AH, SINGAPORE: From Reuters

Singapore is playing matchmaker again. Desperate to boost its fertility rate, the government of the city-state says it will fund new services and activities that encourage dating.

The government said on Friday it will pay up to 80 percent of costs up to S$50,000 (16,978 pounds) for approved projects that "provide gender-balanced social interaction opportunities to singles".

more
posted by Eve at 11:27 PM | Link | 0 comments

GAY ROW RUFFLES WEDDED BLISS: The Age (Australia)

ORGANISERS of a medieval contest to find the happiest married couple are having their relationship tested by a proposal to admit homosexuals.

In the fiercest debate to surround the Dunmow Flitch Trials since their inception in 1104, the organisers in the small Essex town are considering inviting same-sex couples to participate in the next competition, in the teeth of opposition from the vicar and other locals.

The trials, which are mentioned in Chaucer's The Wife of Bath, are held every four years and involve the award of "a flitch (side) of bacon to married couples if they can satisfy the judge and jury of six maidens and six bachelors that, in twelvemonth and a day, they have not wisht themselves unmarried again".

Michael Chapman, a solicitor and one of three members of the Flitch Trials Committee, supports the inclusion of gay couples following the legalisation of civil partnerships this year. ...

The vicar's stance is backed by Fred Shepherd, 86, who won the flitch in 2000 after convincing the jury that he and wife, Joan, had not quarrelled in 62 years of marriage. "It's against the whole idea of it," he said. "This dates back to the 12th century."

more
posted by Eve at 11:25 PM | Link | 0 comments

Faith in Demographics?

A rather triumphalist assertion in Newsweek of the power of demographics in combatting secularism. There's a lot to this, except it doesn't take into account the power of the state and market combined to penetrate the family and "corrupt" or "assimilate" (take your pick)one's children, a new phenomenon really:

"In his remarkable book "The Rise of Christianity," the American sociologist Rodney Stark explains how an obscure sect with just 40 converts in the year 30 A.D. became the official religion of Rome by 300 A.D. Standard histories point to Constantine's conversion; Stark looks to Christian demography. Unlike the pagans, he reports, Christians cared for their sick during plagues rather than abandoning them, which sharply lowered mortality. They emphasized male fidelity and marriage, which in turn attracted a higher percentage of female converts, who raised more Christian children. Moreover, says Stark, Christians had a higher fertility rate—yielding an even greater demographic advantage.

Latter-day religious groups have thrived for similar reasons. The population of Mormons, for example, has grown at a rate of 40 percent per decade for the last 100 years—three times faster than, say, Jews. Once a fringe sect, the Mormons today outnumber Jews among Americans under the age of 45. Demography also helps explain the rise of the religious right in America. A recent article in the American Journal of Sociology by Michael Hout, Andrew Greeley and Melissa Wilde finds that conservative Protestant denominations have increased their share of all-white Protestants from one third among those born in 1900 to two thirds for those born in 1975. As with the rise of Christianity itself, slow-moving sociological forces led to a political "tipping point." This time, Republican strategists played the role of Constantine's advisers, who saw which way the wind was blowing and moved to exploit the new social trends.

This effect is duplicating itself around the world. After a century of modest decline, the share of the world's population that is religious is growing—for the simple reason that the religious tend to have more children, irrespective of age, education or wealth. Nor is "secular" Europe an exception. In an analysis of data from 10 European countries for the years 1981-2004, I found that next to age and marital status, a woman's religiosity was the strongest predictor of her number of offspring. . ."

posted by maggie at 10:56 AM | Link | 0 comments

German doctor must pay for failed contraception

From the BBC:

A doctor who carried out a failed contraceptive operation has been ordered by a German court to pay financial support for the child.
The gynaecologist had inserted a patch into the patient's arm, but it failed to prevent pregnancy six months later.
The woman, who had recently qualified as a teacher, had to give up her new job to care for her child.
The highest judicial court has ruled the doctor must pay 600 euros (£400) a month until the child reaches 18.
German gynaecologists now fear a flood of lawsuits, says the BBC's Steve Rosenberg in Berlin.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/6155200.stm
posted by Margaret Nell at 9:45 AM | Link | 1 comments

UPDATE ON MO STATE U CHRISTIAN STUDENT TOLD TO WRITE LETTER SUPPORTING GAY ADOPTIONS: From Lifesite

Emily Brooker, a student in the Missouri State University's School of Social Work, sued the university after being punished by a professor for refusing to lobby in favour of homosexual adoption. Only weeks after launching the suit, the university has settled out of court and disciplined the professor in question.

Professor Frank Kauffman had assigned Brooker, and her classmates, to write a letter to the Missouri Legislature expressing support for homosexual adoption. She refused to do so because of her religious objections and was charged with a "Level 3 Grievance," the most serious charge possible, and faced the possibility of having her degree withheld. ...

A little over two weeks ago, Brooker launched a lawsuit with the help of the Alliance Defense Fund, a legal firm which defends religious freedom. ...

After an investigation, the university has purged the grievance from Brooker's academic record and has forced Kauffman to resign from his administrative duties. He was also put on non-teaching leave for the rest of the semester.

more
posted by Eve at 8:03 PM | Link | 0 comments

More About South Africa

Some of the news stories on the situation in South Africa miss some of the complexity of the situation there.

Parliament’s action was required by a December 2005 decision of the South Africa Constitutional Court that mandated the government provide a legal status for same-sex couples by December 1, 2006.

On Tuesday, November 14, the government’s Civil Union Bill passed second reading in the Parliament in a 230-41 vote. The bill had been amended just before the vote. As introduced, the bill would have created a civil union status (with all of the incidents of marriage) for same-sex couples with marriage not mentioned. According to the Minister of Health, the new version allows same-sex couples to "solemnise and register a voluntary union by way of either a marriage or a civil partnership." Thus, the current marriage statute is untouched and applies only to opposite sex couples while the new law allows same (or opposite-sex couples) to contract either a marriage or civil partnership. The difference being the source of statutory authority for the marriage to be performed. Interestingly, the legislation also allows government officials (as well as clergy) to refuse to participate in solemnization of the union.

As Maggie noted, the African National Congress, Parliament’s majority party, did not allow its members a free vote so all ANC members who voted did so in favor of the legislation. The National Council of Provinces must now approve the legislation before it can be signed and become law.
posted by William Duncan at 2:31 PM | Link | 0 comments

South Africa Gets SSM

Under court order, and by a strict party line vote, South Africa's parliament adopts gay marriage.
posted by maggie at 1:14 PM | Link | 0 comments

Lead Couples in Calif. SSM Case Splits UP/SF Chronicle

"The couple whose names top all the arguments in California's same-sex marriage court case -- expected to head back to court today -- have separated.

Lancy Woo and Cristy Chung, who have been together 18 years and have a young daughter, announced that they are no longer part of the lawsuit challenging California's marriage statutes. . .

Woo and Chung's breakup comes just months after two other high-profile same-sex couples -- the lead plaintiffs in the case that legalized same-sex marriage in Massachusetts and a Vermont couple who were the first in the nation to enter a civil union -- also ended their relationships. . ."
posted by maggie at 8:25 AM | Link | 4 comments

Why Arizona. . .Grannies Living in Sin?

"Retirees help defeat [Arizona] Gay Marriage Ban", a take on the Arizona Marriage Amendment battle in the Nov. 13 Houston Chronicle:

"When Arizona voters signed enough petitions to put a same-sex marriage ban on Tuesday's ballot, opponents decided their best shot at defeating it was to shine a light on real people who would be hurt by Proposition 107.

If most of those real people were not gay, they said, all the better.

That's how Al Breznay and Maxine Piatt, a charming, elderly heterosexual couple, became poster children for the "No on Prop 107" movement and key players in making Arizona the first state to defeat a gay marriage referendum.

Opponents practically erased gays from their arguments in the months leading to the vote, focusing instead on the impact the law could have on unmarried couples in general. . .

Partners in retirement
In Arizona, with its large retiree population, elderly couples frequently forgo marriage to preserve higher benefits under Social Security, Medicare and private pensions. That's why Breznay and Piatt chose, instead, to make their eight-year arrangement formal by signing the city of Tucson's Domestic Partnership Registry.

"We didn't want to be living in sin," said Breznay, 79. "But my goodness, at our age we were mostly interested in companionship and combining our incomes."

Yet Breznay worried that if Piatt, 75, were hospitalized, he would be denied the role they both wanted him to have in making her medical decisions. Their legal relationship through the Domestic Partner Registry got him into the intensive care unit to see her when she was hospitalized last year, he said, and helped him obtain power of attorney for her. . .

When the lawsuit failed, Prop 107 opponents started thinking about what it would take to get public opinion on their side. The group's advertisement points out the approach they decided to take. There were no photos of gay couples. The ad, still on www.noprop107.com features photos of a young heterosexual couple, a child, and two elderly heterosexual couples. . .

posted by maggie at 12:32 AM | Link | 6 comments

"Angry Gay Man Sinks a Stalwart"/NY Daily News

500G sinks a stalwart
Angry gay man's revenge, Ben Smith, Nov. 12

"GOP Rep. Sue Kelly won't leave office until January, but she may have ended her political career Sept. 30, 2004. That was the day she voted for a constitutional amendment to ban gay marriage – and caught the attention of a Westchester County constituent, Adam Rose.

The openly gay real estate developer son of a legendary builder, Rose, 47, would ultimately sink half a million dollars — an extraordinary amount even by the standards of cash-rich American politics — into defeating Kelly.

"I woke up one day and discovered that my member of Congress had voted to prevent me and my partner from marrying each other," Rose said last week. "I became incensed."

He resolved to do "anything I could do to take her out."

Kelly, who represents the city's northernmost suburbs, lost last Tuesday to Democrat John Hall by a slim 2% margin.

Her loss came as a surprise even to the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee, which had largely ignored Hall's bid. Hall ran an energetic, grass-roots-driven campaign, and he benefited from a Democratic wave. But everyone from MoveOn.org to Comedy Central's Stephen Colbert has claimed credit for helping the musician — best known for the 1970s pop hits "Still the One" and "Dance with Me" — to victory.

Hall also benefited, however, from the continuing power that a single, wealthy individual with nothing at stake beyond his personal beliefs wields in American elections. Rose's money produced a series of harsh television and radio attacks in the final weeks of the race.

No one in the district, however, made the connection between the marriage vote and the massive campaign against Kelly, run through an independent group called Majority Action, which hit her for taking contributions from oil companies. The group also linked her to the scandal over former Florida GOP Rep. Mark Foley's relationship with teenage pages.

"They were basically calling her a coddler of pedophiles," her campaign consultant, Jay Townsend, said bitterly. "It was legal, but it was filthy politics, and nobody up there knew where it was coming from or what the purpose behind it was."

According to filings with the IRS, Rose effectively underwrote Majority Action's campaign against Kelly, giving a $500,000 check to the group Sept. 29, and persuading friends and relatives to contribute tens of thousands more.

He spent in a few weeks half of what Hall spent for his entire campaign. He was Majority Action's largest individual donor, and Majority Action spent more in Kelly's district than in any other, according to the group's executive director, Mark Longabaugh. Before Rose went on the attack, he invited Kelly to the home in Lewisboro he has shared with his partner since 1994. She came alone on Feb. 4, and glanced at the 47-acre property, complete with outbuildings and domestic staff.

She told him she had backed the amendment in part because of the scruples of her Orthodox Jewish constituents in the enclave of Kiryas Joel. She pledged to win back his support by pushing for other gay-friendly issues — in particular an end to the military's "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" policy.

Rose contributed what he could to Hall, and helped him raise more money. And then, in September, he called Majority Action. "I'm this guy in New York you've never heard of and I want to do anything I can to beat Sue Kelly," he recalled saying. "I'm sending you $500,000. I need your address."

On Election Night, he swung by the victory party of Hall, who supports same-sex marriage. Then he drove home and watched the returns on television, elated as Kelly's loss became clear. (The defeat came, ironically, in part from Rose's money and also in part from the decision of Kiryas Joel to back the Democrat.)

"I was really happy, because I felt that the American system really works," Rose said."

posted by maggie at 9:17 PM | Link | 1 comments