[MeekOneGOP]

Oh, great !! The DMN is just GIDDY over this, aren't they? They are even more LIBERAL than I thought. I bet that CEO is gay or has gay buddies, too.

I guess they just didn't get the memo ! Same sex unions are NOT recognized in the state of Texas !!

barf alert!:

Oh, Gee Bruce ! I just can't
WAIT to see our picture in the
Dallas Morning News !!

[Clara Lou]

This is positively putrid-- an utter abomination. Gee, let's open the paper and see pictures of gay men/lesbians pretending to be a married couple. AWK!
I'd like to have the satisfaction of discontinuing my subscription to the DMN, but I don't take the rag.

[Sam Cree]

This is weird, IMO.

I know there have been times in the past when homosexuality has been generally accepted, ancient Greece, I guess is the instance I'm thinking of.

But I have a question. Do you think that even in ancient Greece, homosexual *marriage* was accepted and a part of everday life?

[Clara Lou]

And another thing: I just bet the Houston Chronicle isn't going to want to be left behind by the DMN. That's fine. That's a subscription that I can and will drop.

[capt. norm]

I guess the Dallas Morning News is determine to win the "How Liberal can you Possibly Get?" contest.

[chachacha]

It's enough to make one VOMIT!

[Cicero]

The NY Times is basically a homosexual paper, so it wasn't too surprising when they changed their policy. What I wonder is what it will do to revenue streams if they keep it up. Announcing your daughter's marriage is a joyous and sacred occasion for most people. Will the parents of the bride want to pay good money to make these announcements if the adjoining column announces the marriage of Bruce and Bruce complete with a picture like the one above?

Would you want your children's weddings to be announced via posters on the local whorehouse?

[sweetliberty]

Does anybody else think that if these people keep imposing their disgusting behavior on decent people that we will start seeing a rise in "hate crimes?" I think the majority of people in this country have a live and let live philosophy, but at the point where fag rights start restricting our rights, especially when the exercise of their so-called rights goes against the laws of God and nature, it may just be the last straw for some. I mean, no respectable person wants to have to explain to their 5 year olds why those two men are slobbering all over each other.

[narses]

A ping for the Catholic Caucus. Perhaps a letters to the editor campaign would be in order?

[Mr. K]

When is some enterprising straight couple going to demand equal rights and a FREE announcement (or threaten a discrimination lawsuit hee hee hee)

Libs are so stupid

[First Amendment]

. "We want people to know, 'Hey, we're just like you. We've got a house, we've got a job, we have pets, we pay bills.' "

No, you're not just like "us". My husband is a man and I am a woman. Major difference.

Vanessa Benavides and Amy Davis, two Dallas attorneys who had a black-tie commitment ceremony in Dallas on June 14, are also buying an announcement. The couple also got married in Canada on June 23, and Ms. Davis took the name Benavides.

Weird - feminists used to say they hated the wife taking her husband's name (or even marrying a man) since it was submitting to evil patriarchy. Which one is representing the evil man? Or maybe both were in tuxedos?

The paper's criteria for publishing an announcement are that the ceremony takes place in public, and that somebody officiates.

Is a bathhouse public, and one of the anonymous gang can officiate?

[DallasMike]

I am so ashamed to be from Dallas.

[varon]

We've got a house, we've got a job, we have pets., we pay bills.' "

Sad to say but in some cases their "pets" are adopted children!

[DallasMike]

To: amckenzie@dallasnews.com

cc: PMaples@dallasnews.com

Dear Ms. McKenzie,

 

These announcements are a logical step only if the DMN wants to lose market penetration of readers at an faster pace than it is now.

 

First of all, same-sex unions are not legal in Texas, so why recognize them? Why not have announcements for a woman marrying 3 men, a man marrying a barnyard animal, or a man marrying a little boy? Don't laugh -- all 3 situations have groups of supporters in this country.

10 years ago, the idea of the DMN recognizing gay marriages would have been unthinkable. Now the DMN is clamoring to be just like the New York Times -- especially in their biased reporting of the news. The DMN should be more careful of who it tries to emulate. You've basically chosen the Eddie Haskell of reporting as your role model.

 

Second, while the DMN has always been positively giddy about "gay rights" -- do a Nexis search on Cathedral of Hope for the DMN if you don't believe me -- its readers are not so inclined. Many readers want to see the facts reported and don't care to have the DMN continue to couch editorials under the guise of news. That's why readership isn't growing at the same rate as the population.

 

Third, thank heavens for the internet and talk radio. Now we're no longer limited to just the news that the DMN decides to report.

 

Best regards,

 

-Michael McCullough

 Dallas, Texas

[dc-zoo]

DMN must approve that they're "F'n Aholes". Literally speaking.

[McLynnan]

Remember the good old days when The Dallas Morning News was conservative? Maybe I'm dating myself. Do I understand this to say that heterosexual couples must pay for engagement/wedding announcements, but gay couples get free space? If so, I see a lawsuit on the horizon.

[Jhoffa_]

Ick!

Seldom does a photo leave the viewer feeling as unclean as the one you posted.

Eww.. Geez, my skin is crawling.

[AUH2OY2K]

I wonder if the NYT and Dallas rag will publish polygamous unions since they have both a greater religious and historical basis. Did I say religious? Sorry, nevermind.

[altura]

Actually, I believe your headline contains a mistake.

The News will be charging for the gay union items, just as they charge for other marriage, engagement announcements, etc.

They even charge now for obituaries.

[LibertarianLiz]

Yesterday I pulled my mail out of the box and there was a large post-card type piece from Naturalizer shoes. I haven't bought anything from them for about a year or more so they were sending me a notice and some percentage off my next purchase or something.

Any-whoo, I turn the card over and there on the "front" of the postcard are two lesbians hugging one another. One was sitting, shirtless, and the other was sitting on her, the shirtless girls, lap with her legs wrapped around her.

I was offended. I know the ad-guys in NYC and LA seem to think everyone loves this stuff, but I honestly do not want to be faced with companies sending me postcards with lesbians on the front in sexually suggestive poses. I am calling this company on Monday to tell them to take me off their mailing list, but I was just amazed that someone at that company saw no problem in sending this in the mail to me.

[computerjunkie]

Thought you might be interested in what's happening in MY neck of the woods! This was in "my" (probably former) newspaper this morning.