It may have a lot to do with the fact that historically, and universally, marriage has not been a religious ceremony. It has been a legal contract that has much more to do with commerce and the redistribution of goods than it ever did with religion or love.

The fight here is about the right to determine our own destiny, and be allowed to define our relationship as we please. If we want to marry, we should be allowed to marry. If we then decide we want or need a divorce, that comes with the territory. Or if we simply want to cohabitate as a long term loving couple, then we want that too, without fear of being labelled or discriminated against.

The point is, until we have all the same basic laws and priveledges that every other human being or couple does, we are forced to live under the control and scrutiny of others and have no real ability to define ourselves or our relationship publicly.

[LauraD]

If I could become a fan twice, I totally would.

[EgyptianMysterySchool]

We're in agreement - if you want to be married, get married and everyone should have equal rights. However, historically marriage is a religious ceremony - please see my above reply.

[LauraD]

Marriage is not a religious ceremony unless you choose to make it so. It is a legal institution to which religious ceremony can be attached. But the religious ceremony isn't legally binding. You still have to go to the court house and get the license first.

What a strange fallacy that keeps getting perpetuated. Millions of couples were married by government officials (judges, magistrates, etc), my husband and I being one of them.

"But who am I to tell you what to do."

Precisely.

[EgyptianMysterySchool]

I don't agree that marriage is historically a legal contract. A civil marriage like yours wasn't even a possibility until they were enacted in Germany in 1875. Historically the first legal act of marriage was instituted by John Calvin (the protestant reformationist) when he enacted the Marriage Ordinance of Geneva requiring state recognition and church consecration. After that in Wales the Marriage Act of 1753 put an end to clandestine marriages by stating all marriages had to be done in front of an Anglican priest.

So if you do the research you'll see marriage was only brought into the legal realm in order to enforce it's religious affiliation. So I say again, marriage is a religious ceremony that has only been recently made into a legal entity. The fact that they designate your marriage as a "civil" marriage means that it's being qualified separately from the historical marriage.

Again, I don't care. Everyone should have equal rights. If you read my post carefully you would see that my beef is w/ marriage no matter who's involved. The only reason I got married is so my pregnant wife could be covered by my insurance. We had a friend w/ a Doctorate of Divinity sign the papers and we turned it in. It meant nothing to us, we were husband and wife before and husband and wife after. My point was that they had each other and that's what marriage truly is, it's a commitment between two people.

[Shrinath]

The ridiculous amount of money spent on Prop 8 could have easily been spent on many other worthy causes. And now more time, effort and money will have to be spent to reverse that. When are we going to live and let other live the they choose to? Why do we have to keep forcing the moralities on others?

Let us focus on human betterment. And also try to make the Rethuglican's understand that it is a pluralistic society. Peace out!

[ReallyMe]

[PlaceboStudman]

When are we going to live and let other live the they choose to?

As soon as we, the society excise the gangrenous limbs of religion from our legal system and start looking at marriage, divorce, children, etc from a logical, rational perspective, not a religious one

Why do we have to keep forcing the moralities on others?

The very purpose of "morality" is to force one's thoughts, views, and opinions on others. To turn us all into lemmings who follow their fearless leader into the abyss. Morality is intended to control people, and force them to change their thoughts, views and opinions based on emotional blackmail, because people realized a long time ago that it was easier to manipulate emotions than it is to manipulate rational thought

[LauraD]

And with that, I am a fan.

[dm10003]

soon, marriage and divorce among gays and lesbians will be non-news because it will be as normal as marriage and divorce among str8s.

[tr24]

Pure horse pucky...

[Mark Goodall]

tr24, you are so utterly homosexual.

[erinker]

You're right, dm. It will be. And all these people who fought so hard against it will look as silly and irrelevent as all the people who fought against overturning of interracial marriage laws.

[gifu]

No more yanky my wanky, the Donger need food......­.

[tr24]

LMAO...I guess this is another gay marriage misnomer out the window.

[Pie7]

Hi tr24, it's me pie.

[tr24]

Hi Pie! I missed you! You may have been gone, but definitely not forgotten. I'll go ahead and become a fan.:)

[Nile Liszt]

Meanwhile, some GOOD news from the State of New York.

http://abcnews.go.com/US/wireStory?id=6799087

[GingerB]

Hooray!

[getalong]

Irony!

... well, not really. It happens all the time.

Just look at Burt and Loni.

[PoliticalRockChick]

They realize marriage is all not cracked up to be for both heterosexuals and gays.

[Manny Otiko]

Straight people were the first to bastardize marriage with all their philandering and divorces. Gay people are proving they are just as flighty.

[dm10003]

hence, "equal" rights, rather than "special" rights.

[fentondem]

WELL, WELL I dont know why anyone is surprised, GUESS WHAT!? gay folks are just like straight folks

[carnelld]

Ah........­what are two women to do with each other?....­....it's gotta be boring after a while?

[slaxx]

how would you know?

[rooks]

Made me chuckle.

[pickwickianmom]

I know. My face got sort of red.

[topkatnc]

You don't get out much do you ?

[erinker]

Why would it be any more boring than being with the same man for 20 years? The same equipment is the same equipment.

[Nanaama]

Good question.G­enerally latest in two years it is " dead in the bed " as they say. Lots of lesbians in their desperation resort to treating themselves with testosterone to boost their sexual drive.Howe­ver this does not help matters as the threshold for sexual gratification without proper intercourse is raised so much so that frustration is almost unavoidabl­e.The men do not usually have this problem.

[marythegr8]

Marriage is a truly sacred thing. Just like being in a loving relationship is a truly sacred thing. But there is a difference. For one thing, Marriage is about more than just two people. No matter what we like to think. It includes family, children, community, government. There are benefits to marriage and consequences to divorce, and vice versa. For people to believe that marriage is solely about two people are living in a simplified fairy tale world. Yes, two people in a loving relationship is subset of Marriage as a whole.

[C0Y0TE2]

excellent idealism. Do you have a more realistic POV of marriage also?

[BeltwayInsider]

Exactly - like Del Martin and Phyllis Lyon...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Del_Martin_and_Phyllis_Lyon

[dm10003]

to quote homer simpson, "you take FOREVER to say NOTHING".

[dutchman]

LOL! Homerisms are so helpful at times like this.

[erinker]

What's your point???

[pickwickianmom]

I happen to agree with you, but I think marriage can be the same sacred institution if the couple is same-sex. But, yes, marriage is bigger than two people. I think that is why same-sex couples are fighting so hard for the right to marry. It's special.

[scoochman]

I don't care if you are gay or straight - marriage is not a fling, it is a FOREVER commitment! And commitment is the key word - divorce cannot be an option. It's just an easy way out. These two are a joke for fighting for something and not actually following through on it.

[C0Y0TE2]

Marriage is just a word for exclusive f**king access.

[stayinsouth1981]

OH, get over it. People discover that they are not the best for each other. We change, we grow, we grow apart. Sometimes, no matter what you do, you are better off DIVORCING.­.

Who said anything is for ever?

[jamie461]

"Till death do us part" sounds pretty much like forever. Just sayin'...

[huffnpuffn]

No surprise at the press this is going to generate, and rightly so. For the very people who fought so hard for this right to pi$s on it so freely is absurd. If marriage isn't intended to be permanent, then it may as well be dating.

Foot, meet high caliber munition.

[Paul Peete - Huffpost Blogger]

That they were denied the right initially is the story. Who are you to say that they didn't have good intentions initially? Just as any married couple soon learns, a lot changes when the rings are exchanged.

[C0Y0TE2]

Thus marriage is a frivolous thing