QuoteSo 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 in a statement. "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 it is not "anti-gay" and because of press freedoms can choose to print – or not print whatever it wants.

http://news.blogs.cnn.com/2010/10/25/newspaper-wont-print-gay-marriage-announcements/

Sniveling of course went into the Faggotsphere, with tears and cat-cat-caterwauling unseen since Judy Garland died.

How unthinkably cruel for being absolutely consistent with expressed newspaper philosophy, from arguably one of the top three conservative newspapers in America. This isn't the Detroit News here, which sounds more liberal now than the true union rag, the Detroit Free Press. You don't run the Union-Leader like some kind of bathtub toy, spinning the toy boat in any direction as the News did.

The paper's statement (linked to in the story above) is here = http://www.wmur.com/r/25480077/detail.html