|
Friday, June 30, 2006
Former Wisconsin Governors Urge Rejection Of Anti-Gay Amendment
by 365Gay.com Newscenter Staff June 29, 2006 - 3:00 pm ET (Madison, Wisconsin) Four former Wisconsin governors - three Democrats and one Republican - are calling on voters to reject a proposed amendment to the state constitution that would ban same-sex marriage, civil unions and possibly void domestic partner benefits. "We oppose the proposed constitutional ban on civil unions and marriage. As former governors, we believe the ban runs contrary to the values of freedom and fairness that make Wisconsin great," the former governors said in statement. The governors, Patrick Lucey, Martin Schreiber and Tony Earl, all Democrats, and Republican Gov. Lee Sherman Dreyfus, said that state law already limits marriage to opposite-sex couples. "The founding document of our state is designed to lay the foundation for our government and protect individual freedoms. The civil unions and marriage ban is wrong because it would mark the first time we have ever amended our constitution to limit freedom," said the statement released by LGBT rights group Fair Wisconsin. The governors called the proposed amendment "unnecessarily harsh and far reaching." "We urge the people of Wisconsin to carefully consider the civil unions and marriage ban, and the impact it will have on families who live in our state. We hope you will join us in voting no in November," the statement said. The proposed amendment would add 43 words to the constitution declaring the state recognizes only marriage between one man and one woman and does not grant a similar legal status to unmarried individuals, such as civil unions. The measure passed the legislature earlier this year and is scheduled to appear on the ballot in November. Critics say the amendment would outlaw benefits such as health care provided by many municipal governments and private companies to partners of gay employees. Supporters acknowledge that if the amendment passes the courts would have to sort out what benefits could be offered to gay and unmarried couples. ©365Gay.com 2006 What do you think?
Cardinal: Vatican Fears Gay Suit
by The Associated Press June 29, 2006 - 1:00 pm ET (Vatican City) The Vatican is worried its opposition to same sex marriage, abortion and embryonic stem cell research could one day land it before an international court of justice, a senior Vatican official says. Alfonso Cardinal Lopez Trujillo, who heads the Pontifical Council for the Family, reiterated traditional Roman Catholic Church positions and criticized some European countries, including Belgium, the Netherlands and France, for giving legal recognition to civil unions. ``We worry especially that, with current laws, speaking in defense of life and the rights of families is becoming in some societies sort of a crime against the state,'' Lopez Trujillo told the Roman Catholic newsmagazine Famiglia Cristiana for its issue scheduled to hit the stands Thursday. ``The church is at risk of being brought before some international court if the debate becomes any tenser, if the more radical requests get heard,'' the cardinal said, speaking ahead of the Roman Catholic church's World Meeting of Families in Valencia, Spain from July 1-9. Lopez Trujillo did not comment further about any legal problems the Vatican could face but his words touched upon a concern among religious organizations everywhere: the right of religious freedom versus countries' anti-discrimination laws. Chai Feldblum of Georgetown University's Law Center said the chances of the church being punished for stating its beliefs are slim to none, at least in the United States, though its stances could lead to Roman Catholic organizations losing state funding. ``I cannot fathom a religious organization being punished for speaking its belief against abortion or gay marriage,'' said Feldblum, a veteran gay rights advocate. ``What is illuminating is not the reality of the legal penalties they face but an acknowledgment that public morality is shifting under their feet,'' Feldblum said. In recent years, the Netherlands, Belgium, Spain and Canada legalized same-sex marriage, while Britain and several other European countries now give such couples the right to form partnerships that entitle them to most of the same tax and pension rights as married couples _ laws the church is firmly against. In the interview, Lopez Trujillo reiterated that under church rules, women who have abortions, the doctors and nurses who help them and the father, if he is going along with it, are excommunicated. The same goes for embryonic stem cell research. ``It's the same thing. Destroying the embryo is equivalent to abortion,'' Lopez Trujillo said. He also criticized what he described as a movement to impose new human rights. ``It's happening for abortion, which is a crime, and instead it's becoming a right,'' the cardinal said. He also compared gay marriage to ``absolute emptiness,'' saying the only possible couple is made up of a man and a woman. Earlier this month, the Pontifical Council for the Family issued a 57-page document in which it said the traditional family has never been so threatened as in today's world. It also lashed out against contraception, abortion, in-vitro fertilization and same-sex marriage. The Vatican's document did not break any new ground but marked the first sweeping comment on the issues during Pope Benedict's papacy. ©365Gay.com 2006 What do you think?
Marriage ban fight heats up ahead of Massachusetts convention
The push is on in Massachuetts as a scheduled vote on a proposed ban on same-sex marriage looms in the state legislature. On Wednesday Republican governor Mitt Romney and Cardinal Sean P. O'Malley held a press conference to call on lawmakers to allow the vote amid indications that gay rights advocates are prepared to use procedural tactics to kill the measure, The Boston Globe reports. Pro-gay lawmakers on Beacon Hill could muster the support needed to prevent the measure from coming up for debate. Such an outcome would abruptly end the long campaign to place the ban before voters in 2008. "We urge that the legislators let everyone's voice be heard," said O'Malley in his first appearance at a statehouse press conference. "Let the people vote." Advocates for same-sex marriage say they will do whatever it takes to make sure the amendment dies, leaving intact a 2003 state supreme judicial court decision that made Massachusetts the first state to allow same-sex weddings. "Every possible option is on the table as far as we're concerned," Marc Solomon, campaign director for the group MassEquality, told reporters after the press conference. Romney and religious leaders have joined forces before on the issue, but O'Malley's appearance at the statehouse underscored how crucial this ballot effort has become for same-sex marriage opponents after years of fighting. If the amendment fizzles, it would be a major setback for the opponents, forcing them to decide whether to mount a new challenge in future years. To reach the 2008 ballot, the amendment needs the support of at least 50 legislators at the July 12 constitutional convention, a joint session of the house and senate, and then at least 50 votes at a similar convention during the 2007–2008 legislative session. According to The G lobe, both sides have previously said that the amendment has the 50 votes needed. As a result, advocates of same-sex marriage would need another route to block the amendment. For example, a lawmaker could try to adjourn the convention before the ban comes up for debate. The amendment is at the bottom of a crowded agenda, and adjournment requires a simple majority vote. (The Advocate) What do you think?
NEA Weakens Resolution Supporting Homosexual Marriage
By Nathan Burchfiel CNSNews.com Staff Writer June 27, 2006 (CNSNews.com) - The National Education Association (NEA) has dropped an amendment that was going to ask its convention delegates to support homosexual marriage and civil unions in all 50 states.Cybercast News Service has learned that an NEA delegate earlier this month leaked the language of the amendment to conservative groups and the resulting protest apparently prompted the NEA to substitute it with a weaker version.Instead of asking delegates to endorse homosexual marriage and civil unions across the board, the substitute asks convention delegates to endorse homosexual domestic partnerships, civil unions and marriage in states that already " legally recognize" the relationships.Massachusetts is currently the only state that legally recognizes same sex marriage. Connecticut and Vermont have legalized civil unions. Hawaii, Maine, New Jersey, California and the District of Columbia offer homosexual couples some form of spousal-like benefits.NEA delegates, who have previously approved language stating that "a diverse society enriches all individuals," are now likely to vote on the substitute resolution during the union's annual convention in Orlando June 29 to July 6.Andy Linebaugh, a spokesman for the NEA, told Cybercast News Service that "leadership of the NEA has no interest in advancing a position on same-sex marriage." When asked about the substitute amendment, Linebaugh first stated that he had "no idea what you're referring to." But when he was read the language of the substitute and asked whether it would come up for a vote at the NEA convention, Linebaugh said he believed it would, "but it has to go through the process" first of being debated.Linebaugh said the decision to change the amendment was not a result of any protest by conservatives. However, two days after the American Family Association issued a statement complaining that the "Teacher's union begins plans to promote homosexual marriage in public schools," the substitute was distributed by Ohio NEA President Gary Allen in an email.In the June 21 email, Allen told his membership that "there is a new resolution up for discussion at the July 2006 NEA Representative Assembly.""We didn't respond to the AFA by changing the original amendment," Linebaugh insisted. "We responded to the AFA by saying the NEA has no position on same-sex marriage."Linebaugh declined to address the original resolution that formed the basis of the AFA's complaint, offering only that the current amendment "clearly does not endorse or support same-sex marriages."In an undated release posted on the website of its Kansas affiliate, NEA president Reg Weaver said the AFA had engaged in a "malicious e-mail campaign distorting the facts related to proposed amendment changes."He added that the NEA "has no position on same-sex marriages, and leadership is not seeking to establish such a position."Linebaugh refused to explain how, as Weaver claimed, the AFA distorted the meaning of the original amendment. "You'd have to ask them how they misinterpreted it," he said. "I'm not saying anything about distorting any meaning."Dr. Warren Throckmortion, a psychologist from Grove City College in Pennsylvania who counsels homosexuals on changing their sexual orientation, told Cybercast News Service that the new amendment has been "cleverly wordsmithed" to voice support for same-sex unions in states that already recognize those unions. He said members of the union "could look at these resolutions and take from it support for gay marriage.""I'm not sure why they would need to say anything," Throckmorton said. "It already exists in the states. Why does the NEA need to make a statement to that effect?" What do you think?
It's two people pledging love, fidelity
By LLEWELLYN KING www.kingpublishing.comI grew up with the prejudices of my generation. One was against homosexuality. In the prejudice lexicon, homosexuals were unnatural and degenerate and, of course, they perpetrated illegal acts. When I left the cloisters where certainty reigned, I soon changed my view. Too many gifted people, too many nice people and too many of my friends were gay. I accepted homosexuality as a parallel lifestyle. Yet when I first heard proposals about gay marriage, my initial reaction was that was too much. I do not know any gay couples who enshrine their union in countries where it is legal. But I have come to believe that gays' desire to marry -- particularly among mature gays -- is as real as it is for heterosexuals. Marriage is a public acknowledgment of private commitment. And the desire for that commitment seems to know no gender. Andrew Sullivan, the blogger who is gay, has written eloquently about longing for the fulfillment of marriage. Now I find a charming article in The Oldie, in which the author, Charles Osborne, describes his civil union with his partner, Ken Thomson, in England, after 42 years of cohabitation: ''And so in December 2005, I went down on one bended and somewhat arthritic knee, and proposed marriage -- or to be more accurate, civil partnership, to Ken. For some reason or other, he immediately accepted my proposal, and we began to plan the actual event,'' Osborne wrote in the British magazine. Clearly, older gay couples do not differ from their heterosexual counterparts in wanting the companionship and serenity that marriage affords in the middle course of life. Those aspects of the gay life that disturb the heterosexual world fall away with maturity. I speak of promiscuity and the culture of the bath house. By chance I have just read two autobiographies by notable gays who are upfront, even distressingly so, about their early lives. One was by British conservative politician and journalist Matthew Parris, and the other by American writer Edmund White. I was a little disgusted by their anonymous sex, until it occurred to me that heterosexual men by the millions patronize prostitutes. Despite the political posturing that has attended the Senate debate on a constitutional amendment to define marriage as being between a man and a woman, the concept of gay marriage is well out of the closet. There is no need for us to rush to legalize gay marriage, it should be an evolutionary process; a slow recognition of the humanity of those who are other than ourselves. I suspect, as has been the case with gay acceptance, that gay marriage acceptance will come first from young people. It is not long ago that homosexuality was illegal. Legalizing it gave full citizenship to gays -- and, guess what? -- citizens like to get married. Indestructible institution The thrust of the arguments in favor of the marriage amendment is that gay marriage represents a grave threat to traditional marriage. Maybe, instead, it points to the indestructibility of the institution. Andrew Sullivan promotes marriage in his blog with a passion not common. One of his blog readers wrote: ``Marriage is absolutely nothing like being partners/boyfriends/lovers. It is so incredibly richer than I ever imagined it could be. Even though our marriage is Canadian and isn't recognized in the U.S., it is recognized by our families and friends and co-workers, and most importantly by us. You have no idea the treasure that has been kept from gays and lesbians because we haven't been able to marry. It isn't just a one-time act in front of an audience, it is a life-altering event joining two people as one.'' If that is an attack on the institution of marriage as we now know it, bring it on. What do you think?
Thursday, June 29, 2006
Conservative Religious Leaders Demand Cancellation Of World Pride
by 365Gay.com Newscenter Staff June 28, 2006 - 12:01 am ET (Jerusalem) Conservative Jewish, Christian and Moslem leaders in Jerusalem are demanding the Israeli government step in and block World Pride celebrations scheduled to take place this summer. "We do so out of our great love and respect for Jerusalem, the only city in the world that the Bible decrees as holy," said a statement from three evangelical Christian groups - Christian Friends of Israel, Bridges For Peace and the International Christian Embassy in Jerusalem. The open letter to the government followed a rare joint press conference earlier in the week organized by a well-known rabbi and a Moslem cleric. Rabbi Yehuda Levin, an American, and sheik Ibrahim Sarsur and Abas Zkoor - both Arab-Israelis and members of the Knesset - warned there could be violence if World Pride goes ahead. "If they dare to approach the Temple Mount during the parade – they will do so over our dead bodies," said Sarsur. Last week a member of the ruling Kadima Party called for gays to be banned from entering the Knesset. An international gay youth group is planning on visit the Israeli Parliament during World Gay Pride Week in August to see how the Israeli government works. In a letter to Knesset Speaker Dalia Itzik, MK Otniel Schneller said that the visit would turn the chamber into "Sodom and Gomorra." Itzik rejected the call. Organizers of World Pride say they are undeterred. World Pride will be held in Jerusalem from August 6 - 12 and is expected to draw thousands of people from around the world. The event which is held in a different world city every four years was to have been in Jerusalem last summer but postponed due to the Israeli pullout from the Gaza. Jerusalem Open House, Israel's largest LGBT civil rights organization which is organizing this summer's event, is working on a wide range of activities leading up to the big parade. Major events include an Multifaith LGBT Clergy Conference, an outdoor festival, Human Rights Day, LGBT Health Day, an International LGBT Youth conference, and an LGBT Film Festival. ©365Gay.com 2006 What do you think?
Romney: Vote To Ban Gay Marriage 'Democracy'
by The Associated Press June 28, 2006 - 7:00 pm ET (Boston, Massachusetts) Massachusetts Republican Gov. Mitt Romney, renewing his support for a ballot question banning gay marriage, said Wednesday it's the job of voters - not the courts or lawmakers - to define what constitutes a civil right. "Who's going to tell us what a civil right is and what's not? Well, the people will," Romney said in calling on lawmakers to allow a vote on a proposed amendment to the Massachusetts constitution that would ban same-sex marriage. The State House vote is scheduled for July 12. Supporters have long cast same-sex marriage as a civil right that should not be subject to a popular vote, likening it to the desegregation battles of the 1950s and 1960s, where the courts played a central role in expanding rights for blacks. Yet Romney, during a news conference attended by Cardinal Sean O'Malley and other religious and civil leaders, said that in a democracy, nothing is off-limits to voters, even the definition of civil rights. "We have a Constitution. We can look in there and say, 'Does it say here you can vote on matters unless someone can define them as civil rights?' No," said the Republican governor, a graduate of Harvard Law School who is mulling a presidential run in 2008. "It says you vote on all matters in this country and we'll decide what is a civil right and what's not. So, fundamentally, we come back to the principle that the people speak." State Democratic Rep. Byron Rushing, a supporter of gay marriage, said the civil rights of minority groups should not be subject to the whims of the majority. "He's absolutely wrong when he says the definition of civil rights is a definition that is made by all the people," Rushing said. "It is not reasonable to ask all the people to decide what a civil rights issue is. If it was left up to popular referenda in the 1950s and 1960s, we would not have had any of the civil rights laws passed." In a call to The Associated Press after the news conference, Romney appeared to temper his public remarks. "I'm not saying that civil rights should be up to a popular vote," Romney said, although he added, "The Constitution does not prohibit the people from making any decision. The Constitution allows for the people to overrule the judiciary, the executive or the legislative" branches. ©365Gay.com 2006 What do you think?
Pentagon Apologizes For Calling Homosexuality A 'Disorder'
by 365Gay.com Newscenter Staff June 28, 2006 - 5:00 pm ET (Washington) The Pentagon on Wednesday apologized for classifying homosexuality as a mental disorder. Earlier this month it was revealed that a Pentagon document listing various "disorders" included the reference to homosexuality decades after mental health experts abandoned that position. Alongside homosexuality in the Pentagon document that outlined retirement or other discharge policies for service members were mental retardation and personality disorders. The revelation caused a maelstrom of criticism, particularly from gay rights organizations and the American Psychiatric Association. "Homosexuality should not have been characterized as a mental disorder in an appendix of a procedural instruction," the Pentagon said in a statement on Wednesday. "A clarification will be issued over the next few days." But the statement also noted that whether or not the description should have been in the document out gays cannot serve in the military. "Notwithstanding its inclusion, we find no practical impact since that appendix simply listed factors that do not constitute a physical disability, and homosexuality of course does not," the statement said. The Center for the Study of Sexual Minorities in the Military, at the University of California at Santa Barbara, uncovered the document and pointed to it as further proof that the military deserves failing grades for its treatment of gays. A total of 742 military personnel were discharged in 2005 under the “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” ban on openly gay service members, up from 668 discharges among the services in 2004. A bi-partisan coalition in Congress now supports legislation to repeal the “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” law. The Military Readiness Enhancement Act (H.R. 1059), introduced in March 2005 by Congressman Marty Meehan (D-MA) now has about 120 supporters, including five Republican lawmakers. Meehan’s legislation would repeal the military’s ban and allow lesbian, gay and bisexual personnel to serve openly in the armed forces. The Pentagon's classification of homosexuality as a mental disorder brought a stern rebuke from the APA last week. "Based on scientific and medical evidence the APA declassified homosexuality as a mental disorder in 1973 - a position shared by all other major health and mental health organizations based on their own review of the science," James H. Scully Jr., head of the psychiatric association, said in a letter to the Defense Department's top doctor earlier this month. ©365Gay.com 2006 What do you think?
Mother Of Murdered Trans Teen Pleads With Calif. Senate To Pass 'Gay Panic' Bill
by 365Gay.com Newscenter Staff June 28, 2006 - 11:00 am ET (Sacramento, California) The mother of Gwen Araujo made a passionate plea Tuesday before a California Senate committee for support of legislation curbing the so-called gay panic defense. "Since my daughter was killed, my family and I have spent literally thousands of hours working hard to make sure that California is a state where everyone is respected and treated fairly," Sylvia Guerrero. told the Senate Committee on Public Safety. The Gwen Araujo Justice for Victims Act would place restrictions on the way the defense tactic is presented to juries. If a defense attorney attempted to use the argument that a client committed a crime out of panic because the victim were gay or trans a judge would be required to instruct the jury that the use of societal bias, including so-called "panic strategies," to influence the proceedings of a criminal trial is inconsistent with the public policy of the State of California. The bill, authored by Assemblymember Sally Lieber (D-San Jose) also includes funding for training district attorneys in how to address attempts to use the “panic strategy.” “By providing funding to train district attorney’s on how to effectively deal with the so-called “panic strategy” and telling juries that they cannot allow bias against the victim due to their gender, sexual orientation, race or religion to influence their verdict, this legislation is an important step forward in the effort to ensure that those who commit hate crimes are properly punished,” said Equality California Legislative Advocate Alice Kessler who testified along with Sylvia Guerrero. The bill passed by a 4-2 margin and now moves to the Senate Appropriations Committee in August. The measure passed the Assembly in January. Araujo was a transgender 17-year old teenager from Newark, Calif., who was attacked and killed in 2002. The men beat her to death and then buried her in a shallow desert grave. On January 27, 2006, three of the four defendants were sentenced in the slaying. Michael Magidson and Jose Merel, were convicted of second degree murder and sentenced to 15 years to life and Jason Cazares, received a six-year term. Defense lawyers claimed their clients acted out of panic after having sex with the teen and then discovering she was born biologically male. The fourth man, Jaron Nabors, pleaded guilty and received an 11-year sentence in exchange for testifying against his accomplices. ©365Gay.com 2006 What do you think?
Wednesday, June 28, 2006
Amnesty International Slams Latvian Anti-Gay Move
by 365Gay.com Newscenter Staff June 28, 2006 - 12:01 am ET (New York City) Amnesty International on Tuesday accused the Latvian Parliament of violating European Union laws which guarantee the rights of gays and lesbians. In an open letter to the Parliament Amnesty said called on the Latvian government to rewrite its labor law to include sexual orientation as a ground for discrimination. Last week Latvian President Vaira Vike-Freiberga vetoed the labor protection bill for not including LGBT workers and sent it back to Parliament. The legislation was originally passed in 2004 as a condition of European Union membership and as required by the EU contained protections for gays. The law was never implemented and this month after a heated debate Parliament voted to remove the LGBT protections and pass the revised bill. Debate on the amendment was filled with homophobia with members of the majority Christian Democratic Party calling gays "degenerate", "sick" and in need of being "cured". The vote made Latvia the only EU member state without legislation specifically outlawing discrimination at work and in housing on the grounds of sexual orientation. In returning the bill to Parliament lawmakers can either add the gay protections or pass it again and resubmit it to the President. If she were to veto the bill a second time Parliament could then attempt to override the veto. In its letter to Parliament Amnesty International reminded the Latvian authorities that discrimination based on sexual orientation is a human rights violation. "Now is a critical moment -- the Latvian Parliament has a second chance to demonstrate its commitment to protecting all of its citizens from arbitrary discrimination," said Michael Heflin, Director of OUTfront, Amnesty International USA's Program on Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual and Transgender (LGBT) human rights. "The Parliament's continued failure to take this action violates fundamental human rights principles and Latvia's international obligations." Earlier this year Latvia amended its constitution to bar same-sex marriage, the latest in a series of recent anti-gay moves in the country. In July 2005, the Latvian authorities initially withdrew permission for the LGBT community to hold a gay pride march. Only after the organizers of the march made an official complaint to the Riga administrative court to protest the ban was the march permitted. Despite support of including gays in the labor bill by Prime Minister Aigars Kalvitis and Foreign Minister Artis Pabrik Amnesty said it still is concerned about the way issues relating to the LGBT community are debated in Latvia, both by some officials and by the wider public. ©365Gay.com 2006 What do you think?
Spain To Have Its First Military Gay Wedding
by 365Gay.com Newscenter Staff June 27, 2006 - 9:00 pm ET (Madrid) Two gay privates in Spain's Air Force will marry this summer the ETA news agency reported on Tuesday. The wedding will be the first same-sex marriage for the country's military. The men's family names were not identified but the men share the first name Alberto and are based in Seville. "We know we are in the armed forces and this is touchy because we are not gardeners but rather soldiers. I know there are superior officers who will make life difficult for me, and they are already doing so," said one of the men told a Seville radio station. The military said that it was aware of the wedding but considered it a private affair. Nevertheless, it told the men they could wear their uniforms. The couple said nevertheless that they will wear civilian clothes "so as not to antagonize the military." Same-sex marriage became legal in Spain last year. ©365Gay.com 2006 What do you think?
World Anglican Church At Impasse Over Gays
by The Associated Press June 27, 2006 - 5:00 pm ET (London) The leader of the world's feuding Anglicans on Tuesday urged them to work toward a structure for co-existing despite differences on the roles of gays and women and over the authority of the Bible. ``There is no way in which the Anglican communion can remain unchanged by what is happening at the moment,'' Archbishop Rowan Williams wrote to the Anglican communion's 38 primates, including Archbishop Andrew Hutchison, head of the Anglican Church of Canada. ``Neither the liberal nor the conservative can simply appeal to a historic identity that doesn't correspond with where we now are,'' Williams wrote. His letter is being billed as a ``reflection'' on where the church stands following last week's General Convention of the Episcopal Church, the U.S. branch of Anglicanism. Episcopalians brought Anglican differences to a crisis point in 2003 by elevating V. Gene Robinson, who has a male partner, to be bishop of New Hampshire. Rejecting demands from conservatives in Africa and at home that they elect no more gay bishops, Episcopalians voted instead to call for ``restraint.'' And in a communion where women bishops are the exception, Episcopalians ruffled some Anglicans by electing Katharine Jefferts Schori as their presiding bishop. Williams said the same model could work within national churches, including the Episcopal Church where some parishes are in open revolt against their liberal leaders. ``Being an Anglican in the way I have sketched involves certain concessions and unclarities but provides at least for ways of sharing responsibility and making decisions that will hold and that will be mutually intelligible,'' Williams wrote. ``The reason Anglicanism is worth bothering with,'' Williams added, ``is because it has tried to find a way of being a church that is neither tightly centralized nor just a loose federation of essentially independent bodies _ a church that is seeking to be a coherent family of communities meeting to hear the Bible read, to break bread and share wine as guests of Jesus Christ, and to celebrate a unity in worldwide mission and ministry.'' ©365Gay.com 2006 What do you think?
Tuesday, June 27, 2006
Mass. Court Told State Cannot Bar Rhode Island Lesbians From Marrying
by 365Gay.com Newscenter Staff June 26, 2006 - 5:00 pm ET (Boston, Massachusetts) A Boston court was told Monday that a law used to bar a same-sex couple from Rhode Island from marrying should not have applied. At issue is a 1913 Massachusetts law that says marriage licenses cannot be given to out-of-state couples if their marriages would not be legal in their home states. The law was enacted when most states did not recognize interracial marriage. After the US Supreme Court ruled that laws barring interracial couples from marrying was illegal the Massachusetts statute fell into disuse. After same-sex marriage became legal in Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney (R) used the old law to order local clerks not to issue marriage licenses to couples from outside the state. Same-sex couples from Connecticut, Rhode Island, New Hampshire, Vermont, Maine and New York went to court to fight the use of the old law. A lower court agreed with the state's interpretation of the law and with the help of Gay & Lesbian Advocates & Defenders, the group which won marriage rights for same-sex couples in Massachusetts, appealed to the Supreme Judicial Court. In March the high court upheld the law in the cases involving couples from Connecticut, New Hampshire, Vermont and Maine, noting that each of those states has laws barring same-sex marriage. But the court questioned whether the law could apply to New York and Rhode Island which have no specific laws barring gay marriage. It ordered those sections of the case back to the lower court. Today, GLAD argued that Wendy Becker and Mary Norton, of Providence, should be allowed to marry. "Rhode Island has implicitly decided not to stand in the way of its citizens who want to marry here," GLAD attorney Michele Granda argued. Assistant Attorney General Peter Sacks argued that Rhode Island statutes use gender-specific terms - including both "bride" and "groom" - making it clear, he said, that their intention is to define marriage as a union between a man and a woman. Superior Court Judge Thomas E. Connolly said he would rule on the Rhode Island case within the next six weeks. He has not set a date to hear arguments in the New York case. Whatever the outcome the decisions are expected to be appealed and will likely wind up again before the Supreme Judicial Court. Meanwhile, the Massachusetts House and Senate will meet in a special session on July 12 to consider a so-called citizens' initiative petition that would ban same-sex marriages in the state. The measure, which already is being challenged in court, requires only 50 votes to move on to a second convention in 2007. If successful, the question would appear on the 2008 general election ballot. Last month marked the second anniversary of the implementation of a ruling by the Supreme Judicial Court that declared it was illegal to prevent gays from marrying. In the past two years some 8,000 same-sex couples have wed in the state. ©365Gay.com 2006 What do you think?
Gay marriage arguments take center stage in GA
SHANNON McCAFFREY Associated Press ATLANTA - When lawyers appear before Georgia's top court on Tuesday to argue the merits of the state's constitutional ban on gay marriage they're likely to have very little to say about one key issue: gay marriage. The case, which has ignited a political firestorm in Georgia, hinges on whether the state violated a single-subject rule for ballot measures. "This is an important constitutional issue," Jack Senterfitt, a lawyer with the LAMBDA Legal Defense and Education Fund in Atlanta, said Monday. "But this is not a case where the court is being asked to issue a ruling on the merits of whether same sex couples should be able to marry." At issue is whether a ballot measure, which 76 percent of voters approved in 2004, lumped together same-sex marriages and civil unions in violation of the state's long-standing single-subject rule. In May, Fulton Superior Court Judge Constance Russell said that it did and declared the ban unconstitutional. The state immediately appealed, requesting an expedited review of the case despite the fact that the state still has another law on the books making same-sex marriage illegal in Georgia. Opponents of the ban urged the Georgia Supreme Court to uphold Russell's ruling. In a friend of the court brief, 55 law professors in Georgia said the ballot measure "posed a multiple choice question, but only allowed voters to respond 'all of the above' or 'none of the above.'" The state is arguing that Russell's ruling is flawed and should be overturned. In his brief for the state, Attorney General Thurbert Baker said the measure did not violate the subject rule because banning both has the "common purpose of prohibiting same sex marriages" in Georgia. The amendment states that "no union between persons of the same sex shall be recognized by the state as entitled to the benefits of marriage." The case has drawn interest from afar. Two conservative groups - Arizona-based United Families International and the Virginia-based Liberty Counsel - have filed legal briefs supporting the state. In some ways, what the court rules will be less important than when it does so. Gov. Sonny Perdue has pledged to call a special session of the state Legislature if the court does not rule by Aug. 7, in order to get a new measure on the ballot for the November election. Having a gay marriage ban on the ballot would likely provide Perdue, who is up for re-election, and his fellow Republicans with a boost. The issue has been shown to energize conservative voters. The Georgia Supreme Court will webcast the 10 a.m. oral arguments live at: http://www.gasupreme.us/What do you think?
CA Couple celebrates golden anniversary as grand marshals for Pride Parade
Carlye Malchuk Canadian Press Monday, June 26, 2006 TORONTO (CP) - More than 50 years after they were introduced through a mutual friend, a Toronto-area gay couple took part in the city's annual Pride Parade on Sunday as grand marshals. "It's a great honour," said Les Sheare, who has been with his partner Robert Berry since they met on March 17, 1956. "I'll have my 15 minutes of fame and next week nobody will remember me," he quipped. Parade organizer Trisha Kaplan-Freed said having Berry and Sheare as grand marshals - along with another couple who have been together for 50 years, Donald Middleton and Clayton Wilson - demonstrates Pride Week's theme of being fearless. "It goes back to what our lives were like 50 years ago," she said. "Being a couple back then - a queer couple and being out - was so different than it is now." When they began dating, Sheare and Berry had to worry about persecution, losing their jobs or facing harassment if people knew they were gay. "We've been through all the name calling, the harassment, the threats, but things have changed drastically since the time we came out," Berry said. The couple, who married in 2003, said they are stunned by the changes to society in the past few decades. "I can't believe that I'm part of it in this day and age and that I'm still here to see it," Sheare said. "I just feel so comfortable now, being myself and being gay." Berry said it's wonderful that he and Sheare can walk down the street holding hands - although they don't do it often. "We're a little old-fashioned that way," he said. Sheare said being openly gay was never a problem because he has always been "out and flamboyant and having fun." The couple said they don't see themselves as role models, but they do hope a younger generation of gay men will "find themselves" earlier. "Life is not enjoyable unless you are yourself," Sheare said. What do you think?
Spain sees first gay divorce - report
Madrid - A year after legalising gay marriages, Spain is now seeing its first gay divorce, complete with a custody fight over the couple's dogs, a newspaper reported on Monday.The claimant is asking for the right to stay in the marital home and to take custody of their pets. The suit added that his ex-partner would be granted visiting rights to see the animals, a report on the website of newspaper El Mundo said.Council officials said divorce proceedings were private and would only confirm that the unnamed men were married in a Madrid suburb last October, three months after Spain became the fourth country to legalise same-sex marriages.The claimant said in a petition that he had dedicated his life to the relationship, giving up a modelling career and abandoning his dog hairdressing business to follow his partner who had found work in France.Some 1 300 gay weddings have now taken place in Spain.The marriage legislation gives same-sex unions the same status as heterosexual ones, including inheritance rights and adoption, a plan that drew hundreds of thousands of Spaniards into streets to march both in favour and against.Meanwhile a steep rise in divorces has increased yet further since a new divorce law was introduced last year. In 2005, 150 000 marriages were dissolved, compared to 83 000 in 1995. What do you think?
Conference addresses gay issues in Africa
Nairobi - "We are here in Africa. We live in the mainstream, we pay taxes like everybody else, we relate with people in the mainstream. We are a naturally occurring phenomenon in the universe," said activist Donna Smith of gay people in Africa.The representative of the Forum for the Empowerment of Women - a black, lesbian organisation based in Johannesburg - was speaking at the second Africa Conference on Sexual Health and Rights that took place in Nairobi last week.About 400 delegates gathered for the meeting which sought, in part, to improve policies and programmes on sexuality in Africa. The first such meeting was held in Johannesburg in 2004.A session on gay sexuality proved a drawcard. Many countries in Africa still outlaw homosexuality, including Kenya, where it is punishable by jail terms of up to 14 years. In addition to repressive legislation, gays face stigmatisation and discrimination. At worst, discrimination ends in violence. Fikile Vilakazi, of the Coalition of African Lesbians, cited the example of Zoliswa Nkonyana, a 19-year-old lesbian who was killed by a mob in Cape Town earlier this year because of her sexual orientation.Vilakazi said that matters were aggravated by officials' attitudes towards gays. "A number of rape and assault cases have been reported to police stations. When one reports, the police respond by asking why one is a lesbian."The session on gay sexuality also saw the launch of a book titled Tommy Boys, Lesbian Men and Ancestral Wives: Female Same Sex Practices in Africa, an account of lesbian sexuality in Eastern and Southern Africa.This publication was co-authored by activists from six countries: South Africa, Namibia, Swaziland, Kenya, Uganda and Tanzania. - Sapa-IPS What do you think?
Labor leaders support marriage equality
Written by Empire State Pride Agenda Monday, 26 June 2006 New York, June 26, 2006—Today, Empire State Pride Agenda released a list of twenty leaders of labor unions and federations across New York State who are supporting marriage equality for same-sex couples. On the list are well-known figures like Dennis Rivera, Randi Weingarten and Bruce Raynor. This is the first time these labor leaders have allowed their support for marriage equality to be made public Among the unions on the list are: Service Employees International Union (SEIU) 1199; United Federation of Teachers (UFT); and, a number of affiliates and locals of UNITE HERE, United Auto Workers (UAW), American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees (AFSCME), and Communications Workers of America (CWA). Three important upstate labor federations are also on the list: Capital District Area Labor Federation; Rochester & Genesee Valley Labor Federation; and, Central New York Area Labor Federation. (Federations are multi-union organizations within specific geographic regions of the state.) Alan Van Capelle, Executive Director of Empire State Pride Agenda, New York’s statewide lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender (LGBT) civil rights organization said about the announcements, “As someone who worked for nearly a decade in the labor movement, I know that organized labor is one of most effective vehicles in the country for advancing economic and social justice. I am pleased that labor is continuing that great tradition and is leading the way in New York on marriage equality.”“While members of SEIU 1199 have a variety of views about marriage, according to their personal or religious beliefs, it is a fundamental, uniting principle of our organization that all people are entitled to equal rights. We therefore support the right of same-sex couples to access the full and equal rights, responsibilities and economic benefits of civil marriage and oppose laws and constitutional amendments that deny that right.”Dennis Rivera, President, 1199 SEIU, United Healthcare Workers East“All New Yorkers who want to marry should be allowed to do so. Period.”Randi Weingarten, President of United Federation of Teachers (UFT)While the national organizations of 1199 and UFT have been on the record supporting marriage equality since their 2004 conventions, this is the first time Dennis Rivera, President of SEIU 1199, and Randi Weingarten, President of UFT, have publicly stated the support of their unions for marriage equality as it relates to New York. Even though UNITE HERE has not taken a position nationally on marriage equality for same-sex couples, its President Bruce Raynor has given his personal support for the issue. A number of UNITE HERE’s New York affilitiates have come out in support of marriage equality, however, and their local leaders are on today’s list. “I support the Marriage Equality campaign as a union leader because I have dedicated my entire working life to fighting against injustice and discrimination in any and all forms. I am proud to stand with my brothers and sisters at Empire State Pride Agenda in support of this important struggle.”Bruce Raynor, President of UNITE HERE (for identification only)When informed about labor’s support for marriage equality in New York, NYC Council Speaker Christine Quinn said, “The pundits often divide Americans into distinct and separate groups, but the reality is, we are far more integrated and diverse than that. Union families are not so different from LGBT New Yorkers -- indeed, many union members are gay or lesbian. When it comes to justice -- whether it be safe working conditions, racial equality, immigration reform, or marriage rights -- we truly are, as the labor movement so often says, stronger together.” The number of workers in New York State represented by these unions and federations is about 725,000. The three upstate labor federations represent 33 counties and 320,000 of the 725,000 figure. Most of the rest are in NYC. The three federations cover geographic regions of the state that include the cities of Albany, Rochester, Syracuse, Binghamton and Ithaca. The Executive Boards of all three cast unanimous votes supporting resolutions for marriage equality. The Executive Board of Capital District Area Labor Federation passed its resolution on May 8, the Executive Board of the Rochester & Genesee Valley Labor Federation on May 24 and the Executive Board of Central New York Area Labor Federation on June 15. The resolutions passed by the federations express strong support for the “right of same-sex couples to access all the rights, responsibilities and legal commitment of civil marriage.” The resolutions also propose that the New York State AFL-CIO make marriage for same-sex couples a “legislative goal to ensure that all members enjoy equal rights and benefits” and “determine where New York State elected officials stand on this issue prior to the 2006 elections.” (Go to www.prideagenda.org to view a PDF of the resolution passed by the three federations.)Statements from the twenty labor leaders in support of marriage equality can be viewed on the Pride Agenda’s website at www.prideagenda.org/freedom_to_marry/freedom.htm as part of its “New Yorkers for the Freedom to Marry” initiative. Launched in February, this special initiative brings together local and state leaders from many different backgrounds to speak out in support of marriage for same-sex couples. On Valentine’s Day, over seventy clergy from across the state made their support known for marriage equality through “New Yorkers for the Freedom to Marry” and more have joined since then. In March, forty-four elected officials, including New York State Attorney General Eliot Spitzer, became part of the initiative. “LGBT union members have spent decades organizing within their unions on issues like equal rights and benefits,” said Van Capelle. “The announcements we’ve been able to make today on marriage equality would not have been possible without their hard work over the years and the commitment by leadership to do the right thing.” The Pride Agenda anticipates making additional announcements about labor support for marriage equality throughout the summer.Following is the list of labor unions, federations and individuals released today by the Pride Agenda:Leaders of Labor Federations and Unions Voicing Support for Marriage EqualityTo read their statements, go to www.prideagenda.org/freedom_to_marry/freedom.htm.∑ James V. Bertalone, President, Rochester & Genesee Valley Area Labor Federation & President, Local 215, American Postal Workers Union∑ Marshall Blake, President, Central New York Area Labor Federation & Executive VP Service Employees International Union (SEIU) 1199 Upstate∑ Barbara Bowen, President, Professional Staff Congress (PSC), American Federation of Teachers (AFT)∑ Arthur Cheliotes, President, Local 1180, Communication Workers of America (CWA) ∑ May Y. Chen, International Vice President & Secretary-Treasurer, New York Metropolitan Area Joint Board, UNITE HEREJoyce Degenhardt, Regional Coordinator, Region 1, New York State Public Employee Federation (SEIU & AFT)∑ ∑ Joe Fox, President, Capital District Area Labor Federation, AFL-CIO; and Vice President, New York State Public Employee Federation (SEIU & AFT)∑ ∑ Barbie Gatton, President, Committee of Interns & Residents*, Service Employees International Union (SEIU)*individual endorsement, title provided for identification only∑ ∑ John Gillis, International Vice President & General Manager, New York Joint Board, UNITE HERE∑ ∑ William F. Henning, Jr., Second Vice President, Local 1180, Communication Workers of America (CWA) ∑ ∑ Fred Kaplan, President, Retail Employees Union Local 340, UNITE HERE∑ ∑ Wilfredo Larancuent, International Vice President & Manager, Laundry, Drycleaning and Allied Workers Joint Board, UNITE HERE∑ ∑ Bruce Raynor, President, UNITE HERE**individual endorsement, title provided for identification only∑ ∑ Dennis Rivera, President, 1199 United Healthcare Workers East, Service Employees International Union (SEIU)∑ ∑ Maida Rosenstein, President, Technical, Office and Professional Local 2110, United Auto Workers (UAW)∑ ∑ Chris Shelton, Vice President, District One, Communication Workers of America (CWA) ∑ ∑ Lynn Taylor, President, Local 1930, District Council 37, American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees (AFSCME)∑ ∑ United Auto Workers (UAW) Region 9A New York Metro Community Action Program (CAP) Council∑ ∑ ∑ Ellen N. Wallace, President, National Organization of Legal Services Workers, Local 2320, United Auto Workers (UAW)∑ Randi Weingarten, President, United Federation of Teachers (UFT), American Federation of Teachers (AFT) What do you think?
Monday, June 26, 2006
Big Four Celebrate Pride
by 365Gay.com Newscenter Staff June 25, 2006 - 5:00 pm ET (New York City) North America's four largest LGBT communities celebrated gay pride on Sunday with parades focused on same-sex marriage. In New York a steady downpour failed to dampen spirits or the resolve to attain equal marriage rights. The issue of gay marriage was argued last month before the state's highest court and a ruling could come at any time. Just before the parade began Empire State Pride Agenda the largest LGBT civil rights group in New York announced its endorsement of Eliot Spitzer for Governor. "He supports marriage equality for our families; he understands that there is no place in New York State for discrimination against transgender people; he believes that all youth, including LGBT youth, should be safe from bias harassment in our schools; and he believes the state should provide support to programs that address the long-standing health and human services needs of our community," said Pride Agenda Executive Director Alan Van Capelle. The issue of growing incidents of violence against gays was also highlighted in the parade. Kevin Aviance drew wild cheers from the crowds along Fifth Avenue. The singer, appearing in drag, had his mouth unwired for the parade. Earlier his month his jaw was broken in a homophobic attack in the East Village. The wires will be reattached tomorrow. Four young men have been charged with hate crimes in connection with the beating. A cool breeze blew over Market Street as Dykes On Bikes led off San Francisco's Pride parade. Tens of thousands lined the street from the Embarcadero to Civic Center to watch as drag queens, leather men and muscle boys moved to the beat of music blaring from sound trucks. Same-sex marriage is likely to reach the California Supreme Court next year. Marchers from Bay Area GSAs carried signs reading "If you don't want a gay marriage, don't get one." But for many in the parade it was bittersweet - celebrating gay liberation while at the same time remembering loved ones and friends who have died of AIDS. This year is the 25th anniversary of the AIDS epidemic. In Toronto organizers of Canada's biggest pride parade estimated that about 1.2 million people lined Yonge Street for the march. The city's gay community sees the parade as a "shot across the bow" of Prime Minister Stephen Harper's government which will hold a vote this fall on reopening the debate on gay marriage. The Conservatives hope to get enough votes to introduce a bill repealing same-sex marriage in Canada. Polls show the public does not want the issue revisited and the opposition parties are opposed to amending the law. Toronto's city clerk's office was busy all weekend processing marriage licenses for gay couples - mostly from the US. With no waiting time couples picked up their licenses and immediately married. Tens of thousands of people lined up to watch Chicago's Gay Pride Parade. The highlight was local teams who will compete in this summer's Gay Games. Chicago is the host city for the games this year. Marchers also denounced an attempt by a conservative group to force a referendum on gay marriage. The vote would only call on lawmakers to start the ball rolling on a constitutional amendment banning gay marriage but opponents say they intend to fight it. Crowds were estimated at about a half million people as the parade headed north on Halsted to Broadway, south on Broadway to Diversey, and east on Diversey to Canon Drive. Chicago's pride parade is the second largest parade in the city behind the Bud Billiken parade. At least a dozen other cities also celebrated pride on Sunday. ©365Gay.com 2006 What do you think?
GOP Gov. Appoints Gay Maryland Judge
by 365Gay.com Newscenter Staff June 25, 2006 - 5:00 pm ET (Baltimore, Maryland) Maryland Gov. Robert L. Ehrlich Jr. has appointed Christopher Panos to be a judge on the Baltimore District Court. Panos, 47, is currently a special master in the city Circuit Court family division. He and domestic partner Dennis Cashen, are raising a young daughter. The move is Ehrlich's latest attempt to position himself as a centrist candidate as he seeks re-election. Last week he fired Robert J. Smith, his appointee to the Washington Metro transit authority board, after Smith refused to back down from homophobic remarks he made on a cable TV show. Appearing on a Montgomery County cable access show, Smith called gays "persons of sexual deviancy". Both the firing of Smith and the appointment of Panos has caused some gay activists and a number of conservatives in Ehrlich's Republican Party to accuse him of playing self-serving politics in both decisions. Earlier this year the governor told a Baltimore radio station that he would appoint only judges who agreed with him on social and political issues. Conservatives in the GOP said Ehrlich's newfound "liberalism" could drive them from supporting him. Many gays in the state remember his veto last year of a bill that would have given unmarried couples that registered as life partners the same rights as married couples in dealing with health care issues saying it "could lead to the erosion of the sanctity of traditional marriage as already codified in Maryland law." This year he supported a watered down version of the legislation. When a Baltimore judge ruled that Maryland's law prohibiting same-sex marriage was unconstitutional Ehrlich did a flip flop on whether a constitutional amendment to bar same-sex marriage "was necessary. At first said he would not support an amendment and then decided he would. ©365Gay.com 2006 What do you think?
From Athens To Zagreb Europe Celebrates Gay Pride
by 365Gay.com Newscenter Staff June 25, 2006 - 12:01 am ET (Paris) They marched, danced and rode in a number of cities across Europe on Saturday celebrating victories already won in some places and calling for civil rights in others. One of the biggest parades was in Paris were a sea of rainbow-colored flags weaved its way from southern Paris toward Place de la Bastille. Among the marchers was the city's openly gay mayor, Bertrand Delanoe and other members of the Socialist Party. Last week the leading candidate for the party's presidential nomination announced her support for same-sex marriage in France. "Opening up marriage to same-sex couples is needed in the name of equality, visibility and respect," Segolene Royal told the LGBT publication Tetu. The declaration sets her apart from President Jacques Chirac's ruling conservative UMP party which opposes both gay marriage and adoption and only begrudgingly agreed several years ago to grant limited rights to gay and lesbian couples. This is the last Pride Parade in the French capital before the 2007 election and the Socialists are hoping the LGBT vote sweeps the party into power. In Dublin about 5,000 people celebrated Pride in the Irish capital. Marriage was the major theme of this year's event. The Irish government already is committed to enacting legislation allowing civil partnerships but not marriage for gay and lesbian couples. In Lisbon about 400 people marched for equality and the right to marry. About a thousand people attended a Pride celebration in Athens. Outside the Greek Parliament they called for civil marriage. Heavily influenced by the conservative Orthodox Church the government has been slow to recognize same-sex relationships. Close to 1,500 people marched through central Budapest to celebrate Gay Pride Day. Like Greece, Hungary has been slow to enact civil rights laws for its LGBT community. Marchers carried rainbow-colored flags and banners promoting tolerance. Members of a far-right party held a counter rally but police reported no incidents. In Zagreg there were almost as many police as gay marchers. About 200 members of the LGBT community marched through central Zagreb. The heavy police presence was the result of threats from extremist groups but no problems were reported. ©365Gay.com 2006 What do you think?
Sox GM May Refuse League Ordered 'Gay Sensitivity' Program
by The Associated Press June 24, 2006 - 2:00 pm ET (Chicago, Illinois Chicago White Sox manager Ozzie Guillen reacted angrily during Friday night's post-game news conference when asked about a report on ESPNdeportes.com that quoted him as saying he would not undergo the sensitivity training that commissioner Bud Selig ordered. Guillen was fined Thursday and ordered by Selig to undergo training after an obscenity-laden tirade against Chicago Sun-Times columnist Jay Mariotti in which the manager used a derogatory term that describes someone's sexual orientation. When asked about the report after the game, the manager responded with a lengthy diatribe in which he said he first needs to take English classes ``to understand what they're talking about'' and threatened to ``start being nasty with the media'' if they continued to ask questions about it. ``It's a really uncomfortable situation for me,'' Guillen said after the White Sox beat Houston 7-4. ``I don't need this job. It's hard every day. ... If someone tries to play games, I'm sorry, but you've got the wrong guy.'' Guillen got up and walked out of the interview room. A few minutes later, he said through a team spokesman he will undergo the training. Guillen has said he did not mean to offend gays and has apologized for using the word. But he stands by his criticism of Mariotti, who was not at U.S. Cellular Field when Guillen chastised him. Mariotti had criticized Guillen's handling of pitcher Sean Tracey. The rookie could be seen distraught in the dugout last week in Texas after Guillen became angry when the White Sox didn't retaliate for catcher A.J. Pierzynski twice being hit with pitches. Tracey was sent to the minors. Guillen was also angry with Mariotti for calling for the Cubs to fire manager Dusty Baker and replace him with TV broadcaster Bob Brenly. Guillen was back in the dugout Friday after serving a one-game suspension, a punishment for reliever David Riske hitting St. Louis' Chris Duncan with a pitch Tuesday night after two White Sox were plunked. Riske is appealing a three-game suspension. The St. Louis Post-Dispatch, citing a Cardinals source, said the team became convinced during Wednesday's game that a camera in center field was tipping pitches to the White Sox _ a notion that Guillen laughed off. The White Sox won the first two games 20-6 and 13-5, then managed just one hit but beat the Cardinals 1-0 on Jim Thome's home run Thursday. ©365Gay.com 2006 What do you think?
Saturday, June 24, 2006
Prince Disowned For Being Gay
by 365Gay.com Newscenter Staff June 24, 2006 - 12:01 am ET (New Delhi) The eldest son and heir of one of India's princely families has been disowned after coming out publicly. Prince Manvendra Singh Gohil of Rajpipla quickly became the public face of the gay rights movement in Gujarat and is the patron of the region's biggest HIV/AIDS organization. The prince learned that he had been stripped of his title, inheritance, and all rights in the newspaper. His family, one of the richest in India, this week placed an official announcement in local papers accusing him of disobedience and of bringing dishonor to the royal family. The announcement said that Prince Manvendra was involved in activities that are "unsuitable in society" and said that the family was severing all ties with him. In an interview with The Times of India the prince said that he was not altogether surprised. He told the paper that he had come out to his family in 2002. "However, they may not have expected that I would go public with the issue." "I did so by giving an interview that was carried prominently. I also said gay relationships were not uncommon in royal families. This, along with my recent interviews regarding a documentary film on gay relationships, seems to have prompted the action," he told The Times of India. ©365Gay.com 2006 What do you think?
Law Profs Support Challenge To Georgia Anti-Gay Amendment
by 365Gay.com Newscenter Staff June 23, 2006 - 5:00 pm ET (Atlanta, Georgia) Some of Georgia's greatest legal minds have come out in support of a challenge to the state's constitutional ban on same-sex marriage. Fifty-five law school professors from across the state are urging the Supreme Court of Georgia to uphold a lower court ruling that overturned the ban. The high court will hear arguments next Tuesday in the state's appeal of the ruling. In May, Superior Court Judge Constance Russell, of Fulton County, tossed out the constitutional amendment, which 76 percent of voters had approved in 2004. Russell did not rule on issues related to gay marriage, but held instead that the measure violated the single-subject rule mandated by the state Constitution by asking voters to consider both same-sex marriage and civil unions. "The importance of posing clear, single-subject questions [to voters] has been known for almost as long as democracy itself," the professors from Emory University, the University of Georgia and three other law schools said in a friend of the court brief submitted to the Supreme Court this week. Among those signing on the brief were professors from the University of Georgia, Emory, Georgia State University College of Law, Mercer University Law School and John Marshall Law School. In filing the appeal earlier this month state lawyers argued that the ballot measure does not violate the single issue law. "To constitute a plurality of subject matter, an Act must embrace two or more dissimilar and discordant subjects that by no fair intendment can be considered as having any logical connection with or relation to each other." the state's brief said. "The parts of the amendment are germane to one another and their common purpose of prohibiting same sex marriages in Georgia." Even if the amendment is voided by the Supreme Court it would not mean same-sex couples could marry in Georgia. The state has a so-called Defense of Marriage Act, enacted in 1996. Gov. Sonny Perdue has given the court until Aug. 7 to rule. If it does not rule by then, or upholds Russell's decision, he has vowed to call a special session of the state Legislature to get the issue back on the ballot for the November election. ©365Gay.com 2006 What do you think?
7000 Gay Couples Say 'I Do' In UK
by 365Gay.com Newscenter Staff June 23, 2006 - 3:00 pm ET (London) Nearly 7,000 same-sex couples have entered into civil partnerships in Britain in the four months since they became legal. The majority of the couples were married in England and Wales where 6,516 pairs tied the knot. In Scotland, some 350 couples have exchanged vows. Unlike most other countries which allow same-sex couples to solemnify their relationships most of the British couples were male - by a margin of almost two-to-one figures released Friday show. In England and Wales 4,311 couples were male and 2,205 female. Not surprisingly there was a rush to have civil unions in December, right after the law went into effect with 1,901 partnerships formed in England and Wales. Numbers tailed off slightly in the new year. The most popular location to have a civil partnership was in London, followed closely by the largely gay area of Brighton and Hove. Despite the lower numbers in Scotland, one-in-five of all couples tying the knot in Edinburgh were same-sex couples. The civil partnership law went into effect December 20 in Scotland and the following day in England and Wales. It applies only to same-sex couples and offers all of the rights and responsibilities of marriage but without the name. ©365Gay.com 2006 What do you think?
Hearing set on R.I. gay couple's lawsuit
Friday, June 23, 2006 By DAN RING dring@repub.comBOSTON - A Suffolk Superior Court judge - the same judge who previously ruled against gay marriage - on Monday will weigh whether same-sex couples from Rhode Island can marry in Massachusetts. Monday's scheduled hearing in Boston stems from a March 30 decision by the state Supreme Judicial Court on a lawsuit by out-of-state gay couples who sought the right to wed in Massachusetts. The court ruled that Gov. W. Mitt Romney and Attorney General Thomas F. Reilly could use a 1913 state law to ban gay couples from Connecticut, Maine, New Hampshire and Vermont from marrying in Massachusetts because gay marriage is illegal in those states. But the high court said it was unclear whether gay marriage was banned in Rhode Island and New York. The court said the Superior Court needed to rule on that. The case will be heard by Suffolk Superior Court Judge Thomas E. Connolly, who in 2002 ruled against a lawsuit filed by seven same-sex couples who wanted the right to marry in Massachusetts. The SJC in 2003 disagreed with Connolly and legalized gay marriage. Under the 1913 law, out-of-state couples can't marry in Massachusetts if their union would be banned in their home state. In a brief filed with Connolly, Assistant Attorney General Peter Sacks said the court should prohibit Mary E. Norton, 46, and Wendy L. Becker, 45, of Providence from obtaining a marriage license in Massachusetts. Becker, a professor at Rhode Island College in Providence, and Norton, a director of research at Brown University in Providence, were denied a marriage license in Attleboro in May 2004. Sacks wrote that Rhode Island's laws require a "female party" and a "male party" to obtain a marriage license. Rhode Island law also states that "the bride and groom" should be stipulated on the license. "These statutes clearly indicate the Rhode Island General Assembly's intent that marriage be between a man and a woman," Sacks wrote. In a brief with Connolly, Michele E. Granda, lead lawyer on the case for the Gay & Lesbian Advocates & Defenders in Boston, said Rhode Island law doesn't specifically ban gay marriage under the legal standards set by four of the Supreme Judicial Court's seven justices. The four justices require at a minimum evidence that gay marriage is "prohibited" by express pronouncement in Rhode Island law, Granda wrote. The attorney general has not "identified any Rhode Island statute, constitutional provision or controlling appellate decision that 'expressly forbids' the marriage of same-sex couples in Rhode Island." Sacks and lawyers for the Gay & Lesbian Advocates & Defenders are awaiting a decision by the New York Court of Appeals on whether gay marriage will be allowed in that state. What do you think?
Florida church exposes foes of same-sex marriage
A gay-friendly church in Jacksonville, Fla., is turning heads and sparking debate by publishing on its Web site a list of Floridians who signed a petition voicing opposition to same-sex marriage, reports News4Jax.com. The Church Christ of Peace has made public not only the names but also the addresses of 400,000 foes of marriage equality. Opponents of same-sex marriage in the state need 100,000 more signatures to qualify the issue for the 2008 ballot. Floridians would then vote on whether to constitutionally ban same-sex marriage, although it’s already illegal in the state. The same-sex marriage debate, once a relatively quiet matter in Jacksonville, has been stirred up because of the Church Christ of Peace’s actions. “I think it’s a right of privacy,” Floridian Beverly Hughes told News4Jax.com. “If you want it on [the Web site], you should put it on, not somebody else.” The Reverend Gary Debusk of the Christ Church of Peace thinks the outing of marriage equality foes will have a positive outcome by creating dialogue on both sides, he told News4Jax.com. A similar situation happened in Massachusetts last year when a pro-gay group called Know Thy Neighbor published the names of people trying to overturn that state’s decision to legalize same-sex marriage. (The Advocate) What do you think?
Poll: NJ supports civil unions, opposes ban on gay marriage
-------------------- By GEOFF MULVIHILL Associated Press Writer June 23, 2006, 4:58 PM EDT Nearly two-thirds of New Jersey residents support allowing civil unions for same-sex couples, while half think gay marriage should be legal in the state, according to a poll released Friday. The Rutgers-Eagleton Poll finds the state far more supportive of gay unions than the nation as a whole _ and more than New Jersey was in a poll three years ago. The latest poll comes as the state Supreme Court considers a case in which seven gay couples sued for the right to marry. Many legal scholars and political insiders expect the court will find that same-sex couples do have a constitutional right to marry in the state. If that happens, opponents of gay marriage vow a quick push to amend the state constitution to ban same-sex marriage. Fifty-two percent of respondents said they opposed such an amendment, while 40 percent supported it. The question, though, did not specify whether it was a state or federal constitutional amendment in question. The poll found that while respondents clearly supported expanding rights for gay couples, they were not decisive about whether marriage was the answer. Half of the respondents were asked about same-sex marriage first; the other half were asked first about civil unions. Those asked first about same-sex marriage supported it by a 53 to 40 margin, but those asked about civil unions first were split, with 48 percent in favor of allowing gay marriage and 47 percent opposing it. Regardless of the question order, about 65 percent of respondents supported civil unions, while 30 percent opposed them. The poll, conducted from June 14-19, surveyed 699 randomly selected registered voters and had a sampling error margin of plus or minus 3.5 percentage points. Len Deo, president of the conservative New Jersey Family Policy Council, said the poll results may have shown less support for same-sex unions had the questions been asked differently. He said, for instance, that if respondents had been told that New Jersey already allows same-sex couples to register as domestic partners, more may have opposed going further than that with marriage or civil unions. "When people understand all the facts, then you tend to see a stronger margin in favor of marriage as the union of a man and a woman," he said. Steven Goldstein, chair of the gay-rights group Garden State Equality said the Rugters-Eagleton poll showed the same attitudes _ though not as strongly _ as a poll his organization commissioned in February. "Poll after poll after poll in New Jersey, no matter who conducts them or who commissions them, all say the same thing: New Jersey wants gay couples to have the freedom to marry," Goldstein said in a written statement. Copyright (c) 2006, The Associated Press What do you think?
Friday, June 23, 2006
Colorado Catholics Instructed To Support Anti-Gay Amendment
by 365Gay.com Newscenter Staff June 23, 2006 - 12:01 am ET (Denver, Colorado) Roman Catholic churches throughout Colorado will be used to collect signatures for two ballot measures that will restrict the rights of same-sex couples. One is an amendment to the state Constitution to ban gay marriage, the other would block benefits to same-sex couples. There are about 370,000 Catholics in the state. The ballot measures each need about 68,000 signatures by Aug. 7 to qualify for a statewide vote. Denver Archbishop Charles Chaput said that petitions on the two gay issues and a third on abortion are to be made available in every parish in the state. "If these important measures do not get on the ballot in November, we will have failed to add to our state laws a strong message of respect for our families and new life," Chaput wrote in the Denver Catholic Register. Under Chaput's instruction bishops in the state will read pastoral letters or write columns in area Catholic papers in support of the proposed amendments. "If same-sex marriage is legalized here, churches that refuse to perform these "weddings" could lose their tax-exempt status," Colorado Springs Bishop Michael Sheridan wrote in his diocesan paper, The Colorado Catholic Herald. "Any religious teaching which condemns homosexual acts (would be) considered hate speech and is punishable by imprisonment. This reduces the Christian view of marriage and sexuality to bigotry." Neither statement is correct according to organizations fighting the amendments. While it is likely the group behind the marriage amendment will be successful in having gay marriage banned the move to curb benefits may fail. Last week the Colorado Supreme Court has rejected a challenge to the measure. LGBT civil rights group Coloradans for Fairness and Equality told the justices that referendum also deals with more than one subject. Colorado law permits only one issue to be placed on any one referendum question. The high court rejected the argument and supporters of the amendment have begun collecting signatures to get the referendum placed before voters. The measure is in response to a third referendum that will go to voters which would allow same-sex couples to register as domestic partners. That proposal was approved by the legislature and does not need the collection of signatures to go on the ballot. Polls in the state have indicated that most voters would approve banning same-sex marriage in the constitution but are opposed to including partner benefits. ©365Gay.com 2006 What do you think?
Focus on the Family accused of manipulating research
June 23, 2006 The right-wing group Focus on the Family is being accused of manipulating research on gays and lesbians in an effort to advance its homophobic agenda. It all began when the Colorado Springs, Colo.–based group released a statement on its Web site refuting the results of a study on lesbian teens conducted by Elizabeth Saewyc of the University of British Columbia. Saewyc’s study found that lesbian teens were more likely to attempt suicide than their straight peers, but Focus on the Family took an opportunity to use the findings to come up with a different conclusion than what Saewyc found. “Regrettably, [lesbian teens] think they have to embrace homosexuality because pro-gay advocates told them that they were born gay,” claimed Focus on the Family spokeswoman Melissa Fryrear on the group’s site. On Monday, Saewyc responded to Focus on the Family’s claims by telling the Canadian Press, “The research has been hijacked for somebody’s political purposes or ideological purposes, and that’s worrisome.” The conservative group defended itself in the Canadian Press article by bringing up a 2001 study on sexual orientation conducted by Columbia University professor Robert Spitzer. Spitzer said Focus on the Family was once again distorting the facts. “Although a third of the subjects in my study reported having had serious thoughts of suicide related to their homosexuality, not one of them blamed the gay rights movement’s advocating a ‘born gay’ theory of homosexuality as the cause of their suicidal thinking,” Spitzer said. “Focus on the Family should shut down its fib factory and start focusing on the needs of real families,” said Wayne Besen, executive director of Truth Wins Out, a pro-gay advocacy group. “This group mocks science and can’t tell a centrifuge from a centerfold or a test tube from a boob tube. All they understand is the science of spin, which got them into a lot of trouble.” (The Advocate) What do you think?
Thursday, June 22, 2006
Gay marriage ban passes PA Senate
By MARC LEVY, Associated Press Writer , The Associated Press The state Senate on Wednesday approved a proposed constitutional amendment that would echo state law in seeking to outlaw gay marriage in Pennsylvania, and narrowly rejected efforts by conservatives to include a companion ban on civil unions. The push for the legislation is a last-ditch effort by supporters to keep alive the possibility for a statewide referendum as early as 2007 on a constitutional amendment to ban gay marriage. With differences on the issue between the House and Senate, the multiyear process that is required to amend the state constitution could be set back two years if the chambers do not agree before lawmakers take a vacation from Harrisburg in July and August. The bill passed, 38-12, but was a bitter pill for conservatives who had also sought a ban on civil unions, which they see as tantamount to gay marriage. An effort to add a ban on the "functional equivalent" of marriage to the legislation divided the Republican majority and failed, 23-27. Sen. Jane Orie, R-Allegheny, said that a vote against wider legislation to ban gay marriage as well as civil unions was "a vote against marriage in Pennsylvania." She and other Republicans warned that, without a constitutional amendment, a state judge could act on a legal challenge to Pennsylvania law and effectively legalize gay marriage or civil unions between gays. The House on June 6 approved a proposed constitutional amendment to define marriage as being between one man and one woman and to prohibit civil unions between gays by banning "a legal union identical or substantially equivalent to that of marriage for unmarried individuals." Liberal opponents characterized a ban as the kind of racial discrimination that courts have struck down in previous decades. Other opponents questioned the need for a constitutional amendment to guard against a hypothetical challenge to a 1996 state law that already defines marriage as between a man and a woman. "This measure is disheartening, it is divisive, and it is diversionary to say the least," said Sen. Jim Ferlo, D-Allegheny. "The Pennsylvania Constitution should not be tarnished with this measure." In addition, opponents contended that civil unions have nothing to do with marriage, and said a ban would simply take away rights and benefits from gays and many other classes of people who live together, but are not married. "If we're concerned about the sanctity of marriage, I don't know how it hurts your marriage ... if some gay couple in Philadelphia is living together," said Sen. Vincent J. Fumo, D-Philadelphia. "Mind your own business, stay out of the bedroom." Gay marriage has re-emerged as a major election-year issue, as six states are scheduled for a referendum on a constitutional ban on gay marriages. Twenty states have adopted constitutional definitions outlawing gay marriage, with more than half extending the ban to civil unions. Amending the Pennsylvania Constitution requires the approval by the House and Senate in two successive two-year sessions of the General Assembly and then the approval of voters in a statewide referendum. Constitutionally, any such legislation must be approved by both chambers three months before the Nov. 7 general election if the process is to continue into the 2007-08 session of the General Assembly. That would make Aug. 7 the deadline for the House and Senate to agree on an identical legislation, but the chambers are scheduled to leave Harrisburg at the end of next week to take a summer vacation that lasts into September. What do you think?
Episcopal Church votes to curb gay bishops
Wed Jun 21, 2006 4:15 PM ET By Jim Leckrone COLUMBUS, Ohio (Reuters) - The U.S. Episcopal Church, trying to appease an angry and alienated worldwide Anglican community, reversed itself on Wednesday and agreed to try to avoid the consecration of more openly gay bishops. The action came 24 hours after one of two legislative bodies at the 2.3 million member U.S. church's convention had rejected a similar idea. The non-binding resolution adopted at the convention calls on those in authority "to exercise restraint by not consenting to the consecration of any candidate (for bishop) whose manner of life presents a challenge to the wider church and will lead to further strains on communion." Debate during the weeklong convention made it clear that the "manner of life" caution applied to openly homosexual candidates for the episcopate. The church has been in turmoil since its consecration three years ago of Gene Robinson of New Hampshire, the first bishop known to be in an openly gay relationship in more than 450 years of Anglican history. Rowan Williams, the archbishop of Canterbury, said it was not clear how fully the U.S. church's actions responded to concerns raised by the world church's spiritual leadership. "The wider Communion will therefore need to reflect carefully on the significance of what has been decided before we respond more fully," he said. The resolution's "exercise caution" wording falls short of a recommendation from the Windsor Report, a paper issued at the behest of Williams, which suggested a moratorium on more gay bishops. STRONGER WORDING But the advice to avoid consecrations that was finally chosen was stronger than earlier wording proposed by a special commission within the U.S. church that called for exercising "very considerable caution" in elevating gays in open relationships to the episcopate. However, the election of bishops is a local matter within the church and any resolution in whatever form is advisory. The vote came after Presiding Bishop Frank Griswold warned the convention in its closing hours that "unless there is a clear perception on the part of our Anglican brothers and sisters that they have been taken seriously ... there will be no conversion and the bonds of affection which undergird communion will be further strained." Griswold is leaving the church's top post after nearly nine years. His successor, voted in last Sunday at the convention, is Nevada Bishop Katharine Jefferts Schori, who will be installed later this year and become the first woman to head any branch in the 77 million-member Anglican community worldwide. "This church, the body of Christ, is not wholly one and not wholly two," she said during the debate. "The resolution which is before you is far from adequate. The language is exceedingly challenging but it is the best we can do at this convention." Jefferts Schori, who backed the Robinson consecration three years ago and favors gay rights generally, said the resolution did not amount to "slamming the door" on the issue. "We need to keep working ... to find the common body in this church," she said. "This is the best we are going to manage at this point in the church's history." What do you think?
Wednesday, June 21, 2006
Australians Support Civil Unions
by 365Gay.com Newscenter Staff June 20, 2006 - 9:00 pm ET (Sydney, Australia) A bill at the center of a storm between the Australian Capital Territory and the federal government that would allow civil unions and provide the benefits of marriage has broad support among voters a new poll shows. The Nielsen poll for the Fairfax newspaper group shows that 45 percent of Australian support the legislation while only 34 percent oppose it. The groundbreaking civil union bill was passed by the Australian Capital Territory earlier this month but nullified by the federal government of Prime Minister John Howard. The bill was based on Britain's civil partnerships and offered all of the rights and responsibilities of marriage without using the term. The Howard government said it violated a 2004 federal law limiting marriage to opposite-sex couples. Last week an attempt to overturn the government's veto failed by only two votes in the Australian Senate. Following the vote ACT Attorney-General Simon Corbell said the territorial government will likely introduce a new set of gay unions laws. "Discrimination against same-sex relationships persists in this country," Corbell said at the time. The Nielsen poll found that support for same-sex couples was highest among younger people. Those between 18 and 39 gave 56 percent approval to the ACT legislation. ©365Gay.com 2006 What do you think?
Presbyterians Approve Leeway For Ordaining Gay Clergy
by The Associated Press June 20, 2006 - 6:30 pm ET (Birmingham, Alabama) A Presbyterian Church (U.S.A.) national assembly voted Tuesday to create some leeway for gay clergy and lay officers to serve local congregations, despite a denominational ban on partnered gay ministers. A measure approved 298-221 by a Presbyterian national assembly keeps in place a church law that says clergy and lay elders and deacons must limit sexual relations to man-woman marriage. But the new legislation says local congregations and regional presbyteries can exercise some flexibility when choosing clergy and lay officers of local congregations if sexual orientation or other issues arise. The decision concluded a hard-fought struggle lasting years between liberals and conservatives in the 2.3-million-member denomination. Ten conservative caucuses allied to fight any change, and conservatives lost two last-ditch efforts to kill or delay the measure.The Presbyterian establishment, including all seminary presidents and many officials, promoted the flexibility plan, which was devised by a special task force. The idea is to grant modest change to liberals but mollify conservatives by keeping the sexual law on the books. It's unclear whether that will work. "We have been painfully aware that in some ways our greatest challenge was not preparing for this assembly but preparing for what happens after this assembly," the Rev. Clifton Kirkpatrick, chief executive at denominational headquarters, told delegates after the votes. The Rev. Blair Monie of Dallas, who chaired the committee dealing with the issue, said that "this is not an 'anything goes' proposal. In fact, it will make the examination of officers more rigorous." But a series of conservative delegates disputed that. "When the constitution is set aside and something mandatory is reduced to something optional, it destroys the constitution," said Robert Gagnon, a New Testament professor at Pittsburgh Theological Seminary and author of a book opposing gay relationships. Gagnon said the denomination had reached "a transition point" that broke from Jesus' teaching in favor of man-woman monogamy. But Jesus was cited from the other side. Oregon youth delegate Jamie Moon said she found the assembly debate disheartening. She said she became Presbyterian because "Jesus Christ was love. Jesus Christ was acceptance. He said come to me and be my disciple. "He wants us to love everybody. Raise your hand if you're not a sinner," she told the assembly. What do you think?
Episcopalians Reject Ban On Gay Bishops
by The Associated Press June 20, 2006 - 4:00 pm ET (Columbus, Ohio) Episcopal clergy and lay delegates Tuesday rejected a demand from fellow Anglicans that they temporarily stop electing gay bishops, leaving little chance the proposal could be revived at a national church meeting. Anglican leaders, angered by the 2003 consecration of an openly gay Episcopal bishop, had asked the Episcopalians pass a moratorium _ at least for now _ on homosexuals leading dioceses. But in a complex balloting system, a majority of the Episcopal House of Deputies voted against a measure that would have urged dioceses to refrain from electing homosexuals to lead them. Conservatives said the measure stopped short of a moratorium, but supporters argued it would have at least signaled that the American church understood the concerns of Anglican leaders. Northern Indiana Bishop Edward Little, who was on the committee that drafted the measure, said prior to the vote that if deputies did not approve the legislation "that would be the end" of debate on a moratorium. The critical discussion in the Episcopal Church came on a day when another American Protestant denomination, the Presbyterian Church (U.S.A.), coincidentally planned to decide on whether to allow leeway on the ordination of gay clergy and lay elders and deacons. Mainline Protestant groups, including the Methodists and the largest U.S. Lutheran branch, have been struggling for decades over the traditional Christian prohibition on gay sex as lesbians and gays push for full inclusion in their churches. The issue has frequently dominated debate at national Protestant assemblies. The Episcopal General Convention ends Wednesday, and the House of Bishops could still try to resurrect the ban on gay bishops. But such a measure would need the approval of the very same deputies who have now rejected it. Anglicans sought the changes after the consecration three years ago of Bishop V. Gene Robinson of New Hampshire, who lives with his longtime male partner. The Episcopal Church is the U.S. arm of the 77 million-member Anglican Communion, the fellowship of churches with roots that trace back to the Church of England. While conservatives are a minority within the American denomination, the majority of overseas Anglican leaders oppose actively gay clergy. They have pressured Archbishpo of Canterubry Rowan Williams, the communion's spiritual leader, to take some action against Episcopalians if they fail to adhere to that view. Many Anglican churches have already broken ties with the U.S. church over Robinson's elevation. And if overseas leaders dislike the outcome of this week's meeting, it greatly increases the chances that the association of 38 national churches will break apart. Williams has repeatedly expressed concern that the feud over homosexuality would lead to a permanent rift. "We cannot survive as a communion of churches without some common convictions about what it is to live and to make decisions as the Body of Christ," he wrote in a message to the General Convention when it began last week. ©365Gay.com 2006 What do you think?
Pentagon lists homosexuality as disorder
Updated 6/20/2006 8:41 AM ET By Lolita C. Baldor, Associated Press Writer WASHINGTON — A Pentagon document classifies homosexuality as a mental disorder, decades after mental health experts abandoned that position. The document outlines retirement or other discharge policies for service members with physical disabilities, and in a section on defects lists homosexuality alongside mental retardation and personality disorders. Critics said the reference underscores the Pentagon's failing policies on gays, and adds to a culture that has created uncertainty and insecurity around the treatment of homosexual service members, leading to anti-gay harassment. Pentagon spokesman Lt. Col. Jeremy M. Martin said the policy document is under review. The Pentagon has a "don't ask, don't tell" policy that prohibits the military from inquiring about the sex lives of service members but requires discharges of those who openly acknowledge being gay. The Center for the Study of Sexual Minorities in the Military, at the University of California at Santa Barbara, uncovered the document and pointed to it as further proof that the military deserves failing grades for its treatment of gays. Nathaniel Frank, senior research fellow at the center, said, "The policy reflects the department's continued misunderstanding of homosexuality and makes it more difficult for gays and lesbians to access mental health services." The document, called a Defense Department Instruction, was condemned by medical professionals, members of Congress and other experts, including the American Psychiatric Association. "It is disappointing that certain Department of Defense instructions include homosexuality as a 'mental disorder' more than 30 years after the mental health community recognized that such a classification was a mistake," said Rep. Marty Meehan, D-Mass. Congress members noted that other Pentagon regulations dealing with mental health do not include homosexuality on any lists of psychological disorders. And in a letter to Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld on Monday, nine lawmakers asked for a full review of all documents and policies to ensure they reflect that same standard. "Based on scientific and medical evidence the APA declassified homosexuality as a mental disorder in 1973 — a position shared by all other major health and mental health organizations based on their own review of the science," James H. Scully Jr., head of the psychiatric association, said in a letter to the Defense Department's top doctor earlier this month. There were 726 military members discharged under the "don't ask, don't tell" policy during the budget year that ended last Sept. 30. That marked the first year since 2001 that the total had increased. The number of discharges had declined each year since it peaked at 1,227 in 2001, and had fallen to 653 in 2004. What do you think?
Tuesday, June 20, 2006
French Presidential Contender Calls For Gay Marriage
by 365Gay.com Newscenter Staff June 20, 2006 - 12:01 am ET |