RECENT  POSTS:  » NOM spends six figures on North Carolina's Hagan/Tillis US Senate race » Idaho wedding venue can be discriminatory so long as it sticks to new business model » Sunday in Houston: Activists mad that churches were noted for their politicization head to a church—to politicize » Lisa Kudrow thinks my website title is modest, at best » Do you take this man to be your lawfully wedded mission of destruction? » MassResistance's hilarious fourteen-point plan for reinstating marriage discrimination: Get really, really nasty » Concerned Women For America finally learns to call out anti-gay rhetoric » 'Rivka Edelman' responds to me via one of the most bizarre comments I've ever read » Just going to another vendor isn't always easy, isn't good basis for sound policy » Pat Robertson: People who believe in fair nondiscrimination law are 'terrorists, radicals, and extremists'  

« Go back a post || Return to G-A-Y homepage || Haul tail to next post »

12/22/2005

No pre-nup signed, David Furnish's fortune now vulnerable in unlikely event of divorce

by Jeremy Hooper

   It has been reported that Sir Elton John did not have David Furnish sign a pre-nup before the duo got hitched yesterday, with the wealthy pop giant being quoted as saying:

If I had asked David to sign a pre-nup I would have destroyed part of that faith we have in one another. I just feel that a little something between us would have been lost.”

Our translation: David is a f***ing TIGER in the sack, and while I may hold the riches, as long as he continues to do that special thing that he does, the power is all his.

Don't go breaking his heart [The Sun]

space gay-G-A-Y-post gay-email gay-writer-jeremy-hooper


comments powered by Disqus

G-A-Y Comments Policy


 
Related Posts with Thumbnails