Newsweek's article "The Right to Love - and Loss" pretends to fight for gay couples' "right" to divorce. Instead, it is simply a transparent ruse to fight for gay marriage. How else could gay divorce be legal unless gay marriage preceded it?
In a shining example of journalistic bias, reporter Eve Conant included seven different sources in favor of the government recognizing gay divorce (and hence, recognizing gay marriage) and quoted them 14 times in her article. Opponents, however, were represented by a single, bland quote - a two-sentence statement from the spokesman for the Texas Attorney General. "Under the Constitution and law of the State of Texas, marriage is an institution between one man and one woman. Thus the parties' arrangement from another state is not a marriage under Texas law and therefore cannot be terminated by divorce."
In her not-so-subtle circular argument, Conant called gay divorce a "legal nightmare" and blamed it on the 45 states that refuse to legalize gay marriage - a refusal, she said, that not only denies gays the happiness of marriage but locks them "forever in unhappy matrimony." Many gay advocates, she said, "see the two battles [for marriage and divorce] inextricably intertwined." She quoted Evan Wolfson, of the advocacy group Freedom to Marry, who said, "One of the reasons gay people, like others, need the freedom to marry is divorce. It's a system of guidelines and rules and structure to help people through a painful passage."
Conant devoted two long paragraphs to detailing the "nightmares" associated with gay divorce, whipping out phrases like "blocked ... access to family courts" and "severe ... tax consequences." Her conclusion was, of course, that such things could be prevented if "legal protections" - code phrase for legalizing gay marriage - were granted.
Conant failed to mention, however, that such "legal protections" have already been offered to voters in 31 states, and 31 times the answer has been no.
