Thursday, March 24, 2011

New York Times looks at ' the extra hoops gay families must jump through'

When the National Organization for Marriage, the Family Research Council, and other organizations of that ilk talk about families, it because of the following New York Times article that they attempt to bury all mentions of lgbt families:

MOST pregnant women avoid long road trips right before their due date. But Amanda and Kay Shelton, a lesbian couple in Beverly Hills, Mich., contemplated traveling more than 600 miles to New Jersey so Amanda could give birth in a state where their baby could have two “legal” mothers.

Michigan, along with several others, doesn’t allow same-sex couples to perform second-parent adoptions, which allow one partner to adopt the other’s biological or adopted children. They never did make the long trip, which would have allowed Kay to begin adoption proceedings immediately. “It was not terribly practical, so we were kind of in a difficult spot,” said Amanda, 34.

The inability to adopt is one of many legal and financial inequalities the Sheltons face because their state and the federal government do not recognize their union, which they affirmed in a ceremony almost 11 years ago.

Though Kay, 37, is known as “mama” to their children — Maya is 3, Myles, 8 months — the state government still views her as a legal stranger. So Amanda, who works as a commercial litigator for a law firm in Detroit, must sign a notarized document every six months that gives Kay, who stays home with the children, parental consent. But they have often wondered if there was more they could do to strengthen those legal ties, or to improve their financial situation. So we asked three experts in same-sex issues — a lawyer, a financial planner and an accountant — for advice.

More here. This is a compelling article which tells us that every time the subject of gay marriage comes up, the fact that lgbts have families need to dominate the conversation

Bookmark and Share

Religious right angry over Exodus/Apple controversy and other Thursday midday news briefs

SPLC-Certified Hate Group Defends Exodus, Wants Hateful App Back - The Family Research Council is hopping mad. Probably because somewhere in the world, an lgbt is having a happy life.

NOM's careless discourse: Apple corporate decision edition - The National Organization for Marriage follows Victoria Jackson's nonsensical connecting of the lgbt and Islamic communities. Tacky, tacky, tacky.

Save California Warns of "Sexual Brainwashing" in History Bill - Everyone knows that lgbts brainwashed children through Saturday morning cartoons. A perfect example is The Smurfs. Only a gay man would think of a cartoon with a village of 100 males and one female.

Derby council defends foster ban on Christian couple - This case is far from over but it is good to get another side on this situation other than the canonization of the "Christian" couple.

Bookmark and Share

Does the Vatican support anti-gay violence?

Recently, the Vatican  spoke out against the United Nations statement which condemns international homophobia:

Archbishop Silvano Tomasi says "people are being attacked for taking positions that do not support sexual behavior between people of the same sex," he said to the Human Rights Council, according to Reuters. "When they express their moral beliefs or beliefs about human nature ... they are stigmatised, and worse -- they are vilified, and prosecuted."

The Vatican isn't the only so-called religious entity to speak against the resolution, which is supported by the Obama Administration. Yesterday, the Family Research Council posted an opposing statement which claimed to express dismay over any violence perpetrated against the lgbt community but then gave support to the countries which perpetrate this violence:

Our global neighbors have the freedom to believe that homosexuality is wrong--just as they have the freedom to legislate against any behavior they think is harmful to society.

The Vatican seems to be taking a page out of FRC's playbook by intentionally ignoring that in some countries, folks aren't merely expressing a "moral belief" about homosexuality.

In South Africa, lesbians are subjected to "corrective rape."

In some countries, gay men are chased and beaten by mobs.

And in one country in particular (Uganda) - they will begin debating legislation to imprison and possibly execute people for being lgbt.

The UN resolution does not attack countries which simply express a moral belief against homosexuality. The resolution specifically calls out those so-called expressions which advocate violence against the lgbt community.

I don't put it past FRC to intentionally distort the situation, but for the Vatican to do this is highly shameful. The FRC has built a reputation in part for falsely claiming victimhood. The Vatican represents the Catholic community, which has genuinely been persecuted throughout history.

Instead of issuing deceptive statements, the Vatican needs to explain why it's not showing empathy for true victims of persecution in this matter rather than the perpetrators.

Bookmark and Share