"OUT FROM UNDER: The IMPACT of HOMOSEXUAL PARENTING, By Dawn Stefano

"In a politically correct climate, how could the child of an overtly homosexual father communicate to society her experience of personal trauma and her message that children are affected by the sexual example of their parents? The provocative speaker and new author has broadcast her passionate saga to audiences and lawmakers in the U.S., Canada, and beyond…"

After three and a half years, Out From Under, is now here. You can order it by phone at 1-877-421-READ (7323) or visit online at: http://www.annotationbooks.com."

"Marital status can be a predictor for substance abuse and the course of its treatment. In particular, married persons may have fewer substance abuse problems than unmarried persons, show better courses of treatment when they do require it, and relapse less often to substance abuse after treatment.1,2,3 For example, data from the National Survey on Drug Use and Health (NSDUH) show that persons who were married at the time of the survey had a lower rate of substance dependence or abuse than persons who were not married.4 Other studies have shown that for those who abuse substances, being married can be a predictor of starting substance abuse treatment, spending more hours in treatment, and staying in treatment.5 In contrast, being unmarried can be a predictor of higher relapse into substance abuse after treatment.6"

A Finnish district court prosecutor recently charged a member of the Finland state church, the Evangelical Lutheran Church of Finland (ELCF), with criminal discrimination for refusing to work with a female pastor...

The case could set a precedent for similar cases concerning discrimination against homosexuals. The ELCF is still discussing whether homosexual pastors can serve in the church and whether pastors may bless homosexual couples.

Finland's laws prohibit any discrimination either in the workplace or in public based on race, language, age, family ties, health, religion, political orientation, work, sexual orientation, or gender. This is the first time that an ELCF controversy has involved state law enforcement. The case will be taken to trial November 16...

Johan Candelin, director of World Evangelical Alliance's Religious Liberty Commission, said the blessing of gay and lesbian couples will be "the hot potato in future years. When that comes up, then the church will split. What the split will look like, I don't know."

• “When Three's No Crowd,” By Rachel Breitman, Gay City News, October 25, 2007
  
• “For polyamorists, three's not a crowd; it's just the start,” By Andrea Useem, Seattle Times, October 28, 2007
  

The couple who had an 11-year-old boy removed from their care because they refused to sign new sexual equality rules have won their battle to continue fostering.

Vincent and Pauline Matherick believed the regulations went against their Christian beliefs but social workers told them they had no choice but to sign them.

Last night, however, the couple were celebrating after social services assured them they would not have to promote same-sex relationships...

Executive Summary

In 2006, unmarried women voted for change in dramatically large numbers. On the eve of the election, more than two-thirds of unmarried women believed the country was on the wrong track, less than one-third approved of the job Congress was doing, and 54 percent said that they used their vote to voice their dissatisfaction with politics in Washington. Unmarried women were overwhelmingly against the Iraq war and the current status quo, particularly the neglect of issues such as health care and the economy.

This analysis finds that unmarried women are poised to lead the charge for even greater change in 2008. The growth of this demographic is changing the social fabric of our country. Meanwhile, unmarried women are at the forefront of the demand for change in America. In fact, unmarried women may play the same role for Democrats in 2008 that white evangelicals played for George Bush and the Republicans in 2004.

Key Findings

Marital status is playing an increasingly defining role in elections. For the 2006 congressional elections, the “marriage gap” was 32 points - far bigger than the gender gap, which was just 9 points.

At 26 percent, unmarried women are the largest segment of the Democratic base. They are also the second most loyal bloc of Democratic voters. If progressives turn them out, unmarried women can carry the election for Democrats in 2008.

In an electorate that is hungry for change, this cohort is the hungriest, with 78 percent saying the country is on the wrong track. Unmarried women’s ire is focused firmly on the Republicans, and this is reflected in new poll findings that show Democrats poised to blow Republicans out among this group in 2008. In a generic presidential match-up, unmarried women favor the Democrat by a 70 - 24 point margin.

Those opposed to same-sex marriage are losing this particular culture war. Indeed, the beginning of the end of the movement to thwart the recognition of gay marriage by the states is unintentionally documented in a recent article [see below] in the Harvard Journal of Law and Public Policy, the conservative-leaning journal at Harvard Law School. In that article, Roger Severino, of the Becket Fund, argues that "same-sex marriage threatens religious liberty," which he apparently views as a negative development...

[I]t is perfectly appropriate to weigh the interest in religious liberty against other social interests, such as the interest in enforcing anti-discrimination law. Sometimes, religious liberty and religious entities quite properly lose such public policy battles. Sometimes they don't, and the question is reaching the right balance...

As with all public policy, the right balance will be the result of deliberative and careful weighing of all interests. On the one side is the profound American commitment to religious liberty, subject to John Stuart Mill's rule against harm. On the other, is America's emerging commitment to fair and equal treatment for same-sex couples. Let the policy-making begin.

The movement for gay marriage is on a collision course with religious liberty...

The specific consequences that will likely flow from legalizing same-sex marriage include both government compulsion of religious institutions to provide financial or other support for same-sex married couples and government withdrawal of public benefits from those institutions that oppose same-sex marriage...

Religious institutions will soon face serious legal risks that include the substantial possibility of civil liability and targeted exclusion from government benefits...[and] the inevitable litigation will be protracted, costly, and result in widespread legal confusion resulting in pervasive church-state conflict and a substantial chilling of religious expression...

This Article explores the coming clash...

...Members of the Vermont Legislature's commission studying the possibility of expanding marriage rights to gay and lesbian couples received a quick legal lesson on the history of the gay rights struggle as it met with four lawyers Monday afternoon...

Nearly all of Monday's meeting was thick in legal arguments and relatively low-key. But sparks flew as commissioners had some tough questions for Monte Stewart, a Utah attorney and president of the Marriage Law Foundation, a group that opposes same-sex marriage...

The back-and-forth between commissioners and Stewart forced Commission Chair Tom Little, a former Republican state representative from Shelburne, to interject.

"We are here to listen and ask questions, not to debate," he said...

Monday's public hearing, the second for the commission, was scheduled to hear solely from the legal community. Future public sessions for the general community will be held around the state as the commission prepares to issue a report on its findings to lawmakers in April 2008.

[There are] 26,000 gay and lesbian couples across the state [of California] who are raising an estimated 70,000 children...[U]nlike common public perception...these same-sex parents are neither white nor above the average in income.

A study released Tuesday by a group of Bay Area organizations serving lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender families found that same-sex couples raising children in California are more likely to be people of color and that their median household income is 17 percent lower than the income of married couples with children...

[The groups] produced the report to paint a more accurate picture of gay and lesbian parents and their children...[They] hope that by better understanding the demographics of gay and lesbian families, they not only can help fight bias affecting children in those families, but also help improve economic equity...

"Gay-marriage coalition debates its next mission"

". . .But four months later, the group is agonizing over a question born of its own success: What, if anything, should it do now?

The debate is creating tensions among onetime allies. Some gay leaders believe MassEquality should broaden its mission to include issues such as transgender rights and HIV/AIDS, while others disagree and say expanding Mass-Equality's agenda to other gay and lesbian causes could dilute its effectiveness, crowd out smaller groups that advocate for gay rights, and alienate some lawmakers and donors who supported same-sex marriage. They believe the group should stay focused on its original mission and perhaps share its expertise with gay-marriage advocates in other states.

Some involved with the group are raising concerns that the organization has been spending more than $100,000 a month since June without a clear mission. A confidential survey of Mass-Equality "stakeholders" leaked to the newspaper Bay Windows last week found little consensus about what the group's role should be. . .


One thing everyone seems to agree on is that the group must keep its promise to help lawmakers in the 2008 elections who supported gay marriage. Thanks partly to the group's massive fund-raising and grass-roots efforts, not a single one of the 195 lawmakers who have run for reelection after voting in favor of gay marriage since the group's birth has lost a seat, said Marc Solomon, executive director of the organization.

"We told legislators we'd stick with them if they stuck with us," he said.

But, beyond that, the future is an open question.

MassEquality evolved from a group of gay organizations that had been working together on rights issues since 2001; the group began in earnest in late 2003, after the Supreme Judicial Court handed down its historic decision legalizing gay marriage, and advocates knew they would have to work together as never before to fight attempts to pass a constitutional ban.

The heat of battle encouraged cooperation, and many smaller groups set aside their own agendas to focus on marriage. Mass-Equality pulled in millions of dollars from local and national donors, established 11 affiliates across the state, and, at its height, employed 22 full-time and 35 part-time staff members.

"All the organizations worked together brilliantly," said Arline Isaacson, co-chair of the Massachusetts Gay and Lesbian Political Caucus and a leader of the Mass-Equality lobbying team. "All the groups set aside their differences to focus like a laser beam on defending marriage."

After the Legislature's June 14 vote, and the announcement by foes of same-sex marriage that they would shelve plans for another ballot petition, MassEquality's board decided to do some soul-searching about its future. It hired a consultant, conducted focus groups, interviewed donors and leaders, and held a public brainstorming session. The board decided to keep only its core staff - about eight full-time positions - while it deliberated its mission, said David Wilson, chairman of the MassEquality board.

Wilson said the group has discussed many options, from disbanding - which no one wants to do, he said - to working only on same-sex marriage, not just in Massachusetts but in other New England states, to taking on other issues of concern to gays and lesbians in Massachusetts. The board plans a final vote on the organization's future on Nov. 3. . ."

TOPEKA - A man who donated sperm to a friend and then sought joint custody of the children lost out in the state Supreme Court on Friday.

The court upheld a 1994 state law that says sperm donors have no parental rights or obligations unless they have a written agreement with the mother. The law was meant to prevent frivolous custody battles and child support lawsuits...

Most states, including Missouri, have laws prohibiting donors from having parental rights over children conceived through artificial insemination. The challenge to the Kansas law was watched by family law attorneys across the country...

"Obama: No Gay Marriage

(Cedar Rapids, Iowa) Barack Obama continues to meet with tough questioning on his positions on LGBT civil rights and especially same-sex marriage

In two appearances on Monday he said he still opposes same-sex marriage, preferring civil unions for gays and lesbians. His position is the same as the other Democratic frontrunners but the tone of the questioning is an indication the fallout continues from Sunday's appearance at an Obama gospel rally that featured outspoken "ex-gay" Donnie McClurkin.

Both Obama events were in Iowa, where the issue of gay marriage is before the state Supreme Court. . .

Obama said that he believed same-sex couples should have the same rights as married couples but that their relationships should be called civil unions rather than marriage.

He also said stressed the importance of his Christian faith, but said there has to be a clear separation between church and state.

. . . Only two Democratic candidates support same-sex marriage - Dennis Kucinich and Mike Gravel. . .

Appearing at the Cedar Rapids Public Library, Abbi Swanson whose son is gay, asked what he would do to give him the same rights as opposite-sex couples.

"You want the word marriage and I believe that the issue of marriage has become so entangled - the word marriage has become so entangled with religion - that it makes more sense for me as president, with that authority, to talk about the civil rights that are conferred [with civil unions]" he told her.

Both Swanson and Lamb later told the Des Moines Register they were not satisfied with Obama's position.

"I'm not completely satisfied that he's not for gay marriage ... but I'm happy he does believe in equal rights for gay citizens," Lamb said.

Swanson told the paper, "There isn't an electable candidate out there that has given me the answer I want, which is everything."

None of the Republican presidential candidates support same-sex marriage. Monday in New Hampshire Fred Thompson seemed confused when asked about marriage and civil unions."

"Fred Thompson Quizzed on Civil Unions

CONCORD, N.H. (AP) -- Republican presidential hopeful Fred Thompson told New Hampshire voters Monday that efforts in some states to recognize same-sex marriage are a ''judge-made controversy.''

Civil unions will become legal in New Hampshire on Jan. 1, allowing gays to apply for the same rights as married people. Same-sex unions from other states also will be recognized in New Hampshire if they were legal in the state where they were performed.

Questioned about civil unions after a speech at a dental benefits company, Thompson said, "I would not be in support of that."

But when he elaborated, he switched from civil unions, which give gays legal rights equivalent to those of married couples, to same-sex marriages, which are legal only in neighboring Massachusetts.

''Basically so far, it is a judge-made controversy,'' Thompson said. ''No state or governor has signed off on such legislation on the state level that has endorsed marriage between the same sexes. There may have been a couple of courts that said the Constitution of their states has required that, so it's a judicially made situation as far as I am concerned.". . . ."

"Germany Cracks Down on Forced Marriages

BERLIN (AP) -- Chancellor Angela Merkel has joined a growing movement to criminalize forced marriages in Germany, which is growing less tolerant of practices among Muslim immigrants that clash with the nation's liberal social values. . ."

"October 28, 2007
Angus Reid Global Monitor) - American adults remain divided on finding a way to acknowledge gay and lesbian partnerships, according to a poll by Bloomberg and the Los Angeles Times. 30 per cent of respondents would allow same-sex couples to legally marry, 26 per cent would allow them to form civil unions, and 38 per cent would grant no legal recognition to these partnerships."

African Americans in Maryland are deeply divided over same-sex marriage, an issue that pushes many to weigh their commitment to civil rights against powerful religious convictions...

Take, for example, two Prince George's County Democrats, Sen. Gwendolyn T. Britt and Del. Dereck E. Davis. Davis has said he will be guided by religious leaders who believe marriage is between a man and a woman. Britt, who plans to sponsor the same-sex marriage bill, echoes the messages of the civil rights era that the Constitution protects everyone.

A recent Washington Post poll released last week demonstrated that divide: Fifty-nine percent of white Marylanders favor civil unions. Blacks are split, with 46 percent supporting and 48 percent opposing them. Meanwhile, 59 percent of African Americans oppose same-sex marriage, and white are split, with 50 percent supporting and 45 percent opposing...

DES MOINES, Iowa (AP) - Iowa's Catholic dioceses are calling for a constitutional amendment to ban gay marriage.

The Iowa Catholic Conference Board is the latest group to oppose a Polk County judge's ruling that struck down a state law banning same-sex marriage...

The ruling stemmed from a lawsuit filed by six gay couples who claimed they were denied marriage licenses under a state law they claimed was unconstitutional.

The Iowa Catholic Conference Board is comprised of clergy and lay leaders from Iowa's four dioceses, including its bishops.

VIENNA, Austria: The focus was on untying the knot Saturday at what was billed as the world's first divorce fair...

Most of the 16 firms with stands at the fair offered standard divorce fare — legal services, private investigations, mediation and conflict management. But some catered to more unusual needs.

"Many people come to us when they are already in the middle of divorce proceedings," said Susanna Haas, whose DNA analysis promises to end bickering about why the little one does not look like daddy — or mommy — for €420 ($600). "Proof of parenthood can play an important role in divorces."

In the next room, Isabella Stozek, whose "Hairdreams" offered hair extensions, volume treatments, highlights and other regimens, said such makeovers were important to freshly divorced women looking for a new look to accompany their new start...

At a stand close by, brochures for "MyDates" promised those interested a chance to "meet 25 singles in two hours." And a poster urged freshly minted swingers to e-mail if they were interested in a "Divorce Party."

The Roman Catholic Church had a stand to offer advice for new single parents, and social workers from the city of Vienna were ready to counsel women in sudden need...