Sheesh! Lesbian couple Margaret Chambers and Cassandra Ormiston's divorce proceedings are taking longer than their marriage! And the process has been just as trying, especially for perpetually confused judges!

The story began back in 2004, when the Rhode Island-based duo took a trip to Massachusetts and tied the proverbial knot. But, as happens, things didn't work out as planned, so the ladies filed for a divorce. Unfortunately, a state statute defines marriage as between a man and a woman and a family court denied their divorce.

Desperate to be single again, the gals appealed the ruling - and the case continues to test constitutional boundaries…

CONTINUED »

Margaret Chambers and Cassandra Ormiston remain unhappily married. Rhode Island's Supreme Court ruled 3-2 today not to dissolve the couples 2004 marriage:

[The Court] said the state’s family court lacks the authority to grant the divorce of a same-sex couple.

Cassandra Ormiston and Margaret Chambers wed in Massachusetts in 2004 after that state became the first to legalize same-sex marriages. The couple filed for divorce last year in Rhode Island, where they both live.

Perhaps the ladies should consider moving to Massachusetts for a few months.

• Jennifer Lopez popped over to David Letterman's Late Show to announce she's pregnant with a leather baby.

• Jeanne Phillips aka Dr. Abby supports gay nuptials: "I believe if two people want to commit to each other, God bless 'em. That is the highest form of commitment, for heaven's sake."

• Romney v. Giuliani over taxes. Tonight's debates should be interesting…

CONTINUED »

Thirty Rhode Island-based queer couples gathered in Massachusetts this weekend to celebrate the state's pro-gay marriage laws.

Massachusetts' high court ruled last year that their laws do not restrict Rhode Island residents from taking advantage of the state's gay marriage legislation.

Boston Globe explains:

Dozens of gay marriage supporters met at the Statehouse to mark the one year anniversary of a court decision that allowed them to marry in Massachusetts, and to ask for the same right in Rhode Island.
…
Last year, a Superior Court judge in Massachusetts ruled that nothing in that state's laws prevents gay couples in Rhode Island from marrying across the border.

Perhaps Rhode Island's legislators will be inspired by all these shiny, happy gay people.

• The number one reason why men shower after sex:

…Men are 0-to-60 machines, baby, and we can stop on a dime. Two seconds before orgasm, we might savor the thought of belly flopping in a pool of love juices, but two seconds afterward, lust plummets and we just feel … well, sticky.

Until the "love juices" dry. Then we feel crusty.

• National gay groups call on Broward County Commission to take action against Fort Lauderdale's anti-gay mayor, Jim Naugle.

• Overzealous donkey needs to learn some sexual manners.

CONTINUED »

Cassandra Ormiston and Margaret Chambers' impending divorce takes center stage again this week, as the Rhode Island Supreme Court has ruled that a family court can hear the queer couple's case. The once-loving ladies married in Massachusetts in 2004, during the brief months before former Governor Mitt Romney helped pass a law invalidating out-of-stater's same-sex nuptials.

Unfortunately, the ladies called it quits after heading back to their home state and filed for divorce. A family court judge, the brilliantly named Jeremiah S. Jeremiah Jr, couldn't take the backdoor judicial pressure and passed the case on to the Supreme Court.

The Court originally sent the case back to JSJ Jr., but has now agreed to hear the case only to answer this pressing question:

May the Family Court properly recognize, for the purpose of entertaining a divorce petition, the marriage of two persons of the same sex who were purportedly married in another state?

The Supreme Court will answer that very query on August 1. The Court also makes clear that this decision does not decide whether or not the state will legalize gay marriage. That's quite the disclaimer, especially considering Attorney General Patrick Lynch's recent vow to legalize Massachusetts' gay vows.

R.I. court to rule on same-sex marriage [The Providence Journal]

The confusing case of gay marriage gets even more queer today. And, like so many marriage dramas, this story begins in Massachusetts.

As you know, Massachusetts passed gay marriages back in 2004. Not one for so-called sinners, then-Governor Mitt Romney reminded lawmakers of a 1913 law which prohibited out-of-state visitors from marrying in Massachusetts. Unless, of course, their state would honor the marriage.

While some law-types fell into line, Judge Thomas E. Connolly ruled in favor of a contesting couple, saying that if a state doesn't explicitly bar gay marriage, then a couple's nuptials are legal.

One of the pair hails from New York, which is where things get really interesting…

CONTINUED »

There's no case too small for Rhode Island Attorney General Patrick Lynch. The handsome lawyer has made it his mission to stop Paul O'Rourke: a man who can't seem to stop yelling threatening profanities at his gay neighbors.

O'Rourke's very vocal hatred of the homos even got him arrested last month for disorderly conduct. Apparently O'Rourke just couldn't get enough, leading Lynch to step in. Rhode Island Fox affiliate, WPRI reports:

Attorney General Patrick Lynch seeks a court order to stop a man from harassing and threatening his gay neighbors. Paul O'Rourke is accused in a civil rights complaint of threatening to kill a gay couple who lives across the street from him in Warwick.

He also allegedly shouted profanities and anti-gay epithets at them. O'Rourke was arrested last month and charged with disorderly conduct after police say he threatened to kill the men. He was served with the civil rights complaint yesterday. O'Rourke faces a maximum fine of five-thousand dollars.

This isn't the first time Lynch has thrown himself in the middle of gay drama: the 42-year old attorney general recently released a statement saying his state should honor Massachusetts-blessed gay marriages. This man may be our new hetero hero.

Rhode Island Attorney General Patrick Lynch says his tiny state should recognize Massachusetts gay marriage. The state already extends partner benefits to partners of state workers and their constitution bans discrimination based on sexual orientation. Thus, Lynch says, there's no reason why they should uphold Massachusetts endorsed nups. MSNBC reports:

A letter dated yesterday from Lynch says Rhode Island prohibits discrimination based on sexual orientation and also extends benefits such as health insurance to domestic partners of state employees.

And because there’s no Rhode Island law banning gay marriage — Lynch says there’s no reason to deny recognition of same-sex unions performed in Massachusetts.

Hmmm, Rhode Island's looking more and more appealing…

Yesterday, two lesbians had their day in court. Arguing in front of a Massachusetts Superior Court Judge Thomas Connolly, Wendy Becker and Mary Norton made their case on why they should be allowed to marry in the state even though they are Rhode Island residents.

At hand is a "rarely enforced" 1913 Massachusetts law that bars couples from getting married in Massachusetts if their home state prohibits them from getting married. Becker and Norton argue Rhode Island's statutes not expressly ban gay marriage. Massachusetts Assistant Attorney General Peter Sacks, meanwhile, pointed to Rhode Island's marriage laws, which establish a union as the joining together of a "male party" and a "female party."

Judge Connolly's decision isn't expected for a few weeks. Becker and Norton have been together for 18 years (and have two children together); waiting for the decision might feel like 18 more.

Gay pair asking to be wed in Mass. say no ban in R.I. [Boston Globe]

Copy/Paste this code to post on your blog!

Much love to Queerty's spankalicious reader Art for sending in photos from Rhode Island's gay pride event!