FREEP St. Petersburg Times - 1-800-333-7505 x8735

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1051756/posts ^ | TODAY | David C. Osborne

[davidosborne]

** ACTION ALERT ** "WEDDING" Annoucement in St. Pete Times

FREEP St. Petersburg Times - 1-800-333-7505 x8735 ---- PRESS zero to speak with live person and tell them you disapprove of this....

[getmeouttaPalmBeachCounty_FL]

"We recognize that many people hold strong feelings and beliefs on both sides of this issue. And this publication will no doubt provoke criticism that we have gone too far - or not far enough. If you'd like to contact us, call Anne Glover, Senior Editor/ Readership, at 727/893-8562 or send an e-mail to glover@sptimes.com"

From another thread:
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1051756/posts

[MeekOneGOP]

FREEP St. Petersburg Times - 1-800-333-7505 x8735

Aw ! Isn't this sweet ?? < /sarcasm >

Mr. and Mr. Mavro-Schuler ...

FREEP St. Petersburg Times - 1-800-333-7505 x8735 ---- PRESS zero to speak with live person and tell them you disapprove of this....

Please let me know if you want ON or OFF my Florida or General Interest ping list!. . .don't be shy.

[verity]

Which one is the bride?

[MeekOneGOP]

Gee ! Do ya have pictures of the proud parents ? lol !

Seriously, I wonder what they think about this ? Or if they even know. (Bet they do know).

[MeekOneGOP]

LOL ! I was thinking that very thing when I was posting that !

[Alamo-Girl]

Thanks for the ping...

[xJones]

Criminy, it looks like the blushing bride is the one on the left, and I guess we should be thankful they weren't shown in a passionate embrace. But their parents! Both married pairs and had their names printed. You think they wanted that?? Freak Shows R Us, here we come.

[JulieRNR21]

I just spoke with the Wedding Page Editor and learned that the decision to include same sex wedding announcements was made by the Executive Editor of St. Petersburg's Times. Please (politely) express your disapproval via email here:

timespresident@sptimes.com

I made the point that these unions are not legal in Florida & that SPT should not be printing these announcements since the paper is printed in FL.

She retorted that they are legal in Canada, VT & MA. I corrected her on MA and said that it was a ruling by the MA SC that is has not yet been acted on by the MA legislature.

She said that they have been getting both pro & con feedback but would not reveal the numbers.

I told her I found the announcement personally offensive and therefore would not be having the paper in my home again. She was sorry that I felt that way but said that the 'couple' in the announcement is 'very happy' that it was printed.

I responded that I believed that the paper was putting the 'happiness' of one couple above the concerns of the majority of its readers. I added that I believed their decision would ultimately hurt the newspaper's subscription circulation.

I urge you all to call:

1-800-333-7505 x8735 and then press 'zero' (operator) to get a live person....then ask to speak to the Wedding Announcement Editor.

Let's make ourselves heard on this issue!

[Texagirl4W]

Now you've done it. Gone and ruined my lunch. UGGGGG

[MeekOneGOP]

Aw, but they're SOOooo happy, didn't you see ? (post #28). hehe !

I owe ya a lunch ! :O)

[MindBender26]

Ann Glover, senior editor is now taking calls on this issue.

Questions for her.

What was the news value that caused one out-of-country wedding to be newsworthy enough to be covered in the paper?

A person's "sexual identity" is a very private issue, as is the "sexual identity" of one's family members. Did the St. Pete Times obtain the permission of all family members named before they named them in the story.

Was this printed more for the newsworthiness of the people involved, or more for the shock value of the event and its ramifications.

Since the article announces an event, and implies follow-on conduct, that many Times readers find objectionable, especially when it is exposed to their children, did the Times print any warning notice to readers, such as the notice we see before television airs a morally questionable program.

Did any of the people making the decision to run this story have a personal interest in it, as in are they lesbian or gay? Were readers advised of this? Should readers have been advised of this potential conflict of interest?

Since the Times has demonstrated a willingness to publicize overseas activities that are illegal in Florida, will the Times now take an advertisement for NAMBLA websites, Neo Nazi group websites, or will they be willing to publicize NAMBLA meetings in their "Community Calender" section?

The Times routinely asks for, and occasionally even sues for access to records of meetings that lead to important decisions regarding Floridians. Will the Times release the minutes of meetings that led to the decision to run this announcement?

[JulieRNR21]

Good questions......hope you asked her!

[MindBender26]

I asked. She hissed.

[MindBender26]

I asked. She hissed.

PS: ....and I was ever so polite!!!

[Beowulf]

Thanks for the ping.

Once again the St. Pete Times proves itself even unworthy of bird cage lining.

[Paul Atreides]

I literally thought the guy on the right was a young Howard Dean.

[MeekOneGOP]

I literally thought the guy on the right was a young Howard Dean.

LOL ! Some of his supporters ...

Dykes for Dean

[Rainmist]

So ?

[GOPJ]

Why "marriage" only between a man and a woman? Or only between a woman and a woman, or a man and a man?

Why not a marriage between a man and his bird? Or a woman and her best friend, and her best friend's cat? And groups of swingers, longing for the right to enjoy spousal company health benefits, should they be forgotten?

The question is not "why," but "why not"?

Remember, people who love 50 casual strangers were probably born that way. Who are we to judge? Inquiring minds and all that...

[GOPJ]

Why "marriage" only between a man and a woman? Or only between a woman and a woman, or a man and a man?

Why not a marriage between a man and his bird? Or a woman and her best friend, and her best friend's cat? And groups of swingers, longing for the right to enjoy spousal company health benefits, should they be forgotten?

The question is not "why," but "why not"?

Remember, people who love 50 casual strangers were probably born that way. Who are we to judge? Inquiring minds and all that...