Timetable for SSM in Maine and NE: "3 to 5 years"

From The Phoenix:

"If we had asked the leadership at Equality Maine about their plan for gay marriage say, two years ago, they would have likely said, “If we told you, we’d have to kill you.” After all, it was then that equal-rights activists were campaigning for the umpteenth time to keep a non-discrimination law on the books.

To fend off wild Sodom and Gomorrah claims made by some notorious righties, part of the message was that the law did not, and would not, have anything to do with gay marriage.

Those in the know, however, were well aware that the law had both nothing and everything to do with gay marriage — every piece of pro-gay legislation is another piece of the treasure map, and, in Maine, activists aren’t at all squirrelly about their plan now.

“Marriage,” Betsy Smith, the executive director of Equality Maine, says confidently when asked what her group’s plan is for the future. She even offers a timetable: three to five years. . ."

posted by maggie at 5:42 PM | Link | 0 comments  

British Fertility Hits New High, Immigrants, Older Mothers Credited

June 8, U.K. Telegraph:

"UK's rising immigration fuels 26-year fertility high"

Rising immigration and older mothers have fuelled a 26-year high in the number of children women are having in England and Wales.

Figures released by the Office of National Statistics show the average number of children has risen for a fifth straight year to 1.87, the highest rate since 1980.
The last decade has seen a 77 per cent increase in births by mothers born outside of the UK, with the figure climbing to almost 150,000, or over a fifth of all babies, last year.

As Britain's demographics change, Mohammed is expected soon to replace Jack as the most popular boy's name. It has already pushed Thomas into third place.
Older mothers, also played a part in the rising fertility rate, with more women choosing to break off their careers to get pregnant. Births to women aged between 35 and 39 rose seven per cent last year and the number of babies born to women aged over 40 and over has almost doubled in the last decade. . ."

posted by maggie at 5:33 PM | Link | 0 comments  

SSM Update: Calif Assembly Passes SSM

SF Chronicle, June 6, 2007:

"Assembly OKs bill allowing same-sex couples to marry"

For the second time in three years, the state Assembly approved legislation Tuesday allowing same-sex marriage in California in a vote that highlighted a continued and profound disagreement among legislative Democrats and Republicans on one of the hot-button social issues of the time.

On a party-line vote, Democrats supported San Francisco Assemblyman Mark Leno's effort to make California the first state in the country to legislatively end the prohibition on gay marriage. The bill advances to the state Senate, but even if it is approved there, it's likely to face a veto from Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger.
A spokesman for the governor said Schwarzenegger has not changed his mind on the issue since 2005, when he rejected a similar bill, arguing that voters had spoken against gay marriage by passing Proposition 22 in 2000. . ."

posted by maggie at 5:08 PM | Link | 4 comments  

GAY RIGHTS ACTIVISTS SNUB CIVIL UNION LAWS: From the Miami Herald

...''I'm not bothered by the semantics of marriage versus civil unions,'' Splaine, a Democrat, told Stateline.org. ''Was a marriage bill feasible this year? No. Did we pass essentially the same thing? Yes,'' said Splaine, who is gay.

Although gay rights activists say they are grateful for the legal protections that come with civil unions -- including hospital visitation and burial rights, inheritance without a will and access to a partner's health-insurance benefits -- they stridently object to the notion that civil unions are the same as marriage.

In most states, though, ''the sentiment isn't there for same-sex marriage, but there is an understanding of the fairness of providing legal protections for people in committed relationships,'' said Illinois state Rep. Gregory Harris, who is gay. ''I know we can't have marriage now in Illinois. Instead, we need to do what we can politically,'' said Harris, a Democrat who sponsored a civil union bill this year that failed to advance through the Legislature. ...

''Civil unions are nothing like marriage,'' New Jersey gay rights activist Steven Goldstein said. ''The cockamamie contraption simply doesn't work. If civil unions were a person, they would be arrested for fraud,'' said Goldstein, director of Garden State Equality, a gay-rights advocacy group.

more
posted by Eve at 3:55 PM | Link | 19 comments  

American Academy of Pediatrics Report Critiqued

The story below is from LifeSiteNews, the report by Dr. Sharon Quick is published on their website here.

"Over the past five years, Dr. Sharon Quick, a member of the American Society of Anesthesiologists and retired Clinical Assistant Professor from the Washington School of Medicine, has analyzed all of the major scientific literature that was used in the 2002 American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP) Technical Report on Same-Sex "Marriage" Adoptions. The final report was printed in the highly influential Pediatrics journal and concludes by supporting the adoption of children by Gay and Lesbian Couples.

In an Iowa court-case in late May, Dr. Quick gave her official testimony that the Technical Report "contains major quotation and interpretive errors that, irrespective of the quality of the studies cited, invalidate the conclusions in the article."

Many medical societies trust the accuracy of the AAP's investigations and base their policies upon its reports. The report influenced the American Medical association, for example, to support the adoption of children by same-sex parents. The Report was also as evidence in the Massachusetts legal battle over same-sex union and in United States Supreme Court cases as well.

Dr. Sharon Quick discovered that the report inaccurately references an unprecedented 57 percent of its scientific literature. The list of grossly misgathered and misrepresented information reveals the bias and inaccuracy in the Technical Report.

These errors spread through a Policy Statement (2002) and Special Article entitled, "The Effects of Marriage, Civil Union, and Domestic Partnership Laws on the Health and Well-Being of Children," (2006) both printed in Pediatrics. The Special Article drew its information and conclusion almost entirely from the Technical report and so heaped inaccuracy upon inaccuracy. The Article stated, for example, "Lesbian mothers strongly endorse child-centered attitudes and commitment to their maternal roles." The original studies, however, did not specifically focus on lesbian maternal roles. The Report also ignores some of M. Kirkpatrick's original data (1987) which records a Lesbian mother calling her partner's son a "macho creep".

. . . . Dr. Quick concludes, "The AAP's standard for evidence-based medicine in a technical report is violated by the extent of the misrepresentation of the data, unsupported or misleading statements, and failure to report conflicting evidence contained within the report's own references…the conclusions of the report cannot be trusted and should not be used to define policy."

posted by maggie at 10:03 PM | Link | 8 comments  

A MARRIAGE THAT'S GOOD ENOUGH: Corinne Colbert

here
posted by Eve at 7:12 PM | Link | 0 comments  

Hillary Clinton Repudiates Bill Clinton's Defense of Marriage Act

At least the key sentence, which defines marriage for federal law as the union of husband and wife. Human Rights Campaign press release:

"This groundbreaking and unified position of all Democratic candidates would override Section 3 of the so-called “Defense of Marriage Act,” which provides that for federal purposes, "The word ‘marriage’ means only a legal union between one man and one woman as husband and wife, and the word ‘spouse’ refers only to a person of the opposite sex who is a husband or a wife.” (1 U.S.C. Section 7)"

Briefest of news stories in June 6 NYT online: "Clinton Backs Change to Marriage Law":

"Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton has told a gay rights organization that she supports the repeal of one provision of the federal Defense of Marriage Act, the 1996 law signed by her husband that says states and the federal government do not have to recognize gay marriages and unions from other states. On the questionnaire for the Human Rights Campaign, Mrs. Clinton said she opposed the part of the law that would prohibit the federal government from recognizing same-sex relationships. Her advisers said that she continued to oppose gay marriage. Her response on the questionnaire puts her in line with her rivals for her party’s nomination."

posted by maggie at 10:50 AM | Link | 7 comments  

RITALIN USE HIGHER AMONG CANADIAN CHILDREN OF DIVORCE: Canadian Broadcasting Company

Ritalin use is almost twice as high among children whose parents divorce compared with those who continue to live with two biological parents, a Canadian study suggests.

more; also, you can read the whole study (which I haven't done, so feel free to note lacunae etc in comments) here.
posted by Eve at 9:58 PM | Link | 0 comments  

Calif Proposes Civil Unions for Opposite Sexes, Too

June 5 Sacramento Bee:

"Bill would help unwed couples

All heterosexual adults who register their domestic partnerships with the state of California would have the same legal rights as married couples, including filing joint state income tax returns, under legislation approved Monday by the state Senate.

Senate Bill 11 -- which will now be considered by the Assembly -- was introduced by Sen. Carole Migden, whose landmark 1999 civil union bill allowed same-sex couples to register with the secretary of state as domestic partners.

"This bill proposes to expand domestic partnerships and benefits to all adult couples who desire to form domestic partnership relationships," the San Francisco Democrat said on the floor of the Senate.


She cited published reports that show four out of 10 babies in the United States are now born to parents who are not married, but may live together.

"It seems to me entirely fair that this Legislature respond to the emerging new definition of marriage and family," said Migden, one of California's first openly lesbian lawmakers, who calls the legislation an "equity measure."

SB 11 passed by a 22-13 vote, largely along party lines with Democrats supporting the proposal and Republicans opposing it.

No Republican senator spoke against the bill during the floor session.

But Randy Thomasson, president of Campaign for Children and Families, which lobbies for conservatives causes, warned that if SB 11 becomes law, "marriage will be functionally abolished" in California.

"Why get married if you can get all the legal rights and benefits of marriage without being committed?" Thomasson said in a statement. "This bad bill severely weakens the institution of marriage and will motivate unwed parents to remain uncommitted."

Thomasson urged Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger, who has not taken a position on the bill, "to veto this nonsensical bill that robs marriage of its uniqueness and honor."

But Migden said the state should not accord "special privileges" to the children of gay and lesbian couples "if we neglect to offer the same opportunities to the children of heterosexual couples." . . ."

posted by maggie at 9:23 PM | Link | 7 comments  

"Freedom to Marry" Loving Anniversary Campaign

print ad here. Jeb Bush stars!
posted by maggie at 9:18 PM | Link | 0 comments  

The GOP Debate: Where's Marriage?

No, not gay marriage, just plain old marriage and family. Over on National Review Online, Prof. Brad Wilcox and the Manhattan Institute's Kay Hymowitz (author "Marriage and Caste")point out this is the third Republican debate: Will anyone besides Mitt Romney utter "the F-word?":

"Here we are at debate #3, but has anyone heard a Republican besides Mitt Romney utter their one-time favorite word “family?” In fact, most of the top Republican presidential nominees are studiously avoiding the biggest social problem of our time, namely, family breakdown. There’s a good reason for this, of course; aside from Romney, the leading candidates, whether committed to running or only flirting, are divorced, and at least one of them has a marital history that verges on the baroque. It’s understandable that a presidential contender would want to avoid reminding voters about a messy personal history.

Understandable, but in the end, misguided. There is simply no way to advance the principles that have made for past Republican successes without supporting strong families. Let us count the reasons. . ."

posted by maggie at 11:32 AM | Link | 18 comments  

At the Intersection of Blogging and Family Law

In a recent child custody decision in the Ohio Court of Appeals, the mother was appealing a change of child custody from her to her ex-husband. Her argument was that the court had inappropriately considered “her lifestyle choices [drug use and sadomasochism], religion [paganism] and sexual orientation [bisexuality]” in making its decision.

In deciding that the trial court had not erred, the court noted online blogs by the mother indicating she had and would continue to use drugs and engage in sadomasochism including when her child was in the home. The court said these lifestyle choices could adversely affect the best interest of the child.
posted by William Duncan at 6:54 PM | Link | 0 comments  

SSM Update: Maryland Supreme Decision Expected Soon

WaPo reports:

"Advocates for same-sex marriage are preparing for a decision by the Maryland Court of Appeals that could come any day, with big consequences. . . .Equality Maryland is preparing for any outcome with a new campaign, Marylanders for Marriage. The advocacy group is enlisting grass-roots support in certain neighborhoods and preparing to lobby state lawmakers this summer. Yard signs and bumper stickers are being printed with the slogan "Civil Marriage Is a Civil Right." Fundraising is in full gear."

posted by maggie at 4:38 PM | Link | 36 comments  

Maryland's HIgh Court Decides: Birth Certificate Need Not List Birth (surrogate) Mother

This June 2, 2007 story, "Ruling May Have Broad Implications For Prospective Gay Dads" from 356gay.com is about this ruling from the Maryland Court of Appeals (the supreme court of that state):

"A surrogate mother who has no genetic connection to the baby she is carrying does not have to be listed as the mother on a birth certificate, Maryland's highest court ruled recently. The case arose from twins born in the Washington suburbs in 2001. The woman who carried the twins for a father used an egg donor and had no genetic relationship to them. Both she and the father did not want her listed as the mother.

In a 4-3 decision, the Maryland Court of Appeals ruled that the babies are not required to have a mother listed on birth papers.

"Maryland's breaking ground here," said Dorrance Dickens, a Washington lawyer who argued the case for the father and the surrogate mother.

Though judges routinely allow blank spaces for mothers on birth certificates in surrogate cases, Dickens said Maryland's court is the first to use a state Equal Rights Amendment to make the decision.

In a 56-page decision, the majority argued that a man who can prove he has no genetic relationship to a child can be ruled not to be its father, so a woman should have the same ability.

"The methods by which people can produce children have changed," Chief Justice Robert Bell wrote in the decision. "... The paternity statute, clearly, did not contemplate the many potential legal issues arising from these new technologies, issues that will continue to arise unless the laws are rewritten or construed in light of these new technologies."

Not all judges agreed. In a dissent, Judge Dale Cathell said the father had the twins "manufactured" and then didn't want them to be listed as having a mother.

"The majority, in essence, holds that if you do not intend to be the mother, you should not be responsible as a mother," Cathell wrote. "There are probably tens, if not hundreds of thousands, of fathers (and certainly mothers as well) who did not intend to be parents at the time of the actions that led to conception, who have been judicially determined to be responsible for the support of the child they did not intend to conceive."

posted by maggie at 4:33 PM | Link | 0 comments  

Iran Official Calls for Promoting "Temporary Marriages"

June 2 AP, by ALI AKBAR DAREINI, "Iran Official Backs Temporary Marriage":

"Iran's hard-line interior minister is encouraging temporary marriages as a way to avoid extramarital sex. . .

A temporary marriage, or "sigheh," refers to a Shiite Muslim tradition under which a man and a woman sign a contract that allows them to be "married" for any length of time, even a few hours. An exchange of money, as a sort of dowry, is often involved.
Although the practice exists, it's not very common in Iran, a Shiite majority nation where many consider it a license for prostitution. . . .

"Temporary marriage is God's rule. We must aggressively encourage that," state-run television quoted Interior Minister Mostafa Pourmohammadi as saying.

The minister, who made his comments Thursday, was the first Iranian official to support the disputed practice in more than a decade. Former Iranian President Hashemi Rafsanjani raised the issue in the early 1990s but was opposed by the country's hard-line clerics.

"We have to find a solution to meet the sexual desire of the youth who have no possibility of marriage," Pourmohammadi was quoted as saying by local newspapers.
Half of Iran's population of 70 million is under 30. Taxi driver Reza Sarabi, 23, expressed the frustration of many young Iranian men who can't afford to buy a house and get married.

"I have no money to set up a matrimonial life. I don't want prostitutes. What should I do with my sexual needs?" he said. . ."

posted by maggie at 10:10 AM | Link | 1 comments  

New Study: Marriage Protects Against Depression

More evidence its not just a selection effect:

"Marriage provides greater psychological benefits to depressed people compared to people who are not depressed before they walk down the aisle, a new study reveals. This remains true even though marriage quality is poorer for depressed individuals.

Adrianne Frech and Kristi Williams, Ph.D. from Ohio State University in Columbus co-wrote the study. It appears in the June issue of the Journal of Health and Social Behavior.

“Based on previous research, we hypothesized that people who are depressed would have worse marital quality and would therefore experience fewer benefits from marriage,” Frech said, “but that is not what we found.”

The researchers speculate that marriage might provide a level of companionship that depressed singles typically lack.

Frech’s team used data from the National Survey of Families and Households. The study included 3,066 unmarried people aged 55 years and under. To identify depressed individuals, researchers used a 12-item test for depression and considered respondents depressed if they scored 23 or more points on the test.

After a follow-up period of five years, researchers identified people who married during the period, asked about the quality of their marriages and how their psychological well-being changed. The study excluded participants who married but ended up divorcing before the five-year follow-up.

Researchers found that the participants who married within the five-year period scored an average of about 3.5 points lower on the depression test than those who remained single. Of all the depressed participants, those who got married scored an average 7.5 points lower on the mood scale than the people who remained single. The non-depressed experienced a smaller change in their psychological well-being if they got married. . ."

posted by maggie at 9:51 AM | Link | 0 comments  

EVERYONE I KNOW GOES AWAY IN THE END

Kristine Steakley on two views of divorce, change, and the nature of life.
posted by Eve at 2:46 AM | Link | 0 comments  

SHE GOES WEST, HE GOES RIGHT: From Der Spiegel

...But according to a new study released by the Berlin Institute for Population and Development, there is another problem that accompanies the migration. Since 1991, more than two-thirds of all those who have left Eastern Germany have been women. The result is that in many towns in the region, there are simply not enough to go around -- some places are missing up to 25 percent of their young women. Even worse, the young men who stay behind are often poorly educated, unemployed and frustrated -- perfect fodder for neo-Nazi groups looking for members.

"In general," the study finds, "right-wing radical parties receive more votes in those areas where the most young women have left."

more
posted by Eve at 2:12 AM | Link | 0 comments  

NYT: "Sex, With Consequences"

An interesting column in Sunday NYT by Randy Kennedy:

“But there is a sense that these recent artistic creations are partly a response, maybe partly unconscious, to the current state of sex in our society, where it can often feel like just another form of the cheep entertainment and distraction that now pushes in from all sides. . .In ‘The Abstinence Teacher,” Mr. Perotta pokes a lot of fun at the cadre of Christian hardliners. . .But behind the humor, you can sense the writer’s sympathy with their desire to create more meaning in human relations even if he disagrees with their methods and ends. . . .

The same yearning to drag sex back into the foreground in a more meaningful way. . . is also at work in the movies of Judd Apatow, the creator of ‘The 40-Year-Old Virgin” and the new ‘Knocked Up,” about post-pregnancy reality. . . .

The sociologist Alan Wolfe. . . .said he saw a reflection in such works of the way people seem to struggle now for a greater sense of societal structure. “They do want to go back to a more conventional sexuality, morality, whatever, “ said Mr. Wolfe, director of the Boisi Center for Religion and American Public Life at Boston College. “But they do not want to go back to an era of repression. So a kind of muddled, middle position is where it seems to me that most Americans are these days.”

This column, esploring the current ambivalence towards the sexual revolution and the desire for greater meaning, ends however, on this quote from novelist Jane Smiley, “I wouldn’t go back to 1962 for a hundred million dollars.”

Randy Kennedy, “Sex, with Consequences,” New York Times June 3 2007, Section 4 page 1, 4: 4
posted by maggie at 3:53 PM | Link | 0 comments