AG Coakley Backs Gay Couple In Disput...

AG Coakley Backs Gay Couple In Dispute With Church

There are 12 comments on the EDGE story from Mar 14, 2014, titled AG Coakley Backs Gay Couple In Dispute With Church. In it, EDGE reports that:

Attorney General Martha Coakley filed a court brief Thursday in support of a married gay couple who sued the Roman Catholic Diocese of Worcester for allegedly refusing to sell them a Northbridge mansion because church officials were concerned they would host gay weddings at the site.

Join the discussion below, or Read more at EDGE.

david traversa

Resistencia, Argentina

#1 Mar 14, 2014
A healthy-minded lady ..
Wondering

Tyngsboro, MA

#4 Mar 14, 2014
Sen Rick Saintpornum wrote:
Wait, I figured it out..
Which shoe goes on which foot?
Wondering

Tyngsboro, MA

#5 Mar 14, 2014
If the property is offered to the public for sale the only requirement should be the wherewithal to pay for it.
Wondering

Tyngsboro, MA

#7 Mar 14, 2014
Sen Rick Saintpornum wrote:
<quoted text>
Wrong again, as usual. There are other valid concerns besides just financial ones in a sale of property. For example, zoning issues or historic preservation issues.
All of which is understood by most people and none of which has anything to do with the sale.
All of which would come into play AFTER the sale if the new owners wanted to do something with the property that would require a variance. Does everything have to be explained to you?
Rainbow Kid

Alpharetta, GA

#8 Mar 14, 2014
At the very least they should show us a picture of the mansion so we can figure out where to put the Rainbow Flag
http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-foxI0X9KBwY/T6wtf9o...

“Together for 24, legal for 5”

Since: Sep 07

Littleton, NH

#9 Mar 14, 2014
I think this will become part of the "war on Christianity" lexicon, joining Lexington schools, New Jersey wedding pavilions, New Mexico photographers, and Oregon bakers.(You will note that this particular issue is unique in that it actually addresses MARRIAGE. All the other cases are about civil unions or domestic whatchamacallits, which all the homophobes claim they don't care about.)

The ADF will pursue this to SCOTUS, trying again to establish the principle that religious disdain trumps the free market. When they lose, they'll make a documentary about how those nasty gays used the courts to pry Church property away from its godly owners.
Wondering

Tyngsboro, MA

#10 Mar 14, 2014
Rainbow Kid wrote:
At the very least they should show us a picture of the mansion so we can figure out where to put the Rainbow Flag
http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-foxI0X9KBwY/T6wtf9o...
http://www.wcvb.com/image/view/-/16553758/med...
Rainbow Kid

Alpharetta, GA

#12 Mar 14, 2014
Wondering wrote:
Thanks W
.
That one is ready for a serious HGTV makeover
.
It doesn't even have a pool with a waist-deep wet bar
.
What were they thinking!;o)
Wondering

Tyngsboro, MA

#13 Mar 14, 2014
Sen Rick Saintpornum wrote:
<quoted text>
That's not true. Zoning and other questions come into play all the time as means of blocking sales, not just after sales.
Okay, cretin?
Blocking, no. Preventing, yes.
If a person wants to buy a property and turn it into a bar, he could have a problem.
If he has a problem he might not buy the property. That doesn't mean he couldn't by the property, it means he couldn't turn it into a bar. I'm going to have to start charging you for explaining the obvious.
Wondering

Tyngsboro, MA

#17 Mar 14, 2014
Sen Rick Saintpornum wrote:
<quoted text>
No, cretin, you failed to grasp any of this. That's why I explained the issues step by step.
As the rcc has failed to grasp reality in general, or that they are merely being sick bigots by making up likely illegal reasons not to sell the mansion to this buyer.
The progression is that the dwindling homophobes will be the least intelligent in the population, but you're pushing it.
Have you considered stand-up comedy? I would go to see you, sip on anything but a Sam Adams and laugh my ass off. Oops, I said ass. Please know that in no way, shape or form was I trying to turn you on.
Wondering

Tyngsboro, MA

#20 Mar 14, 2014
Sen Rick Saintpornum wrote:
You were wrong. I demonstrated that.
Because you are too stupid to understand doesn't make me wrong. It makes you stupid.

“Where's my fairy wand!”

Since: Apr 08

Reading PA

#21 Mar 14, 2014
Wondering wrote:
If the property is offered to the public for sale the only requirement should be the wherewithal to pay for it.
Agreed!

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Douglas Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
News Webster seeks probe of emails alleging police b... Sep 5 Not that crazy 2
News Southbridge man, son indicted again on charges ... Jun '17 Brown 1
Body found in French river dam at the end of Mi... (Mar '17) Mar '17 Rosy 6
Uxbridge Music Forum (Feb '13) Feb '17 Musikologist 14
I need help in identifying old tintype pictures (Jan '17) Jan '17 Dan Marchand 1
News Joseph A. Cusson Jr., 55 (Aug '08) Dec '16 Elisha cusson dau... 2
Sutton Paving (Aug '08) Dec '16 Joe Richard 25

Douglas Jobs

More from around the web

Personal Finance

Douglas Mortgages