APPARENTLY … Submitting your wedding announcement to two small newspapers in rural Pennsylvania is sure to generate hate mail when the marriage listing is for two dudes.
apparently
Small Rural Towns Don’t Want Gay Weddings In Their Newspapers
Help make sure LGBTQ+ stories are being told...
We can't rely on mainstream media to tell our stories. That's why we don't lock Queerty articles behind a paywall. Will you support our mission with a contribution today?
Cancel anytime · Proudly LGBTQ+ owned and operated
Kasio
The more I read about homophobia, the more I want to work for the cause of gay rights.
Dabq
In a time when newspapers are not making a penny and closing up weekly? I saw an obituary in my local paper about a guy and they mentioned his husband as one of his survivors, and, I wonder how much hate mail will flow from that, especially since my state is one of those that bans gay marriage.
ShaunTom
I grew up right next to Oil City… I wasn’t out in middle school, and thankfully my family moved away before I reached high school. In “Pennsyltucky,” the kids hate you for being different, and the parents perpetuate that hate by reinforcing some twisted machismo version of christianity. It was (and is) a horrible region in which to live.
Ted B.
Ahh,yes. The old genteel description of Pennsylvania still applies; Philly and the Mainline in the southeast, Pittsburgh to the west…and Alabama in the middle.
AlwaysGay
I can relate to CJ’s story so much. He needs to hang in there and pursue an education. Education is the best defense. Heterosexuals are outsiders with prejudices to homosexuality. Heterosexuals are not your authority.
sal(the original)
This looks COOL!!thanks queerty
rick
you missed all the outrage over the elkhart truth of elkhart, indiana printing a marriage announcement for two men that are getting married in iowa. one of the men is from and has relatives living in elkhart. a local christian radio station decided to go off the deep end about it and start a crusade against the paper that went nowhere.
the paper printed a long editorial on why they printed the announcement and why it was no big deal.
hardmannyc
Not to minimize how fucked up people in that part of the world are (I know, I’m from near those parts), but this documentary was made a few years ago, right? Maybe things have changed (a bit).
JayPA
This is so absurd I could weep. And I’m not talking about the controversy over gay wedding announcements, I’m referring to the outrageous prejudice based on region. I grew up in western Pennsylvania, was totally out during my teenage years, and never experienced anything worse than what I’ve met in the cities. And then you wonder why those in Nowheresville vote for people like Sarah Palin and George Bush. They do it out of spite for those that look down their noses at them.
Ant Man
I live in rural Pennsylvania at the moment and I have to be in the closet. So in my opinion, no, rural PA hasn’t changed.
KyleR
This is similar to what happened in a Kansas City, Missouri paper. They printed a same sex marriage announcement and people went ape shit crazy. Everyone should be happy that someone found someone to spend their life with.
Jaroslaw
#8 Hardman – I don’t see how a few years could make much difference when the filmmaker said little had changed in TWENTY FIVE years…… but maybe. or is it “hopefully?”
youcanthandlethetruth
No matter how hard you try, you cannot force normal people to accept homosexual marriage as normal.
dgz
@youcanthandlethetruth:
you’re right. that’s like forcing stupid people to be good at math.
Jaroslaw
#13 & 14 yes you can. Slavery was legal and now it isn’t. And whoever disagrees (with ss marriage) philosophically can still do so, they can teach their children whatever they want, but from a legal standpoint, there is no reason to prohibit any adult from marrying ONE adult of their choice.
And as I have said before, leave religion out of it. Almost 50% of straight couples aren’t even marrying at all, opting to live together. SOOOOO.. if religious groups want to “save” marriage, they must outlaw divorce and require cohabitation to be illegal. Which is NOT even being dreamt about much less really pushed in the form of proposed legislation…. they are only focused on Gays. So how about some REAL truth for a change?
youcanthandlethetruth
@Jaroslaw: Comparisons between homosexuality and slavery are not just ridiculous, they are also odious and highly offensive to most African Americans.
Pretending that the whiny, self-pitying demands of homosexuals bear any similarity to the noble struggle of black Americans is the epitome of delusion.
And if you homos are so liberal and tolerant why would you want to restrict marriage to just ONE partner?
The truth is homosexuals don’t really care about marriage they just crave attention for their sad disorder.
Jaroslaw
#16 May the love of Jesus enlighten your brain! You must have the Devil in you because you are so stupid.
Why don’t you worry about all the straight people who are fornicating AND bringing children into the world and into their often unstable lives?
The government has no right to promote religion – which is what the Constitution says – Congress shall pass no law that establishes religion…… so people SHOULD be able to marry who they want.
I’m not suggesting marriage be limited to one person – although I think it is better that way since most people don’t seem to have time for more than one, but the concept here is EQUALITY. If you can marry the person of your choice then so can I.
As to comparing homosexuality to slavery, that is a debate you’re not going to get me in other than to make my point that slavery was legal and now it is not. Non-colored People in 1700 accepted owning slaves as normal and even their right! If you disagree with this you are more than stupid.
And you’ve been asked a number of times, WHY are you here? Go to church and pray for us and stop spouting all your stupidity here on a Gay website.
youcanthandlethetruth
If you want to quote the US Constitution then do so accurately:
“Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof”.
The truth is nobody is talking about establishing a religion such as the Church of England that the forefathers wanted to escape from.
The fact is no major world religion condones homosexual marriage, and plenty of non-religious Americans oppose it as well.
Nobody has an unlimited right to marry the person of choice, you cannot marry your mother or sister or your neighbour’s wife for example. And neither can I – that’s equality.
At least you backed off on the ridiculous and odious comparison with slavery.
Why am I here – why not? Don’t you tolerant homosexuals want to hear an opposing point of view instead of sitting around wallowing in self-pity and agreeing with each other?
Jaroslaw
I’m starting to wonder why I “enjoy” arguing with an idiot after agreeing with Andrew not to feed the trolls, which you are #18. I answer you so that a person not familiar with the topic or perhaps as knowledgeable will be able to read my answers and see the truth.
You are truly grasping at straws when you fuss about my quoting the Constitution because (A) I didn’t put quote marks around my sentence and (B) the meaning and understanding is perfectly clear as you showed yourself when you put the exact quote down.
I didn’t talk about establishing a religion either – what I said was there are no valid non-religious reason to prohibit same sex marriage or any dangers. They’ve had civil unions in Vermont for several years now and REAL marriage in Massachussetts for about 5 years and the sky hasn’t fallen.
WHY you think it is your business to prohibit who I marry is hard to figure out. If you DO think it is your business, then perhaps I should tell you who to marry or how many kids to have etc.
And you ignored the questions again about all the fornicating straight people who will never marry but cohabitate (who greatly outnumber us – aren’t millions of ummarried straight people fornicating left and right more dangerous than a few thousand homos?)
What did I back down on slavery? My initial sentence was 8 words long. “Slavery was legal and now it isn’t.” A moron should be able to understand what I was driving at, but then I’m speaking to YOU.
Stop putting words in my mouth, I don’t recall saying “unlimited choices of who to marry” – I said EQUALITY – you marry the one person of your choice and same for me. Within the usual exceptions of close blood relatives etc, but even that doesn’t apply – we’re not having children in the usual way anyhow so what is your point?
As to why you’re here, “why not” is not a reason. If you’re bored or just like to argue at least by saying that you’d be more honest.
BTW, since you want to argue etc. I’d like to hear a scientific rebuttal of the pheromone study/brain scan experiment in Sweden from you. As I said on another post, no fervent Christian has challenged that one yet; They always say they will but they don’t.
And finally, if you think Gays are so whiny and complaining about nothing, I suggest you walk through a rough blue collar neighborhood holding hands with a guy (or a same sex partner) and see what happens to you.
Jaroslaw
And for the millionth time (that is an expression since you live to read things literally)
what about prohibiting divorce and/or remarriage since presumably you want to “save” marriage by prohibiting SSM?
Jaroslaw
Oh, sorry – forgot – I don’t CARE if any major world religion condones same sex marriage. They don’t follow their OWN rules. Look at the priest boy sex scandal in the church of my birth! Look at all the wars etc. fostered by religion. gotta go they’re locking the building…