Same-sex relationship

Good news: gays can have mothers-in-law now in the US

The US Supreme Court has handed down their ruling that same-sex couples can enjoy the same misery of heterosexual married couples…mothers-in-law.

Gay and lesbian Americans have the same right to marry as any other couples, the U.S. Supreme Court declared Friday in a historic ruling deciding one of America’s most contentious and emotional legal questions. Celebrations and joyful weddings quickly followed states where they had been forbidden.

The vote was narrow – 5-4 – but the ruling will put an end to same-sex marriage bans in the 14 states that still maintain them, and provide an exclamation point for breathtaking changes in America’s social norms in recent years. As recently as last October, just over one-third of the states permitted gay marriages.

Public acceptance has also shot up in recent years, in stark contrast to the widespread outcry against a 2004 ruling by the high court in Massachusetts legalizing same-sex marriage there, prompting several states to ban it and galvanizing conservative voter turnout during George W. Bush’s re-election campaign.

Read more »

Beating the gayness out of you in Nigeria

Nigeria has strict laws against homosexuals, so strict that the penalty for gay sex is death by stoning.

But if you are lucky you will get a lenient ‘judge’ who will simply arrange a whipping to beat the gayness out of you.

The young man cried out as he was being whipped on the courtroom bench. The bailiff’s leather whip struck him 20 times, and when it was over, the man’s side and back were covered with bruises.

Still, the large crowd outside was disappointed, the judge recalled: The penalty for gay sex under local Islamic law is death by stoning.

“He is supposed to be killed,” the judge, Nuhu Idris Mohammed, said, praising his own leniency on judgment day last month at the Shariah court here. The bailiff demonstrated the technique he used: whip at shoulder level, then forcefully down.

The mood is unforgiving in this north Nigeria metropolis, where nine others accused of being gay by the Islamic police are behind the central prison’s high walls. Stones and bottles rained down on them outside the court two weeks ago, residents and officials said; some in the mob even wanted to set the courtroom ablaze, witnesses said.

Since Nigeria’s president, Goodluck Jonathan, signed a harsh law criminalizing homosexuality throughout the country last month, arrests of gay people have multiplied, advocates have been forced to go underground, some people fearful of the law have sought asylum overseas and news media demands for a crackdown have flourished.  Read more »

Alcoholic Mum better than Gay Adoptive Parents?

Words fail me. How could anyone say that an alcoholic parent is a better one than a loving and caring couple of responsible lesbians or gay men?

LONDON, October 25, 2012, (LifeSiteNews.com) – Court of Appeal judges turned down a mother’s plea not to have her two children adopted by a homosexual couple.

The mother of the two boys, aged four and six, appealed an earlier court decision that ruled she was incapable of looking after her children because of alcoholism, when she discovered that councillors in the north London borough of Camden had decided the boys would be placed with two homosexual men.

Justice Dame Janet Smith, sitting with Lord Justice Longmore and Lady Justice Black at the Court of Appeal in Holborn, heard that the mother and the boys’ father had been “distressed” to learn that the prospective adopters were homosexuals.

Not distressed enough to actually look after the children. Not distressed enough to stop drinking.

The mother, described as a highly educated woman who had been “very successful” in early life, and the father of the children had met at a detox clinic but had never beaten their dependence on alcohol. Last September, the children were taken from the mother and placed for adoption.

The mother began her battle to reclaim her children when she became aware of Camden Council’s decision in April.

At the Appeal Court, the mother’s lawyers stated that a month’s intensive treatment for her alcoholism had been successful and the woman had overcome her addiction. The court was told the woman attended Alcoholics Anonymous meetings regularly, was now alcohol-free, and had severed her relationship with the children’s father.

In dismissing the mother’s appeal, Dame Janet commented that though the case revealed “a sad human story” she believed the mother was “out of touch with reality and capable of telling a pack of lies.”

“It is just too good to be true that a woman with the deep-seated shortcomings displayed by this mother could have been transformed in four weeks,” Dame Janet said.

Camden Council argued that the two homosexual men had successfully passed the selection process and the council was convinced they will “provide a secure and loving home” for the children. They also pointed out that if the court found in favor of the mother, the ruling could have wide-ranging legal ramifications affecting the authority of local councils to place children with homosexual and lesbian couples.

Councillor Angela Mason, Camden’s cabinet member for children, said, “The gay couple who have been approved to take over care from the mother went through a rigorous selection process and we are convinced they will provide a secure and loving home for the children.”

“The evidence was all one way,” Dame Janet concluded. “This couple are suitable adoptive parents and there is no specific reason to think that the placement might fail.”

Andrei and Lucia Maria though, would argue that an abusive drunkard for a mother is better than two gay men or two lesbian women as parents.

We are all god’s children

Sydney Morning Herald

One of the arguments that opponents of same-sex marriage use is that it will destroy the sanctity of marriage…hmmm:

FOUR in ten same-sex couples are Christians, according to a detailed snapshot of the nation’s gay community based on the latest census data.

Christians represent a smaller proportion of same-sex couples than heterosexual couples, of which more than two-thirds affiliate with the religion.

Same-sex partners are more likely than heterosexual partners to be Buddhists, but less likely to be Hindus or Muslims, according to a portrait of the 33,714 same-sex couples counted in last year’s census.

Same-sex partners are more likely to report no religion (48 per cent) than heterosexual partners (21 per cent), according to a paper released yesterday by the Australian Bureau of Statistics.

As in previous censuses, there were more male than female same-sex couples, although the gap between the number of male and female same-sex couples has narrowed since 1996, when the bureau began collecting data on same-sex couples. Then, there were 137 male couples for every 100 female couples. In 2011 there were 109 male couples for every 100 female couples.

Same-sex marriages last

NZ Herald

Nice article in the Herald about civil unions and the way it is viewed as a second class marriage…not quite there. It continues to amaze me that we allow first cousins to marry but not two gay people. It is a shame they can’t marry. They’d prefer Nikki Kaye to do something more meaningful than promote a big gay expensive mardi gras

Grey Lynn couple Diana Rands and Anna Birkenhead are pleased to find that same-sex civil unions can last – but they also feel there is a social expectation that they will break up.

“When heterosexual people meet each other and get married, everyone is, ‘Yay, well done!”‘ says Ms Rands, 50, who has been in a civil union with Ms Birkenhead, 41, for two years.

“If that was a same-sex couple, it’s, ‘Oh, it’s not going to last.’ There is this underlying misinformation that gay relationships don’t last, so it’s really nice that they actually do.”

Society supports heterosexual couples, she says, but gay couples are often shunned. She has heard of children who are banned from visiting friends as soon as the child’s mother hears the friend’s mother is a lesbian.

“We even hear stories about people who have had civil unions not being invited to the family Christmas dinner.”

Catholic Church goes to war against David Cameron

The Catholic Church has decided to go to war with David Cameron over same sex marriage:

The Catholic Church is on a collision course with David Cameron as one of its most senior figures issues an outspoken attack on the Government over its plans to legalise gay marriage.

Cardinal Keith O’Brien, the leader of the Catholic Church in Scotland, says the proposals to allow same-sex unions are “madness” and a “grotesque subversion of a universally accepted human right”.

The cardinal’s intervention, in an article for The Sunday Telegraph, is the strongest criticism yet from any church figure of the plans, which are due to be unveiled this month by Lynne Featherstone, the equalities minister.

He accuses ministers of trying to “redefine reality” and change long-standing laws and traditions “at the behest of a small minority of activists”.

The cardinal has added his voice to those of leading figures in the Coalition for Marriage, a group of bishops, politicians and lawyers opposed to the changes. The group’s supporters include Lord Carey, the former Archbishop of Canterbury.

The group is in outright opposition to Mr Cameron, who hopes to make legislation changing the legal definition of marriage to include same-sex couples, expected by 2015, one of the central achievements of his time in office.

I would have thought that buggering choir boys against their will was a “grotesque subversion of a universally accepted human right”. They oppose gay marriage but cover up buggering of choir boys.

When the Catholic Church addresses their historic sex crimes perhaps then we might start listening to what they have to say about “traditional family values”.

Marriage Equality: Immune from Evidence

Yesterday I blogged about my experience with people who I consider to be gossipers and bigots and their desire to oppose something as simple as marriage equality. the comments on each and every post on the matter have yet to show me any compelling evidence as to why two people who love each other shouldn’t be able to marry.

Andrew Sullivan also had this piece:

Mark Oppenheimer profiles Maggie Gallagher, marriage equality’s most notorious foe. Of interest:

In her forthcoming book, she writes that “including same-sex unions in the legal category of ‘marriage’ will necessarily change the public meaning of marriage for the entire society in ways that must make it harder for marriage to perform its core civil functions over time.” How do we know? We just do.

And even if somehow the evidence showed, conclusively, that same-sex marriage were good for children? Gallagher would still be dissatisfied: “Nothing could make me call a same-sex couple a marriage, because that’s not what I believe a marriage is.”

Gallagher’s declaration that her mind cannot be changed is the statement of a fundamentalist. There is no greater sin against open debate than to preemptively seal oneself off from evidence. Will Wilkinson, on the other hand, considers what it would take for him to change his mind about various issues, marriage equality among them.