“Lets have kids  dear!”

Posted by Melanie Nathan

Choosing Children

08.26.10

A letter from Kate Kendell:-

Twenty-five years ago, I was 25 years old and just starting law school at the University of Utah. I was parenting my daughter Emily, who was 4 years old with her mom, and my former partner, Lori. While it was uncommon for LGBT friends in our circle to be planning for parenthood, it did not occur to Lori or me that we were at the forefront of what would be termed the “gayby boom.”

Lori had been a single parent raising the then 1-year-old Emily when we met. We were just living our lives unaware of a sea-change that was just beginning when it came to issues of parenting and our community. While we were living that life, Academy Award-winning filmmaker Deborah “Chas” Chasnoff and her then life and work partner, Kim Klausner, were in the midst of writing, producing, and directing their groundbreaking film documenting this burgeoning movement. Choosing Children captured on celluloid the choice a growing number of lesbians and gay men were making, a choice that seemed both counter-intuitive and revolutionary: to become parents.

Up until this generation, most LGBT folks were parents because they had been in earlier heterosexual marriages or relationships and then divorced and come out, or vice-versa. In doing so many of them faced hostility from family and former spouses and countless numbers lost or gave up any hope for custody of their children.

Beginning in the early 1980s, a new kind of parenting began emerging. Led by lesbians, often in biological partnership with gay men, women began choosing to have children as lesbian-identified parents. Now, 25 short years later, the groundbreaking idea that lesbians, gay men, bisexuals, and transgender folks can also be parents seems, well, not so groundbreaking. In fact, it is now so commonplace that doing so is viewed by some in our community as assimilationist and pedestrian. Gotta love the march of progress.

But of course, what the fight for the right to be both LGBT and a parent is really about is the right to live a fulfilled and authentic life according to what gives joy and satisfaction to each of us. And in 1985 becoming a parent often meant rejection from both one’s family of origin and one’s chosen family in the lesbian or gay community. It also meant maintaining a pretense of heterosexuality or absolute legal vulnerability because almost every state prohibited openly lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender people from adopting, and few if any states provided any parental protections. It was a time of very little community or institutional support for you as a parent or for your child as the son or daughter of a queer parent.

Emily will be 30 next year. She is smart, lovely, creative, open-hearted, and generous. I can hardly believe I have a daughter who is near 30 years old. But then I also can hardly believe the progress we have made in the short time my oldest has been alive. Seeing Choosing Children again was inspiring for many reasons but most of all, it made me really stop and appreciate how far we have come and how much we owe those who blazed this trail uncertain of the terrain ahead of them. Filmmakers Chas and Kim, the parents featured in the film, our own founder Donna Hitchens—who provided legal expertise and commentary—did not intend to be pioneers, but they were, and we are all much better off because of the choices they made.

So please join us for the upcoming Choosing Children 25th Anniversary Screening and Reception, a film that is now a crucial and transformative story of our movement. Our evening together promises to be a celebration of how far we have come and a promise to not end our quest until every family is valued and safe.

Sincerely,

Kate Kendell

Choosing Children 25th Anniversary Screening and Reception

Groundbreaking Film Exploring the First Generation of LGBT Parents Celebrates 25th Anniversary

Related articles by Zemanta

• Groundbreaking Film Exploring the First Generation of LGBT Parents Celebrates 25th Anniversary(lezgetreal.com)
• Groundbreaking Film Exploring the First Generation of LGBT Parents Celebrates 25th Anniversary(pinkbananaworld.com)
• Contacting My Sperm Donor – I Am A Kid who is All Right! (lezgetreal.com)

08/06/2010- by Natasia Langfelder

Angelina Jolie is constantly criticized for “forcing” daughter Shiloh to “dress like a boy” and thus turning her into a disgusting manly lesbo. Angelina has defended Shiloh in the past and now the philanthropic lady is begginning to sound a littled pissed off. She said in an interview while doing the press rounds for her action film, Salt:

“I think people think kids should be a certain way, but I feel they should wear what they feel like wearing and they should express themselves. Shiloh cried one night and said, ‘Please cut my hair off. I don’t want to have long hair.’ I’m not going to leave it long just because somebody thinks I should…I have a very strong-willed four-year-old girl who tells me what she wants to wear and I let her be who she is.

 I agree with her and not just because I’m a lesbian who loves gender bending women. It’s important to let children be who they are, it’s heartbreaking to hear stories of people who have grown up trying to fit into a mold to make their parents happy. While this is common among LGBT individuals, it is also prevalent in the straight community, like the athlete who wants to impress his dad, the solider who joined the fight because he has a family history of it, the woman who married within her religion to make her mom happy. Parents shouldn’t force their child into a mold, it usually ends in disaster.

Also, our culture of dressing little girls in frills and pink sparkles is getting out of control. Girls are sexualized as soon as they pop out of the womb and are told they need to be beautiful fashion plates before they can walk. They need to be outfitted with heels and wearing designer diapers. It’s disgusting and for once Angelina is a bastion of sanity.

Although I did not report on it, earlier this week, Angelina was criticized for letting her son, Pax, get a mani/pedi. Basically, I like Angie better than ever before. Go on with your bad self, girl. I hope you adopt 100 more babies and seed them throughout the world to help people learn to become more tolerant.

Related articles by Zemanta

• Angelina Says Shiloh is Like Her; Discusses Gender Identity (lezgetreal.com)
• The Real L Word Recap: Episode 7 (lezgetreal.com)
• Megan Fox Got Married (lezgetreal.com)

For more on what you can do to aid the fight for LGBT rights please visit www.aclu.org.

Image via Wikipedia

05-08-10  Melanie Nathan

Rachel Maddow, on her MSNBC show tells the Rekers story in clear and express terms while exposing  a letter sent by George Rekers to the thousands of  schools under the guise of misleading letter head (organization) informing requesting that school children be told that if they are gay they can be cured and that they were not born gay. Two weeks later Rekers takes off on a vacation with a very young Rentboy, Lucien, whom he paid $75 per day for sexual services fully delineated in a written contract between Rekers and Lucien  (Jo-Vani Roman.)

Maddows asserts that the importance of the story lies in the fact that Rekers has made a career specifically  by causing extreme harm to gay people and their families, making thousands of dollars and worse yet – He is still doing it!

Visit msnbc.com for breaking news, world news, and news about the economy

NARTH Responds to the
Recent Media Coverage of Dr. George Rekers

May 6, 2010 — The National Association for Research and Therapy of Homosexuality (NARTH) is a professional scientific organization with hundreds of academic, research, and clinical members dedicated to assisting individuals dealing with unwanted homosexual attractions. While NARTH is focused on the science of homosexual attraction, personal controversies often deepen the existing cultural divide on this issue. Such is the case in the recent news stories concerning one of our members, Dr. George Rekers.

NARTH takes seriously the accusations that have been made, and we are currently attempting to understand the details behind these press reports. We are always saddened when this type of controversy impacts the lives of individuals, and we urge all parties to allow a respectful and thorough investigation to take place.

At this difficult time for the families and individuals involved, we extend our sympathies. We also wish to reiterate our traditional position that these personal controversies do not change the scientific data, nor do they detract from the important work of NARTH.

NARTH continues to support scientific research, and to value client autonomy, client self-determination and client diversity.

By Melanie Nathan
nathan@privatecourts.com

Related articles by Zemanta

• The Advocate Locates Lucien – Did Reker Play with Boy Toy? (lezgetreal.com)
• Rekers: ‘I am not gay and never have been’ (miamiherald.typepad.com)
• Rekers Begs Rentboy to Stop Interviews – Finally the Full Monty (lezgetreal.com)

5-7-10 by Melanie Nathan

The name Rekers, has been bouncing from blogger to blogger, with Miami New Times at the helm of the expose of the beast who ‘would separate gay families.”  George Alan Rekers, a voracious anti-gay ex-gay, has  been one of the most significant Piranhas to helm the concocted ex-gay industry, whose prime conscious motive has been to make money and (perhaps) unconscious motive to hide and mask his hatred for himself and G-d, behind lies and contrived thesis.

Rekers was caught courting a Rent-Boy- now hounded, named and talking, at an airport after returning from a vacation to sleazy hotels in Europe, with his paid escort.

Bloggers from Joe, (Joe-My-God)  to Andy Towle to Unzipped have been following the beat of the Miami New Times, which first exposed the story, amidst a controversial bewilderment rendering speculation of ‘ who, what and how did they’s’  get the  tell-tale picture and story.

Then came the hunt for Rentboy and successfully found by Unzipped, who dropped the story mid-talk with Jo-Vanni Roman, (Lucien) leaving his readers holding limp wrist beside keyboard:…”more later” as the saying goes.. but none came and readers were pissed.

So Joe-My-God got the ultimate scoop just today in the weeny hours.  Actually it was relatively easy to contact Jo-Vanni, after he was named. I too made contact and reached out – but seems he wanted to talk to the more famous and the  boys!

This all culminated with only two BLOGS now worth reading, present company excluded of course.  Firstly I name TWO – Truth Wins Out- which has a full rendition of Rekers hate filled lies that have cost the LGBT family community so much, including references to PDF file Judgment from the Judge in In Re Gill, the Florida adoption case. TWO exposes the indulgent industry and the enormous amount of money this Blob made at our expense. It is all a must read.  It makes me wonder who the real prostitute is in this scenario. The one who sells his body or the one who sold his soul?

Then the other is Joe-My-God who had a 90 minute interview with the young man in the early hours of this morning. Another must read.

Joe’ s take  “Let’s open by saying that this kid is no dim bulb. I found him frank, sharp, funny, and quite forthcoming to all my questions. And I had a lot. But I also must say Jo-Vanni is almost painfully naive about some things, as you’ll see.

“Since the story broke on Tuesday, we’ve all seen George Rekers’ increasingly desperate attempts to deny the sexual aspect of their trip or that he even met Jo-Vanni on Rentboy.com in the first place. They’ve spoken on the phone once since then, during which Jo-Vanni angrily confronted Rekers about his anti-gay work with the Family Research Council. “I just stay in the background” was Rekers’ limp defense. The call ended with Rekers begging Jo-Vanni to refuse future interview requests.” (Joe)

Tonight we may see the first of a big national media explosion.  While the bloggers have been busy- the mainstream media and cable TV have been reticent, but now that our ‘Brothers in Blogging’ have done the work, Anderson Cooper is ready. This is all good- and shows the power of blogging and how often we can fuel mainstream.

J-Vanni told told Joe, that  that  a gay reporter was about to interview him   and Joe says that is indeed Anderson Cooper, whose office has been calling Jo-Vanni. So this morning CNN’s Randi Kaye will meet Jo-Vanni at a Fort Lauderdale hotel for an on-camera (but probably silhouetted) interview. And there Jo-Vanni says he will hand over the confidentiality agreement signed by himself and Dr. George Rekers. “You know, I’d love to see that contract if you wouldn’t mind faxing or emailing a photo of it to me,” I said innocently. Jo-Vanni laughed and declined. Like I said, naive perhaps, but not dumb”

The power of bloggers – must be further honed to keep this story alive until we bring this anti-gay hate group – ex-gays out of the Courts and Bookstores.  Let them preach to their own kind, but take heed – if the appear at any door to any courtroom involving an adoption or a gay rights issue, we will be there to track them until we bring each one of their lying butts down.  This story cannot go away – so fair minded and hard working passionate Brothers and Sisters in Blogging and News – keep the focus and Jolly well done!

UPDATE – Jim Burroway BOX TURTLE gets Anderson Cooper leaked interview  on site http://www.boxturtlebulletin.com/2010/05/07/22407#comment-68074

By Melanie Nathan
nathan@privatecourts.com

Related articles by Zemanta

• George ‘Rentboy’ Rekers: ‘I Am Not Gay and Never Have Been’ (towleroad.com)
• Here’s George Alan Rekers’ Favorite Escort Service (queerty.com)
• Rent Boy: George Alan Rekers is a Homosexual who Enjoys Body Rubs in the Nude (towleroad.com)
• The Worst Thing About Prostitute-Loving George Alan Rekers? He’s Cheap (queerty.com)
• The Advocate Locates Lucien – Did Reker Play with Boy Toy? (lezgetreal.com)
• Over Speakerphone, George Rekers Tries to Silence ‘Rent Boy’ (towleroad.com)
• George Rekers is Gay, Says Escort (advocate.com)
• The Case for Talking to LEzgetREAL -Advocate Locates Lucien – talking to Unzipped and What about Joe (pinkbananaworld.com)
• PHOTOS: Meet Jo-vanni Roman, Escort to America’s Leading Hypocritical Bigot George Alan Rekers (queerty.com)

4/18/10-by Paula Brooks
A gay couple in Chicago has invited former Arkansas governor Mike Huckabee to show him same-sex parents know they are not raising puppies.

The College of New Jersey’s newspaper, “The Perspective” reported last week that Huckabee equated being gay to drug addiction and incest and said like them, being gay should not be promoted by society. He also said he’s opposed to gay adoptive and foster parents.

“I think this is not about trying to create statements for people who want to change the basic fundamental definitions of family,” Huckabee said. “And always we should act in the best interest of the children, not in the seeming interest of the adults. Children are not puppies. This is not a time to see if we can experiment and find out, how does this work?”

Huckabee’s statements were not so cool with Windy City gay parents Steve McDonagh and Dan Smith, a committed couple for the past 13 years, so they sent Huckabee an invitation to come meet a gay family.

“Sir, your comments likening my parenting my son to adopting a pet are beyond hurtful and dangerous,” writes McDonagh. “My love, passion and commitment to Nate is not one iota different than what you have for John Mark, David and Sarah. Our son is loved and cared for just as much. He feels just as loved and cared for. He is a happy, well adjusted little guy whom I fiercely love.”

“We were blessed to adopt our son, Nate, at his birth 4 1/2 years ago,” McDonagh writes in his invitation. “I will open my home to you and pray that we might help you better understand the damage you could inflict.”

via Gay Chicago couple invite Huckabee to dinner (ChicagoPride.com).

The couple has not yet heard back from Huckabee.

Related articles by Zemanta

• Arkansas Judge Strikes Down Discriminatory Adoption Ban (hrcbackstory.org)

From: The Honorable Pete Stark

via Rep. Tammy Baldwin.

Posted by Melanie Nathan 3-9-10. Every Child Deserves a Family: A Congressional Briefing on efforts to end discriminatory policies that close homes to foster children by prohibiting and restricting adoption and foster placements by LGBT families and unmarried couples.

There are approximately 125,000 foster children waiting to be adopted. With only 50,000 adoptions each year, there is a clear shortage of adoptive parents.  The result is that children, especially minority and special needs children, languish in care and bounce from placement to placement. The 25,000 youth who never find a permanent family and “age out” of the system each year are more likely than nearly any other group to become homeless, incarcerated, or suffer with mental illness or substance abuse.

Despite the need for more adoptive and permanent foster homes, some states have enacted discriminatory bans that prohibit children from being placed with qualified parents due to the parent’s sexual orientation or marital status.  The result is less children being adopted and more children bouncing around the foster care system with no permanency and no security.  In some cases these bans have resulted in a grandparent having to go through costly litigation in order to care for their own kin who are in foster care.

LGBT Caucus – invites you to a briefing to learn more about this issue and what Congress can do to fix the situation.

Date: Thursday March 11th
Time: 1:30-3:00
Location: H-137
The Hill.

Panelists will include:
•    Nakea Page and Kendra Langley- Foster Care Alumni will discuss their experiences in the child welfare system and “aging out” of the system without a family;
•    Uma Ahluwalia-Director of Montgomery County Maryland’s Department of Health and Human Services will discuss the benefits of opening as many adoptive homes as possible to foster children;
•    Charlotte Patterson- Professor of Psychology at the University of Virginia will discuss 30 years of research on LGBT parenting and adoption;
•    Gary Gates- Senior Research Fellow at the Williams Institute will discuss research on the fiscal impact of banning and restricting LGBT adoption and foster parenting;
•    Leslie Cooper- Senior Staff Attorney at the ACLU will discuss ongoing litigation at the state level to overturn discriminatory adoption bans;
•    Martin Gill- Foster parent engaged in litigation to be able to adopt two brothers he and his partner have been fostering since 2004.

If you have any questions, please contact Jeff Hild  jeff.hild@mail.house.gov.

Related articles by Zemanta

• Another Judge Calls Florida Anti-Gay Adoption Law Unconstitutional, Grants Lesbian Couple Baby Boy (lezgetreal.com)
• Rep. Pete Stark Introduces Anti-Discrimination Adoption Bill (towleroad.com)

Adoptive parents, Oren Adar and Mickey Ray Smith, who now live in San Diego, were living in Connecticut when they obtained an emergency adoption decree in New York state court to adopt the baby who was born in Shreveport, La. in 2005. The baby’s mother had transferred him to Adar and Smith’s care shortly after the boy’s birth.

A federal appeals court on Thursday ordered the state of Louisiana to issue an amended birth certificate for the child of the men stating that the State of Louisiana is ordered to  put the names of both fathers on the new certificate.

The ruling by the 5th Circuit Court of Appeals upholds a 2008 ruling by US District Court Judge Jay Zainey.  He ordered the Louisiana Office of Public Health and Vital Records and registrar Darlene W Smith,  who had overtly discriminated against the parents, to supply an amended birth certificate for the boy that shows Adar and Smith as his parents, Courthouse News Service reports

Lambda Legal, a national civil rights organization based in Los Angeles, represented Adar and Smith sued on behalf of the couple in October 2007, saying Louisiana Vital Records Registrar Darlene Smith violated the U.S. Constitution in denying them an accurate birth certificate, which threatened the boy’s enrollment in a health care plan and treated him like a second-class citizen.

Clearly showing an aversion to the fact that the boy had two fathers, Louisiana Attorney General Buddy Caldwell, appealed the Zainey decision, arguing that state law wouldn’t have allowed such an adoption in the first place. The Vital Records office claimed that it would have supplied a birth certificate if just one of the parents had been listed in the New York record as adopting the boy.  This shows the Office of vital records attempting to assert its own ideas as to

Adar and Smith are the adoptive parents under Louisiana law, wrote Judge Jacques Wiener Jr. for the panel of three,  because the state “owes full faith and credit to the New York adoption decree that declares [the infant] to be the adopted child of Adar and Smith.” Because New York law allows adoption by unmarried couples, Louisiana had to follow those rules.  The registrar have the discretion to refuse to make a new, correct birth certificate for a Louisiana-born child,  when the New York adoption decree “indisputably satisfies” Louisiana requirements.

Marjorie Esman, executive director of the American Civil Liberties Union of Louisiana, which filed a friend-of-the-court brief in the case, called Caldwell’s decision to fight the birth certificate request discriminatory.

“It was shameful that Attorney General Caldwell took such extreme measures to deny a small child a proper birth certificate simply because he didn’t like the boy’s parents,” said Esman, in a statement. “Hopefully this decision will make him think twice before wasting taxpayer money to defend his anti-gay activism.”

PICTURE;  Kenneth D. Upton, Jr. , Supervising Senior Staff Attorney

“We’re pleased the court agrees that it’s wrong to punish children just because the Registrar doesn’t like their parents.”

By Melanie Nathan.
nathan@privatecourts.com

Related articles by Zemanta

• Gay Adoptive Parents Win Birth Certificate Case in Louisiana (towleroad.com)
• Louisiana Court Ruling: Both Adoptive Dads Get Their Names On Birth Certificate (joemygod.blogspot.com)

1/31/10-by Paula Brooks
A judge in Miami has called a third strike on a 1977 Florida law that bans LGBT couples from adopting children in the Sunshine State, after she approved judge approved the adoption of a 1-year-old girl by Vanessa Alenier, 34, and her partner Melanie Leon, 31, a Hollywood, FL lesbian couple.

“There is no rational connection between sexual orientation and what is or is not in the best interest of a child,” Miami-Dade Circuit Judge Maria Sampedro-Iglesia. She also called the anti-gay adoption law “unconstitutional on its face,” and that it could not be enforced.

“The permanent interests and benefit to all members of the adoptive household will be promoted by the adoption,” Sampedro-Iglesia wrote. Alenier “is a fit and proper person to adopt the child and has adequate resources and facilities to care for the child.”

Judge Sampedro-Iglesia’s ruling comes after a judge in Key West, Monroe Circuit Judge David J. Audlin, declared the law unconstitutional, after Audlin’s allowed a gay Key West lawyer, Wayne LaRue Smith, to adopt a boy he had been raising in foster care and Miami-Dade Circuit Judge Cindy Lederman approved the adoption of two half brothers by a gay North Miami foster parent, Frank Martin Gill, after she too said the law was unconstitutional.

Florida Department of Children & Families administrators, who objected to the adoption, has not yet decided whether they will appeal.

“We are currently reviewing the judge’s decision and will make a decision on an appeal within the 30-day period,” agency spokesman Joe Follick said to the MiamiHerald

Mathew Staver, founder and chairman of Orlando-based Liberty Counsel, called Sampedro-Iglesia’s ruling “evidence of judicial activism’ that violates state law.

“A judge is not a legislature onto oneself,” Staver said. “Judges don’t have the ability to write laws any way they desire. They have to follow the rule of law, and this judge did not.”

While a Miami appeals court is set to determined the constitutionality of the embattled adoption ban latter this year, the Miami Herald also noted that Sampedro-Iglesia’s ruling indicates that judges “already have made up their mind about gay adoption.”

Related articles by Zemanta

• Florida Judge Delivers Third Ruling Against Gay Adoption Ban (towleroad.com)
• Quote of the Week (Perhaps the Year) (mombian.com)
• National Adoption Month Interview: Adoption Benefits (hrcbackstory.org)
• Florida Adoption Court Ruling Matters Nationwide (bilerico.com)

The state government of Sydney, Australia had been considering legislation that would make it possible for the LGBT community to adopt children. There was a parliamential inquiry into the matter that suggested allowing gay adoption would benefit the Australian State of New South Wales, of which Sydney is a part of. Unfortunately the legislation was shot down.

The Minister of Community Services, Linda Burney, has said that the reason the ban was upheld is because, “”There are very deeply held, divergent views on this issue and that is why a decision on this matter will not be taken at this stage.” [The Sydney Morning Herald]

Advocacy groups for same sex marriage in Australia are said to be outraged. Given the flimsy excuse for rejecting the measure, this is not surprising. There are always strongly held beliefs on both sides of any civil rights argument and the reason given by Burney does not address the discrimination faced by Australia’s same-sex couples.  

 So having been challenged by the admin of Cath -Pews I am providing a cryptic analysis based of one such article promoted by Cath Pews.   I have provided a demarcation between the article wording and my comments as can be seen from ITALIC BOLD = CATH-PEWS and REGULAR= Melanie.

 ANDERSON:-   ARTICLE :_
How to Make the Case for Marriage ,
(Using Non-religious Language)  
By Mary Jo Anderson

 Whether we like it or not, secularism is the dominant mode of public discourse today. Even those we encounter who are not “anti-faith” often place a high value on their understanding of “separation of church and state.”  Catholics must therefore be prepared to support moral positions without recourse to Scripture or religious vocabulary. That is an enormous challenge to Catholics who want to defend and preserve marriage as the only healthy model for an orderly society.  Before we go any further, we should make it clear that using secular terms to make the case for marriage in secular terms in no way suppresses or denies the faith. While it does omit a higher dimension of marriage, the secular case is effective because all truth—including the truth about men and women, marriage and family—is God’s truth. 

 MELANIE – Anderson, the Author provides an excuse and subversive means to hide the intention of faith behind overt secular language. This article is all but a ruse a desperate attempt to provide secular legitimacy to a faith based argument.  You cannot hide behind the intention! Simply ridiculous!

 ANDERSON – As such, it has an internal coherence that is part of the created order. One need not credit God with the physical laws of nature, such as gravity, to know that gravity works. Where the physical laws are violated, breakdown occurs. The same goes for the moral realm: A violation of God’s moral order brings chaos in human relationships. The evidence of that chaos is the source of the daily headlines and the nightly news broadcasts. When people of faith make the case for marriage using this kind of evidence, it is less likely to be perceived as “imposing religion.”

 MELANIE:-  This is a flagrant misrepresentation, as is the entire surreptitious intent of this article-  (A Catholic Virtue – to be manipulative and furtive? Anderson is providing the readers a way to Circumvent the truth of their own assertions by trying to slip it into secular form; a clear case of scape-goating?  How do we know that the church itself is not to blame for the depravity on earth?  After all the church has a violent history, borne through war for conversion!

ANDERSON   There is a secular argument for preserving natural marriage as the only legal definition of marriage and the one model of family life deserving of tax relief. The major building blocks are these:

1.             Nations that fail to form families suffer grave consequences, including loss of workers, loss of tax base, and decline in human ingenuity and productivity

MELANIE :-  “The proof of the pudding is in the eating”   as my beloved granny Rose would say: Firstly there are an ever increasing amount of Gay families out there.  In the US and abroad who are contributing to society in a big way.   The new census  2010, may reveal these numbers.  Let me give you my family as one itsy bitsy example and as a metaphor for all of us:-

I am a lesbian. I married spouse under California Law. We have been together for almost 10 years.  

I went to University for many years and have law degrees, which I use in my Conflict Resolution and Mediation practice, which I established over ten years ago.  I used to practice law and decided I would prefer to resolve conflict through mediation.  I function as any other American who owns a business.  The fact that my spouse is of the same sex has zero impact on my productivity or functionality.   In fact I was recently appointed by our County Board of Supervisors as a Commissioner on the County Human Rights Commission.  I serve on the Board as Vice President of A Fair Housing Group and volunteer in our congregation on social justice issues. I volunteer in the Courts to mediate family law matters for people who cannot afford attorneys.  I advocate in DC for equality. I would say about 90% of my free time is devoted to volunteer or pro bono work.   

My spouse teaches Hebrew language to children and adults; as well as bible studies.  She has   almost complete a Masters in Education.  She is brilliant and spends much of her free time with our children.  Our four year old has never had a babysitter because one of us is with the kids at all times.

In fact your argument is so false it makes an argument for the fact that we NEED EQUALITY.  You see we do not get to file Federal tax returns together and so everything costs us more. We have no Federal government benefits.   Your argument highlights that gay families are discriminated (in fact your thesis even calls for the discrimination …”no tax relief..”) against because within the realm of our productivity we are denied the  benefits that you get as a result of your productivity = unequal!   Your productivity does not endure as a result of your sex nor that of your spouse; my production does not occur as a result of my sex or the fact that my spouse is of the same sex.   The government takes our tax money- but as separate and not as joint, while we function as fiscally joint. Your argument has no foundation and simply makes no sense.

We have two daughters.  One was adopted from an orphanage in Vietnam as an infant, suffering from malnutrition and scabies; and is now a thriving all A’s scholar, budding young leader, who loves to help those less fortunate than herself.  She has great talent and will certainly be a productive and well adjusted adult. She will go to University, get a degree, help others, continue to volunteer for our congregation which focuses on helping the needy.  Just last week her class organized a lunch for homeless people in the area. This is not just a one- time event.   

My second daughter was conceived through donor sperm and Artificial Insemination.  She is four now and very smart. We were able to choose sperm of a genius and so have contributed to the population. Who knows maybe our daughter will be President of this Country. Who knows maybe our daughter will be the one to find a cure for diabetes, cancer, aids. Point is – we as a family have conscientiously and decidedly contributed to the increase of population and done so in a responsible fashion.

The adoption costs us about $35,000 and the insemination cost us about $8,000.  So you can see by choosing our modes of ‘birth” if you will, we have contributed to the economy.  We have saved a child from a difficult life and turned it into a situation where she will be ready to give to society in a big way. We pay for childcare, we pay for extra -activities, we pay for clothes, for food

IN SUM ,  Anderson  re my family:

1. We have added to human ingenuity;
2. We provide tax base plus more than we ought to if we had equality;
3.We are an extraordinarily productive family and contribute to our economy in a big way;
4. There are hundreds of thousands of other families like us- maybe millions;
5. If we had equal rights then we would have an opportunity to have more contributing gay families – and increase productivity.    

Conclusion – This  Anderson Argument is DOA!

ANDERSON:-  2. The question is not about denying individual rights but about promoting the good of the whole society.

MELANIE:- This is the argument that I just cannot understand. Most Pedophiles are straight white men.  Most incest occurs via straight fathers raping their children.  The US divorce rate is high;   we all know and easily condoned by Churches – some of which choose annulment. The latter simply denies the marriage ever took place even though there are children. Is that not destructive on society and morality?  

This particular statement made me laugh because of the contradiction in terms.  Ms. Anderson   we will be promoting the good of society if we had equal rights.  How can you on any level think that by denying equality society will improve? (Maybe we ought to bring Jesus in here – lest I forget this is a secular argument.)   Inequality leads to hate, validates inequities and injustice on a secular level. The scales are tipped. People suffer terrible hardship, such as Shirley Tan who highlights the plight of all  binational gay couples.   You tube and hear her testimony.

The question IS about denying rights and in doing so you are promoting an unequal society.  Argument DOA.

ANDERSON:-  3. Marriage and family provide benefits to society by producing, raising, and educating the next generation.

MELANIE:- Gay and lesbian families are in no way deterred in this function. We are already doing this and having equal rights and benefits will only strengthen our ability to be more even productive. Oh yes… Britney Spears marrying for 24 hours is productive; reality shows making a mockery of marriage where you line up bachelors and pretend to fall in love for TV exposure is a fine way to honor marriage and maintain its sanctity.  I could go on…. Let us add this to our secular argument.   Anderson Argument DOA.

ANDERSON:-  4. A strong family life offers the benefits of mental and emotional health.

MELANIE : Gay and lesbian families are in no way deterred in this function. We are already doing this and having equal benefits and rights will only strengthen our health.  Studies have been done to show how stressful it can be not to have equal rights.   

What part of my family life is not strong?  What position is Ms. Anderson in to make that assumption or judgment unless based on falsehood.  Would you like testimonials from my daughter’s school, from my clergy?  From my neighbors, from the homeless guys we fed yesterday?  Are you thinking my kids will turn out to be criminals? Are you presuming that my emotional and mental State is not in good order?  Simply ludicrous.  I can list the names of professionals, judges, politicians, moms, teachers, doctors, scientists, professors who are openly gay and who offer perfect emotional and mental health in living their lives at home and in society.  Who are you using as your example the ‘straight’ Senator with a straight marriage who played tootsie- footsie under the toilet door with a male prostitute?

 It is not possible with the amount of parental involvement and love we provide, to imagine that my home is anything but emotionally stable.  I am  not in need of super nanny and nor do I need a reality show.    There are studies showing that gay parents are of a high caliber and that we provide good and safe homes for our kids. . There are many millions of emotionally imbalanced straight families.  What about the woman, Smith who drove her kids into a pond and drowned them?   The mother who drowned five kids in the bath tub?  The suicides stemming from military returning home from WAR? What about the child abuse day to day; the trash who loose their kids in the night to suspect circumstances? You only have to watch Nancy Grace’s show to see that my life and that of hundreds of thousands of gay families have had nothing to do with the sicko’s in this society.  Straight America is doing fine in its own destruction without gay help or influence. I challenge you to find one gay family convicted of murder.   Anderson argument = DOA

ANDERSON:-  5. These blocks build on the foundation of the common good: shared commitment to a society ordered to the good of the most members.   No Marriage, No Civilization

MELANIE:- Exactly and thanks for making my case and RESTING  MY CASE FOR ME-  THANKS MARY JO ANDERSON – not only have you failed to make your secular argument but you have revealed a furtive attempt to avoid the faith based argument AND  you have successfully made the argument for WHY GAY MARRIAGE EQUALITY WILL ACTUALLY ENHANCE SOCIETY.  

  Yeah – at last We are in agreement marriage – Civilization – Give everyone the right to marriage one person of their choice regardless of sexual identity. This secular argument, albeit furtive,  works after all. It works for our equality and not against it.  So maybe Ms. Anderson your attempts have backfired and you should go back to your religious argument. In truth the religious argument is the only one that may hold any relevance at all and to that end I say thank G-d for the separation of Church and State.

In the words of Anderson per an article on credentials for Bishops “Our bishops must foster authentic marriage and family life. In the heart of the family the dignity of the human person is taught and the future is nurtured. Healthy families are the source of a moral people, ethical citizens, and vocations,” she concluded. ”

In light of this comment Ms. Anderson how hypocritical is it of you to argue against marriage for all G-d’s flock?

  Mary Jo Anderson :-  

By Blogger, Melanie Nathan, contact
nathan@privatecourts.com /
www.oblogdeeoblogda.wordpress.com

Sir Elton John and his partner David Furnish have been denied permission to adopt a 14 month-old HIV positive orphan by the Ukrainian government because according to them, Sir Elton is too old and too gay.

The Ukraine Minister of Family, Youth and Sports Yuriy Pavlenko said yesterday that Ukrainian law only allows for married couples to adopt children and also restricts people who are more than 45 years older than the child from adopting that child.

While John and Furnish have been civil partners in the UK since 2005, the Ukraine does not recognize same-sex unions and Sir Elton is 62 years old.

The child, who is only known as Lev, lost both of his parents to AIDS.

On Saturday, Sir Elton said at a press conference in Ukraine that the boy – whom he met at an orphanage for children whose lives had been affected by Aids and HIV, – had “stolen my heart”, as he and his long time partner, filmmaker David Furnish toured the orphanage as part of the singer’s work with the Elton John Aids Foundation.

Had John and Furnish been allowed to adopt the child, Ukrainian law also require they adopt his brother, who is also in state care as well.

“Foreign citizens who are single have no right to adopt children… and the age difference between the adopter and the child cannot be more than 45 years,” Ukrainian family, youth and sports minister Pavlenko said to the Associated Press. ” Elton John will not be able to adopt a Ukrainian child and if he files that request we will unfortunately deny it. The law is the same for everybody – for a president, for a minister, for Elton John.”

LGR sources over at the US State Department tell us that John could still appeal to Ukrainian President Viktor Yushchenko for permission to adopt the children, but local politics would probably become an issue; Our source said The Ukraine is entering election season and the issue of foreign adoptions and gay rights are very sensitive ones in that country at the moment, so that avenue would also appear to be closed.

So sadly, two children… who could have the best of care, provided by two loving parents, and all that Sir Elton’s money and name could give them, today still sit in an orphanage, victims of local politics and prejudice.

• Elton John wants to adopt Ukrainian toddler (msnbc.msn.com)

With the passing of this legislation, the District of Columbia will become the first jurisdiction in the nation to enact a statute specifically providing children born through artificial insemination with two legal parents from the beginning even when those parents are a same-sex or different-sex unmarried couple.

Until now, a mother’s same-sex partner in the District of Columbia could become a child’s parent only through an expensive and lengthy adoption process.

But since the District of Columbia laws ban surrogacy, this measure does not affect the legal status of the partner or spouse of a gay man who has a biological child born in another jurisdiction using a surrogate mother. However, under existing District law, that partner can adopt the child and may also have some legal rights and obligations as the child’s de facto parent.

The DC Department of Vital Records is current preparing the consent forms that, when signed by both women, will result in placing the names of both parents on the child’s birth certificate.

In a statement issued by the National Center for Lesbian Rights (NCLR), Nancy Polikoff, Professor of Law at American University Washington College of Law, said, “A mother should not have to adopt her own child. When a heterosexual married couple uses artificial insemination to have a child, the husband does not have to adopt the child born to his wife. He is the child’s legal parent automatically. Now the child of a lesbian couple will have the same economic and emotional security accorded the children of heterosexual married couples who use artificial insemination.”

DC Council member Phil Mendelson was the principal sponsor of the new DC law, and the legislation received unanimous support from all 13 members of the D.C. Council from introduction to its passage.

Said Shannon Minter, NCLR’s legal director, “By establishing legal ties for families from the moment a child is born, this law provides same-sex parents and their children with much needed security and stability. We are especially grateful to Council member Phil Mendelson for shepherding the bill through to passage and to his staff for their meticulous work.”

The enactment of this law follows another new law that recognizes same-sex couples married elsewhere as legally married in the District. The D.C. Council is expected to legalize gay marriage in the city later this year after legislation is introduced.

http://www.nclrights.org/site/PageServer?pagename=press_DCparentingbill072209

Related articles by Zemanta

• Children of gay couples speak out (cnn.com)
• D.C. council votes to recognize gay marriages; Congress has final say (seattletimes.nwsource.com)