If you read the AP story that you link to or have kept up with Midwest court rulings, Iowa did dissolve a civil union between two women that they entered into in Vermont. Iowa's on the brink of gay marriage itself, so you might want to change your summary to reflect a state that won't, like Missouri.

Welcome to the Bathhouse California. You can check out any time you like, but you can never leave.

Still..what a mess! I am in disbelief that someone would have to move to a different state for an entire year just to get a divorce.

I wonder if this would develop into a pretty good legal challenge for not recognizing gay marriage. The states are supposed to give full faith and credit to each other's laws to prevent issues like this. Imagine needing a different driver's license for each state in order to drive there. If a state's restrictions prevent the ability for people to transport freely through the US (by forcing them to live in a certain state to get divorced) or restrictions begin to affect commerce, there may be some justification for requiring states to recognize a marriage, at least ironically for purposes of divorce. Then again if you recognize gay divorce, there doesn't seem to be much of a rational basis not to recognize the underlying marriage…hmm.

On the question of cross-recognition: are gay couples who have legally married in Spain, Belgium, the Netherlands, Canada or South Africa recognised as married in the US? Perhaps some of these countries have more lenient divorce laws than Massachusetts has?