October 25th, 2010
10:16 AM ET

Newspaper won't print gay marriage announcements

Greg Gould and Aurelio Tine say they just wanted to share their wedding plans.

So they went one of the largest papers in New Hampshire, where gay marriage is legal and generally accepted, to work up a wedding announcement.

But the New Hampshire Union Leader, the Manchester paper known for its conservative viewpoints, refused to print it, a decision that has sparked anger from the couple and lit up the Twittersphere and the Web.

"I was really disappointed because the Union Leader is a big voice in the state of New Hampshire, and they seem to be so out of touch," Gould told CNN affiliate WMUR-TV in Manchester.

The newspaper, however, issued a statement saying that printing the announcement would be "hypocritical" given its previous practices.

“This newspaper has never published wedding or engagement announcements from homosexual couples," Publisher Joe McQuaid said. "It would be hypocritical of us to do so, given our belief that marriage is and needs to remain a social and civil structure between men and women and our opposition to the recent state law legalizing gay marriage.”

In its full statement, printed online, the paper said firmly that it is not "anti-gay" and because of press freedoms can choose to print - or not print - whatever it wants.

Still, that move hasn't stopped the matter from becoming a controversy, with Democratic Senate candidate Paul Hodes, making it an election issue as well.

Hodes wrote a letter to the paper that read in part: "Mr. Gould and Mr. Tine will become legally married this weekend and they should have the same opportunities as everyone in New Hampshire to have their marriage publicized and recognized. The Union Leader's disgraceful policy of exclusion harkens to a different time in this country when people were denied opportunity because of their race, religion and ethnic origin."

What do you think? Should the paper give gay couples the same chance to announce their weddings? Or does freedom of the press override that, and allow the newspaper to make the decision it did? Let us know what you think in the comments below.

soundoff (665 Responses)
  1. Terry Pommett

    It just goes to show that freedom of the press belongs to whom ever owns the purse strings. It has nothing to do with unbiased objective reporting.

    October 25, 2010 at 10:30 pm | Report abuse |
  2. Fremry

    They have every right to refuse this, no matter how deplorable it is.

    It's a calculated move by a conservative paper. If refusing to print this makes them more money than printing it, they will do it. If not, they will rescind and start printing the marriage announcements.

    CNN's no different. They print stories like this because it makes money. They print opinion because it makes money. They are the first on the scene because it makes money. They print articles that agree with what you agree with because it makes money. They print articles your don't agree with, because it's just controversial enough to keep you reading, and therefore making money.

    Welcome to News in the 21st century. It's not News. It's entertainment because entertainment makes money.

    October 25, 2010 at 10:31 pm | Report abuse |
  3. mn

    When a gay craps is he giving birth or having an abortion?

    October 25, 2010 at 10:35 pm | Report abuse |
    • Fremry

      He's posing an existential question to a bigot.

      October 25, 2010 at 10:55 pm | Report abuse |
    • Maty

      Let's ask YOUR parents.

      October 25, 2010 at 11:56 pm | Report abuse |
  4. mk

    I don't want to read about gay people getting married, gross.

    October 25, 2010 at 10:36 pm | Report abuse |
    • EuphoriCrest

      Then why are you reading about it? You made the choice.

      October 26, 2010 at 12:27 am | Report abuse |
  5. michael fletcher

    The under educated people will rejoice with the paper. The educated will see it as out of toouch and silly-stop advertising and buying and hold the heat to the people putting ad's in the paper who discriminate against you.

    October 25, 2010 at 10:36 pm | Report abuse |
  6. Nathan

    They have a right to print what they want however we have the right to call them hateful bigots for which they are.

    October 25, 2010 at 10:36 pm | Report abuse |
    • a

      call me whatever you like, i call gay marriage wrong. I call them right and I'd did b calling my lawyer, if were them i'd do the same thing. They have EVERY RIGHT to disagree with something they feel is MORALLY WRONG. Guess what? God does not hate ppl, no person He loves EVERYONE, but HE hates sin. I am free to hate what GOD hates, not individuals or ppl cuz we all fall short. It's rebellion. PEACE.

      October 25, 2010 at 11:07 pm | Report abuse |
  7. Zeus6793

    I am a NH resident, and all I can say is Ahhh...the lovely Union Leader. Closed minded, conservative, right wing lunatics, keeping the spirit of Nackey Loeb alive and well. Nackey is the crazy, nutjob right wing conservative crotchety old bag that owned the newspaper for like 100 years. She died mercifully a few years ago, but the ownership stayed the same. Many of us more open minded sorts in NH are ashamed of this paper. When are these people going to come out of the middle ages? Whether you agree with it or not, its the law, and they have the same rights as anyone. Just disgusting.

    October 25, 2010 at 10:38 pm | Report abuse |

    I hope their marriage lasts longer than the paper remains in business. Many trees will rejoice.


    October 25, 2010 at 10:39 pm | Report abuse |
  9. a

    They have EVERY RIGHT to agree with something they feel is MORALLY incorrect. So basically if I was working the same way if the LAW says to me as a doctor i have to perform an abortion, my right to free speech will b infringed upon and i will have to quit and will b out of a job. What right to GAYS have to push THEIR agenda down MY throat, I have nothing against them i don't agree and just because someone made it a law does not make it right. God for them for standing up for their beliefs. It's appalling that I have tell my children about this if people want to do that, fine get a regular paper with regular/secular beliefs but as for me and my house....( maybe they will have to change it to a christian newspaper. I am not a bigot because i don't advocate sin. peace out.

    October 25, 2010 at 10:40 pm | Report abuse |
    • Shecky

      you advocate sin daily, merely by going to your job expecting a paycheque. you willfully surrender your mind and talents to those who take them from you as long as the payclock is running. you step into a facist regime every time you clock in and you assist it's reach for dominance, even though you are fully aware that this business does not in all ways adhere to your bible's teachings.you pray for raises too, I would imagine.you advocate sin willingly all the time, by your own bible's teachings (unless you ignore some of them).

      October 26, 2010 at 1:50 am | Report abuse |
  10. Sane

    It is unfortunate that your American laws allow mentally ill persons to "marry", rather than requiring their confinement until such time as they can be cured of their insanity. I applaud the Union Leader for standing up for what is right.

    October 25, 2010 at 10:42 pm | Report abuse |
    • Maty

      Which hospital are you confined to, sir?

      October 25, 2010 at 11:00 pm | Report abuse |
  11. a

    because they stood up for what is right their paper will b blessed and last a long time, the U.S. however may not. keep offending a holy God, and we will all eating beans out of a can peace.

    October 25, 2010 at 10:43 pm | Report abuse |
    • deb

      Did you ever stop to consider that your god is testing your tolerance and love and lack of judgement for someone he created?

      October 25, 2010 at 10:54 pm | Report abuse |
    • Amanda

      Don't you know that a perfect God is also a just God? He also condemned gays at Sodom and Gomorra.

      October 26, 2010 at 12:57 am | Report abuse |
    • Observer

      “Now THIS WAS THE SIN OF YOUR SISTER SODOM: She and her daughters were arrogant, overfed and unconcerned; they did not help the poor and needy.”
      - The Bible

      October 26, 2010 at 12:59 am | Report abuse |
    • Brian


      October 25, 2010 at 10:58 pm | Report abuse |
    • rafael

      Apparently you don't know the teachings of your god particularly well. Keep on hating and you will surely make it into heaven.

      October 25, 2010 at 11:07 pm | Report abuse |
    • mikeL

      Remember, to disagree means to hate. Unless you are disagreeing with a christian, then it's ok.

      October 26, 2010 at 7:12 am | Report abuse |
    • Tim

      I don't understand how people can hate God's creations. Isn't God supposed to be perfect. If he created gays, he did it on purpose. Your hating them or not tolerating them is a slap in God's face.

      October 25, 2010 at 11:11 pm | Report abuse |
    • Cuadrose

      Exactly, Tim!

      October 26, 2010 at 3:01 am | Report abuse |
    • http://www.facebook.com/photos.php?id=1675444456#!/group.php?gid=309852867697

      You are a moron.

      October 25, 2010 at 11:19 pm | Report abuse |
    • peanutman


      October 25, 2010 at 11:26 pm | Report abuse |
    • larryb

      another christian with zero concept of the teachings of christ

      October 25, 2010 at 11:42 pm | Report abuse |
    • anon

      awesome, love me some beans.

      October 25, 2010 at 11:50 pm | Report abuse |
    • macguysea

      Your "god" is NOT my God!

      October 25, 2010 at 11:51 pm | Report abuse |
    • SGT J

      When asked what is the greatest commandment Jesus replied " Love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and all thy soul and all thy mind", He then went on to say the second greatest commandment is "to love thy neighbor as thy self" Matt 12:28

      So tell me, where is there room for hatred and judgement in that statement from Jesus himself?

      October 25, 2010 at 11:52 pm | Report abuse |
    • frank

      small minority bullying there views its a joke that two gay people is on the same legal foundation as straight couple can force the majority to bow to pressure even when the majority are now zippered up out of fear thats not good enough !!!

      October 25, 2010 at 11:54 pm | Report abuse |
    • There Are No gods

      You idiot, you dont believe in santa claus or the easter bunny do you>??? why then would you believe in some made up god? its the same thing, none of them exist, your values and concerns are all weighed upon an irrational belief in things that are not there. you are others like you are why the world is in such a decay. there are no gods, wake up!

      October 25, 2010 at 11:55 pm | Report abuse |
    • dur de durrr

      c'mon, "a" was just trolling. No one that stupid is reading CNN articles. Those true morons only read drudge and watch fox. They loooooooove glenn beck, too.

      October 26, 2010 at 12:04 am | Report abuse |
    • Troy from S'port

      The US may not last very long with loonies like yourself.

      October 26, 2010 at 12:11 am | Report abuse |
    • Krys

      It is not hating but to stand for what is right and holy. Marriage is established for a male and female, therefore a man and woman since animal don't legally marry. When you decide to stand for what right and holy, sometime you have to swim up alone, against stream. It is not because something is generally accepted, legally accepted, politically accepted...it does mean it is right. Marriage between man and man (or woman with woman) is wrong. It is just plain wrong, no matter what reasons, arguments,...or whatever you may come up with. Sometimes people involve in something that they KNOW is completely WRONG tend look to the common view of the society (what is generally accepted), come up with some arguments...in order to have a certain "approval" of that society to create their comfort zone and still what is what is WRONG.

      October 26, 2010 at 12:20 am | Report abuse |
    • Jon

      I'm' not sure why God makes the people the way they are and then hates on them. Can you explain that? And please not the "they're not gay they choose to be that way" argument. You're not gay, I'm not gay, neither of us could possibly know that.

      October 26, 2010 at 12:28 am | Report abuse |
    • Krys

      I cannot speculate on this, but I don't think GOD made them gay and hates on them. I think what GOD does is to "record" in my/your/anyone heart what it right and wrong. And the role of the society is to keep the boundaries of wrong and right like a watchman. Now It up to each individual to do what right or wrong and it is up to the society to warn and take action when the boundaries are crossed.

      October 26, 2010 at 12:49 am | Report abuse |
    • LR

      Your god has no legal standing in this country to decide what is right, wrong, legal or illegal. That is the highest law of the land. The Bible? No authority whatsoever.

      Darn that pesky First Amendment. Darn that pesky Fourteenth Amendment.

      October 26, 2010 at 1:03 am | Report abuse |
    • Gburton

      LR, you have obviously never studied American History. We are founded upon Judeo-Christian beliefs and Biblical authority. Why, even today do people in court place their hand on the Bible, not the Koran. Why is Moses face in the Capitol among other lawgivers?

      October 26, 2010 at 1:12 am | Report abuse |
    • offkilterview

      the founding father were actually mostly athiests. they did how know enough that by crouching their ideas in Judeo Christian language and using the symbols of that faith system would help in the transition to what was a less religiously controlled society then the Church of England run society of the British Monarchy

      October 26, 2010 at 1:17 am | Report abuse |
    • Gburton

      really, offkilterview, is that why they had mandatory prayer in the Senate and days set aside for repentance, fasting and prayer? gee, must have been cloaked ideas..... Or why was Harvard started as a school to train clergy for the furtherence of the Gospel? George Washington was hardly an atheist or even a deist. He was a Chrisitan and said so in his writings.

      October 26, 2010 at 1:21 am | Report abuse |
    • Observer

      "Gouverneur Morris had often told me that General Washington believed no more of that system (Christianity) than did he himself."
      – Thomas Jefferson, in his private journal, 2/01/1800

      October 26, 2010 at 1:25 am | Report abuse |
    • Shecky

      And we all know politicians never lie ...

      October 26, 2010 at 1:39 am | Report abuse |
    • Gburton

      LR, do you realize that you are a breath away from death? One day you will die. TEN out of TEN people will die and all will stand before the judgement seat of Christ. You too will stand before God on that day. Read the Bible for yourself and you will read about a God who loves you and sent His Son to die for your sins so you won't have to perish in hell for all eternity!!!! Read the book of Romans and then John and study them, asking God to reveal Himself to you and He will.

      October 26, 2010 at 1:15 am | Report abuse |
    • AKC

      I am a Christian and you sadden me. Everything you said is correct – but you will likely never reach a person with the message of Christ if you go about it this way. Especially in a comment forum. Go figure out where Christ came from and how He taught. It was not out of a position of judgment – it was out of a position of love. Think deeply about John 3:16.

      October 26, 2010 at 1:19 am | Report abuse |
    • offkilterview

      aptly put

      October 26, 2010 at 1:26 am | Report abuse |
    • offkilterview

      so alright then, how is the list of the following coming for you:
      – removing the spec of dust in your own eye
      – loving your neighbour as yourself
      – feeding the poor
      – clothing the naked
      – visiting imprisoned
      – comforting the widow

      it says in Revelation that those who do these things Jesus will acknowledge. How's your own list coming on them? Are you sure your getting in???

      October 26, 2010 at 1:23 am | Report abuse |
    • Neverquit

      Gburton, you epitomize the problem. There are over 20 major religions in the world today, with many conflicting beliefs among them, and many in existence long before Chrsitianity even existed. The adherents of each will often scream and argue with your identical passion about how there's is right and yours is wrong. They of course will be saved, and everyone else is going to burn. The only way a society and the world can function is that people must learn to respect the beliefs of others as much as they may believe that their religion happens to be "the one" by virtue of them having been born into it and being lectured about it throughout their lives growing up. Bottom line: you believe what you want, and stop shoving your beliefs down the throats of those who believe something else. You'll never change their minds just as they'll never change yours.

      October 26, 2010 at 2:11 am | Report abuse |
    • Gburton

      John, Even if they were "born" that way, Jesus says very, very, very clearly in the Gospel of John ch. 3 – that we must be "born again". That which is born of the flesh is flesh but that which is born of the spirit is spirit. No, God does not hate gays – He loves them, but He does not condone the sin, He hates the sin and Jesus Christ died to set sinners free.

      October 26, 2010 at 12:59 am | Report abuse |
    • Observer

      If marriage is HOLY, how many of these TOP religious figures were married? Jesus, John the Baptist, the Disciples, priests, nuns, the Pope, and monks?

      October 26, 2010 at 12:44 am | Report abuse |
    • Shecky

      marriage is a human invention, and is an un-necessary fiction. if two humans care enough to stay together through their lives, they will. calling anything humans do 'holy' is dividing humans from their environment, and ignoring fact.we live here on earth. I think the earth is wonderfull. I think it can be a LOT more wonderfull though. no religeous dogma has the possibility of creating trust between all humans, even though it is a requirement of our continued existence. please place a relevance value on your dogma. if it causes or promotes hatred, i suggest you rethink its importance to your daily life.

      October 26, 2010 at 12:53 am | Report abuse |
    • peanutman

      You are so right Krys, Someday these people will know that they were deceived. All we can do his pray for them. Satan has got a hold on them He has blinded there eyes. Deep down inside they know were right. they know its wrong, God gave us common sense. Remember the Bible says dont be apart of the this world or love the things of this world.These people are living in darkness This is not our home. Our home is in Heaven.

      October 26, 2010 at 1:58 am | Report abuse |
    • thatguy

      You said "It is just plain wrong, no matter what reasons, arguments,...or whatever you may come up with."
      That is just another way of saying:
      My mind is made up I will not be swayed by logic, a rational argument or the truth so don't talk to me, I can't defend my position.

      October 26, 2010 at 6:53 am | Report abuse |
    • thatguy

      This is a reply to Krys's post just above.

      October 26, 2010 at 7:03 am | Report abuse |
    • becka

      Its unnatual to be gay .not to get in anyones face but if you look around how many people who ar egay can have kids together natuarlly?

      April 5, 2011 at 2:00 pm | Report abuse |
    • charlie

      After reading the article and then all of the comments I first felt that the couple should be given the chance to let everyone know about their big event, but you can't force someone to shout out your good news. If that newsparer won't be our friend, then find one that will.

      October 26, 2010 at 12:22 am | Report abuse |
  12. Cory Ekern

    I think it is utter and complete garbage that, in this day and age when gay and lebian couples are fighting SO hard for equality and acceptance, a newspaper in what is supposed to be a liberal state refuses to print the wedding announcement of a gay couple... and that's being EXTRAORDINARILY kind.

    October 25, 2010 at 10:44 pm | Report abuse |
    • Nick

      boo hoo.... anything against liberals is "hate"... anything against conservatives is "freedom of speech"... stop being a cry baby

      October 25, 2010 at 10:50 pm | Report abuse |
    • Dan

      So free speech is only reserved for the hard left? I have mulled over "gay marriage" for a decade and it makes not one ounce of sense to me.

      October 25, 2010 at 10:53 pm | Report abuse |
    • Deb

      I am a NH resident and NH is not a liberal state. The Union leader has every right to print what it wants, or doesn't want.

      October 25, 2010 at 10:55 pm | Report abuse |
    • DK

      let's take away your freedom of religion (which is a complete joke anyway) and see who "boo hoos".

      October 25, 2010 at 11:09 pm | Report abuse |
    • Fremry

      The conservative base is so off in their understanding of free speech. Guess what guys? Hate IS free speech. Hate is included under free speech.

      What the conservative right can't get through their head is that dissent and disagreement is NOT the same as "trampling on free speech". Freedom of speech applies to the government, and not to private citizens or private enterprise. A liberal telling you that you are hateful because you hate gays is not an infringement on free speech. It is a dissenting rebuttal to what you said.

      They are 100% different things, and I don't understand why the conservative right can't understand that "disagreeing with me" is not the same as "infringing on my free speech". I'm sorry, but the only reason I vote democrat (because they are obviously not the perfect choice), is because of this type of crap. If your party doesn't even have the fundamental understanding of what free speech is and is not, I will vote against you, EVERY. SINGLE. ELECTION.

      October 25, 2010 at 11:10 pm | Report abuse |
    • rafael

      Actually, Deb, the paper has that right but at the cost of its own credibility. The editorial and news arms should be strictly separate to maintain any sense of impartiality in its reporting of news.

      October 25, 2010 at 11:13 pm | Report abuse |
    • cliffdogg

      they can print what they want based on their religious conservative beliefs, just don't pretend to be a real newspaper

      October 25, 2010 at 11:14 pm | Report abuse |
    • dandydonny

      My hat is off to the editor of the paper for standing up for what he considers right. He knew when he made that decision he would be the target of 90% of the hate groups in America.

      October 25, 2010 at 11:16 pm | Report abuse |
    • Ardell

      The "right" of gay and lesbian people to marry everywhere is somewhat inevitable. The argument has been, among others, that no one (or state) has the "right" to tell them what they can and can't do. In other words, the argument is that "conservatives" or states cannot diminish the "rights" of gays and lesbians as citizens. So be it. Here, it seems, a couple of gay men and their supporters, who legally have the right to marry in NH (and will do so), are attempting to tell the paper what it must think, and what it must print.. Freedom of speech also includes the freedom "from" speech. If they choose not to support gay and lesbian marriages, it is the paper's choice. I suggest that gay and lesbian folks cancel their subscriptions in protest, but the hypocracy of using "free speech" to argue against "free speech" is a bit transparent... and ridiculous.

      October 25, 2010 at 11:18 pm | Report abuse |
    • xrk9854

      Deb: I am a New Hampshire resident as well. But I have also lived in a few other places as well. New Hampshire is a libral state when compared to the nation as a whole. It is only conservative when compared to Massachusetts.

      October 26, 2010 at 12:34 am | Report abuse |
    • AB

      I am glad there are people that still stand up for what is right . Marriage between two men or two women is definitley not right. Everyone knows it is not right and weird, and no matter how many people say it is, it is still WRONG. Come on America wake up!

      October 26, 2010 at 12:39 am | Report abuse |
  13. Karen

    They are welcome to print what they want, we have the 1st Amendment to let them. I am also welcome to think they are being a rag for refusing to print these banns of marriage, I have the 1st Amendment as well.

    October 25, 2010 at 10:49 pm | Report abuse |
    • dandydonny

      Karen, if you had the basic knowledge that a junior high student had in 1960 America you would understand that the first amendment is not about thinking it is about talking/writing.

      October 25, 2010 at 11:19 pm | Report abuse |
    • fajita

      dandydonny, you are being to kind to karen.

      October 25, 2010 at 11:30 pm | Report abuse |
    • SGT J

      The 1st Amendment states that the government cannot stop them from writing what they want to write, it doesn't force them to write something. While they have the right to absolutely not print this announcement, i find it deplorable.

      October 25, 2010 at 11:55 pm | Report abuse |
  14. Nick

    Hurp and Jersey Bob, oh boo hoo hoo... Liberals cradle and adore and even hide behind the word "hate".... someone expresses disapproval of a gay person's lifestyle... "hate"..... someone doesn't print the lifestyle plans of a gay couple... "hate"... someone doesnt like the colors of the gay flag... "hate"... someone looks at a gay person cross eyed... "hate"... what is with America? ANd NURSEHOPE, youre response of "Dave: You want to marry your sister? Seriously? That's waaay different than marrying a non-genetically linked person.".... The problem is that morality is defined and acceptable only by the generation that currently exists. Gay lifestyles weren't accepted before and not liberal bleeding hearts are forcing this down the world's throat even when it's not morally right. So you say this Nursehope, but who is to say that 50 years later, inbreeding isn't the acceptable lifestyle that gets forced down our throats? seems crazy now, yes, but with liberal "progressiveness" how do we know this? How do we know that marrying fathers and/or mothers won't be acceptable? Crazy now, yes, but will it be considered "hate" later? this is the problem with liberal "progressiveness".... it has NO END. CHristian morality has a set line that doesn't change because ethics and morals don't change. Liberal "progressiveness" changes this way and that way and any which way according to the generation. So stop being baby's liberals!! You all are the infants of this country!

    October 25, 2010 at 10:49 pm | Report abuse |
    • Sean

      You must be smoking the crack. Also, if that wasn't just an infantile diatribe, I don't know what is.

      October 25, 2010 at 10:54 pm | Report abuse |
    • Chris

      who said anything about inbreeding? Hyperbole is your only argument...as usual.

      October 25, 2010 at 10:56 pm | Report abuse |
    • Jeremiah

      I see the point you are trying to make here Nick and while I don't agree with the stance the Newspaper took I won't deny that it is their right to omit any article or announcement they choose. I think the question here is whether it is the newspapers responsibility to decide what is "moral" or "immoral" in terms of news. It could be argued that the couple did factually get married in New Hampshire and that is just as newsworthy as any other couple getting married. I understand that they aren't "required" to print a thing they don't want to but my simple point is that the gay couple did, in fact, get married just as everyone else did in the state and that is as reportable as any other legal marriage. It is because of that fact alone that I disagree with the papers decision. Whether it is "hateful" or "bigotry" is irrelevant to me. It was an event that occurred like other marriage events and it should have been reported on.

      October 25, 2010 at 11:05 pm | Report abuse |
    • Ken in TN

      In actuality, even CNN is deciding what is proper to post in this forum, if you use foul or offending language, your post will be censored... this is because someone out there will get likely get offended if CNN just let anything in.

      October 26, 2010 at 7:14 am | Report abuse |
    • cliffdogg

      Good idea Nick, let's turn the clock back 2000 years 'cause these liberals have changed it all for the worse. Then again, let's go back before the time of Christ, because, he was, after all, a radical liberal.

      October 25, 2010 at 11:18 pm | Report abuse |
    • rafael

      This is the problem with progress–there is no end!

      October 25, 2010 at 11:23 pm | Report abuse |
    • Aetna7011

      well, here's how this works. Inbreeding is bad. Every person in the world carries a certain number of rare recessive mutations that, when inherited as a pair, are lethal. The odds of receiving a set of rare recessive alleles go up drastically with inbreeding. Then, there is inbreeding depression. Basically, the more you inbreed, the more genetically unstable your population becomes. Finally, there is the occurrence of non-lethal yet detrimental traits, like albinism, deafness, hemophilia, increased risk of cancer, and tons of other fun ones, that can really put a hamper in your day. So please, although i do not agree with gay marriage (or marriage at all really, the term needs to simply be removed from the legal literature so everyone, whether gay or straight, simply has a civil union under the law) comparing gay marriage to something that is literally a biologically imperative problem is absolutely moronic. Gays don't make children with serious genetic problems, because, well, gays don't have kids. Except for some religious hang ups, which, by the way, are completely and totally un-American, as we are supposed to have separation of church and state, there is no biological, scientific, or anthropological reason why gay marriage is detrimental to society.

      October 25, 2010 at 11:26 pm | Report abuse |
    • Robin H

      "Christian morality has a set line that doesn't change because ethics and morals don't change."

      So I guess this means you are in favor of the death penalty for adultery as it states in the Old Testament? Morals don't change...indeed.

      October 25, 2010 at 11:34 pm | Report abuse |
    • larryb

      first...you really are full of hate. it seems to pour out of you.
      second...you really need some history. the christian religion (and the bible) changed constantly during it's first 1500 years

      October 25, 2010 at 11:48 pm | Report abuse |
    • Joe Schmoe

      Except it must be hate, else you'd disapprove of the individuals lifestyle choice(s), not an entire groups. Unless of course you disapprove of them just being? If thats the case, I'd call that hate.

      October 25, 2010 at 11:56 pm | Report abuse |
    • Jon

      To turn a totally illogical argument into a semi logical one let me just say this. If you are going to try a snowball argument then you need to start at the beginning. It's not gay marriage will be accepted, then inbreeding, then polygamy or however you look at it. The beginning is marriage as it is currently defined. If men and women can get married, then maybe gay people will want the same rights too. Logical arguments start at the beginning, not half way through so they work for you.

      October 26, 2010 at 12:40 am | Report abuse |
    • vic keller

      To Cliffdogg;

      Chirst is the Son of God.

      October 26, 2010 at 12:50 am | Report abuse |
    • Milo

      I'm so sick of having "Christian Morals" being shoved down my throat, how about that? Who are you to decide everyone else's "morals?" I do not have to abide by your religion, I abide by the laws of this country, I'm nice to my neighbor and everyone else I come into contact with. I just prefer not to tell others how they should live their lives. Stop coming up with things you "think" are wrong when NO ONE is asking you to do anything but leave them alone.

      October 26, 2010 at 12:50 am | Report abuse |
    • Deb

      I am sick of gay this and gay that, and gays complaining about their rights, sick.....

      October 26, 2010 at 5:39 am | Report abuse |
    • SaneCanadian

      O.K. everybody, that's it , we're making Deb sick. We're going to have to shut this whole push for human rights down. At least until Deb is feeling better. You let us know Deb. ( I hope this is a Deb you taunt)

      October 26, 2010 at 6:22 am | Report abuse |
  15. Chris

    Boycott the New Hampshire Union Leader! Freedom of press? totally! And in the same breath, we all have the freedom to not buy such a publication. The impact on their revenue will speak more loudly to a conservative organization than any rationalization we could muster.

    October 25, 2010 at 10:49 pm | Report abuse |
    • Dan

      Liberal media is bleeding red ink. It turns out conservative media is doing much better financially. It turns out people are voting with their feet.

      October 25, 2010 at 10:55 pm | Report abuse |
    • Chris

      Who said anything about feet?

      October 25, 2010 at 11:04 pm | Report abuse |
    • cliffdogg

      Yes, Chris, and Twinkies outsell carrot sticks. Conservative media is to knowledge as Twinkies are to nutrition. Tastes good, fun and easy to eat, but doesn't make you any better in the long run.

      October 25, 2010 at 11:21 pm | Report abuse |
    • dandydonny

      Your ban will not cause their bottom line to shrink by one thin dime.

      October 25, 2010 at 11:21 pm | Report abuse |
    • Blackdruid

      I am a NH person and will be boycotting the Union leader and any businesses that choose to put ad money into that paper.

      October 25, 2010 at 11:57 pm | Report abuse |
    • Billbsjca

      Very well said.

      October 26, 2010 at 12:10 am | Report abuse |
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20