Must Women Have “Sex” in Order to be Lesbians?

     Two Florida Women, Who Were lllegally “Married” in Mass., Plan to Sue Christian Science Church for Discrimination

     Two Florida women, 46 and 62, who were “married” in Massachusetts (the marriage was illegal because they are not residents of this state), are making plans to sue the Boston-based Christian Science Church because it discriminated against one of them, a “practitioner” who counsels members of the church.

     The church has revoked the teaching credentials and the membership of the practitioner. The two women claim they are not lesbians as charged by the church, despite the fact they are now “married.”

     Both say they believe the church should update their laws and support the “gay community,” according to the Boston Herald. “They [the church] are governed by a little thin book of rules and the rules haven’t changed. There was opportunity to legally marry. We went to Massachusetts to be legally married. We are now legally married. So what rule did we break?”

     The church also charged the practitioner a few years ago of living a lesbian lifestyle even though the pair maintained two households.

     The practitioner told the Herald, “I had a very difficult time labeling myself a lesbian, but then I read that one’s primary affectional orientation and commitment is toward other women. It’s not about sex, it’s about family and commitment.” However, they didn’t say whether they practiced mutual masturbation, which is the primary sex objective of lesbians.

     In addition, Florida must now decide whether these women can demand benefits from the taxpayers of Florida. But it is the Christian Science Church which will first have to pay the expense of lawyers to defend themselves.

     Any Two Women (or Men) Can Marry

     The above story about two Floridians points out that any two women (or men) can marry ---regardless of whether they have sex together--- and receive benefits from the state taxpayers.

     It was estimated by the Beacon Hill Institute in 2002 that a much smaller law concerning domestic partners would have cost taxpayers of Massachusetts $15 million the first year, if it had passed the House of Representatives as it already had the Senate.