...I believed that when she promised to stay with him "till death do us part," she really meant it this time, unlike with that guy she married in Las Vegas.
If Republicans really want to protect the institution of marriage, and were not simply trying to ban gay marriage to use it as a wedge issue in the campaign, then they should prove their dedication to this cause by introducing the Defense of Britney's Marriage Act as the first order of business in the lame-duck session of Congress...
Don't hold your breath.
What we are more likely to be reading about as gay marriage gains momentum is the issue of gay divorce in states that do not officially recognize the marriage. Check out this story from the New York Times today.
Now that it’s clear, more or less, where gays can get hitched, what about getting un-hitched?
If, say, two women have “civil-unioned” in Vermont and then move to Wisconsin, can they legally untangle themselves in the place they now call home? Can a couple married in Massachusetts be put asunder in Ohio? The questions are new, so answers are in short supply, and court rulings have been mixed. In one dispute involving the collapse of a Vermont civil union, courts in Vermont and Virginia are on a collision course that could end in the Supreme Court.
Frederick Hertz, a lawyer in Oakland, Calif., who specializes in same-sex family law, said it could take five years to resolve some of the issues.
It's not hard to envision some on the anti-gay right supporting gay divorce while steadfastly opposing gay marriage. These days nothing would surprise me.