Rhode Island Recognition Decision

The Rhode Island Supreme Court has just ruled (3-2) that Rhode Island Family Courts do not have jurisdiction to grant a divorce to a same-sex couple from Rhode Island who married in Massachusetts.

The majority said the issue in the case was the “meaning of the word ‘marriage’ within the Rhode Island statute that empowers the Family Court to grant divorces” and, more specifically, what the word meant when the statute was enacted in 1961. Looking at dictionary definitions, the court said it was unambiguous that when the statute was enacted marriage meant the union of a man and a woman.

The court also said the “role of the judicial branch is not to make policy, but simply to determine the legislative intent as expressed in the statutes enacted by the General Assembly” and since the legislature “had in mind only marriages between people of different sexes” when it gave jurisdiction to the Rhode Island Family courts, the same-sex couple in this case have “no remedy for their predicament.”

A dissenting opinion said the case could have been settled merely by noting that the parties were validly married in Massachusetts. The dissent reasoned that Rhode Island Family Courts have jurisdiction where there is a marriage so they can grant a divorce in this case.
posted by William Duncan at 2:56 PM | link  

New Romney TV Ad Says He Supported Traditional Marriage When it Wasn’t “Politically Correct”

From "Romney ad says he's not politically correct," Boston Globe (Political Intelligence Blog), December 7, 2007:

Fresh off his nationally televised speech on faith in American politics, Mitt Romney today launched a new TV ad in Iowa in which he brags about actions as Massachusetts governor that were not "politically correct."

In the ad, (watch it here) the announcer cites his opposition to abortion, his support of English in the classroom, and his effort to ban gay marriage. Romney is shown speaking against same-sex marriage and about encouraging people to marry before having children...

posted by Imapp Staff at 1:01 PM | link  

Huckabee on SSM in GQ Interview

From "Is This Guy For Real?" by Ross Douthat, GQ:

[GQ:] ...Ten years ago, it would have been unimaginable to have gay marriage even in liberal Massachusetts. Now it’s there.
[Huckabee:] I don’t think the issue’s about being against gay marriage. It’s about being for traditional marriage and articulating the reason that’s important. You have to have a basic family structure. There’s never been a civilization that has rewritten what marriage and family means and survived. So there is a sense in which, you know, it’s one thing to say if people want to live a different way, that’s their business. But when you want to redefine what family means or what marriage means, then that’s an issue that should require some serious and significant debate in the public square. And if you look at states that have had it on the ballot—I know in our state it was a 70-percent-against issue. Most states are similar to that.

But if the younger generation keeps going the way it’s going, it could be 50 percent in ten years.
It could.

I just wonder what you’d say to the gay couple who says, “Well, we want to live this way, and my partner can’t come visit me in a nursing home.”
He can with a power of attorney. That’s the fallacy, that this requires some new definition of marriage. It’s simply not the case.

So why can’t you call it a civil union?
Because it really is a precursor toward marriage. Once the government says this relationship is in essence similar to or equal to a marriage—we’re not going to call it that, but that’s what it is—and you grant it the same basic rights as marriage, then you’ve effectively done it...

posted by Imapp Staff at 11:24 AM | link  

NYT on "Push Presents" Trend

After all that gestation and labor, doesn't she deserve a diamond? Modern life gets weirder and weirder.
posted by maggie at 9:41 AM | link  

Good News: Total Fertility Rate Climbs Above Replacement

The good news from the CDC (see last post) is the Total Fertility Rate climbed just over 2.1 births per woman, the highest since 1971, and the first time the U.S. as a whole has experienced above replacement fertility since then.
posted by maggie at 9:36 AM | link  

Bad News: 38.5 percent of Births Now to Unmarried Moms

Newspapers are following the CDC's lead in highlighting the small increase in teen birth rates (a legitimate story) but the real bad news is the very large single-year jump in out of wedlock births, from a record 36.9 percent in 2005 to a record 38.5 percent in 2006, CDC press release here.
posted by maggie at 9:31 AM | link  

What Is the Best Age Difference for Husband and Wife?

From "What Is the Best Age Difference for Husband and Wife?" Scientific American Online, December 5, 2007:

Men marry younger women and women prefer to marry older men, in general. But is it culture, genetics or the environment that drives such a choice—and is there an optimal age difference? New research shows that, at least for the Sami people of preindustrial Finland, men should marry a woman almost 15 years their junior to maximize their chances of having the most offspring that survive.

"We studied how parental age difference at marriage affected [families'] reproductive success among Sami people who married only once in their lifetime[s]," says ecologist Samuli Helle of the University of Turku in Finland. "We found that marrying women 14.6 years younger maximized men's lifetime reproductive success—in other words, the number of offspring surviving to age 18."...

Other research in modern day Sweden has shown that the ideal reproductive match is for a man to marry a woman six years his junior. But the cultural constraints on marriage may have changed. "Wealth was the most important factor in a [Sami] marriage," Helle notes. "Love played almost no role in it."

posted by Imapp Staff at 8:51 AM | link  

University of Virginia Student Newspaper Op-Eds re. SSM

From "The trouble with gay marriage" by Manuel Lopez, The Cavalier Daily (University of Virginia), November 8, 2007:

...Marriage as we know it is bound up with -- even a product of -- natural sexual differentiation, the most massive and undeniable feature of which is the potential for reproduction...

Disconnecting marriage from procreation would make it seem less bound up with a world larger than we are. Marriage would become more like a commitment we make, an act of the will, and less like an acceptance of or conformity to the fundamental order of things...

Widening marriage to include people of the same sex means stripping it of much of its meaning and diminishing it for everybody...

From "Beyond marriage" by Manuel Lopez, The Cavalier Daily (University of Virginia), November 16, 2007:

...[O]ur happiness does not always lie in satisfying our desires. Some desires are better redirected or curbed -- for our own sake...

For those of us who are homosexuals, of course, traditional marriage is not the answer to our longings...

Instead of trying to imitate heterosexual couples, let's raise a higher standard, not of promiscuity but of deep friendship and the conversation and thoughtfulness which can flourish there, unencumbered by children and many other domestic cares. One reader wrote that gay marriage will be "just plain different from heterosexual marriage." I agree. So why call it marriage?

posted by Imapp Staff at 7:44 PM | link  

New MD Judge Could Affect Future SSM Rulings

From "Appellate Judge Picked for State's Top Court," Washington Post, December 5, 2007:

Maryland Gov. Martin O'Malley announced the appointment yesterday of Joseph F. Murphy Jr., the chief judge of the state's lower appeals court, to fill a vacancy on the state's highest court, which has been narrowly split on such culturally divisive issues as the death penalty and same-sex marriage.

O'Malley (D) tapped Murphy, 63, to fill the Court of Appeals vacancy left by Alan M. Wilner, who in January reached the mandatory retirement age of 70. The court comprises seven judges...

In September, by a 4 to 3 vote, with Wilner in the majority, the Court of Appeals upheld a 34-year-old state law banning same-sex marriage...

posted by Imapp Staff at 7:06 PM | link  

Alberta Speech Decision

Last week, a panel of Alberta’s provincial human rights commission issued a decision condemning a letter to a local newspaper entitled “Homosexual Agenda Wicked.” After the letter was published, a local university professor filed a complaint with the commission. This professor was supported by the provincial attorney general. The letter is included in the decision.

For U.S. readers who are not overly familiar with this type of case, the panel’s reasoning is fascinating.

The panel concluded that “the letter expresses hatred or contempt for a group of persons on the basis pf their sexual preference. It is also my view that any persons on the basis of sexual preference. It is also my view that any person of reasonable intelligence informed about the context of this statement would understand the message is expressing hatred and/or contempt.” The panel further believed “the effect of the communication would make it more acceptable to others to manifest hatred against homosexuals.” The panel said: “The fact that the letter is written by a ‘Reverend’ who is a ‘chairman’ on behalf of a ‘Coalition’ tends to give the letter credibility. Further, the polemic references to the Bible gives the message an air of credibility, given the ancient nature of the text.”

The panel rejected the argument of the letter writer that his expression was protected by the rights of free speech and religious expression. The panel said it was “nonsensical to enact broad and paramount and remedial legislation, such as human rights legislation, to protect the dignity and human rights of Albertans, only to have it overridden by the expression of opinion in all forms.” The panel believed “the views of individuals expressing their opinions or expressing political statements must be made in a responsible manner.”

The panel thus concluded that religious freedom did not trump the human rights legislation’s speech code because “[i]t cannot be the case that any speech wrapped in the ‘guise’ of politics or religion is beyond reproach by any legislation but the Criminal Code.”
posted by William Duncan at 6:44 PM | link  

RI Religious Leaders Affirm Support For Gay Marriage

From "Local religious leaders affirm support for gay marriage," Providence Journal, December 4, 2007:

PROVIDENCE -- Religious leaders from several denominations reaffirmed their support for same-gender marriage today and announced an advertising campaign intended to get that word out and to dispel any impression that religion doesn’t support the policy change...

A dozen religious leaders and supporters showed off their signs on buses at the Rhode Island Public Transit Authority headquarters on Elmwood Avenue this afternoon. The advertisements will run on 10 RIPTA buses for a month, the agency said. The advertisements depict two dozen religious leaders and carry the message, "Rhode Island Religious Leaders Supporting Same-Gender Marriages."...

posted by Imapp Staff at 8:39 AM | link  

New Law Review Article re. MA Same-Sex Adoption Controversy

From "Same-Sex Adoption in Massachusetts, the Catholic Church, and the Good of the Children: The Story Behind the Controversy and the Case for Conscientious Refusals" by Daniel Avila, Esq., Children’s Legal Rights Journal, Fall 2007:

I. Introduction

In 2005, the media reported that the Catholic Charitable Bureau of the Archdiocese of Boston, Inc. (“Catholic Charities of Boston”) was involved with same-sex adoption. This revelation prompted Roman Catholic officials to direct all Catholic agencies providing adoption services to refuse participation with same-sex adoptions. State authorities countered that such a refusal would violate Massachusetts mandates prohibiting sexual orientation discrimination. After failing to secure a conscience exemption, Catholic Charities of Boston withdrew from the adoption field altogether.

This Article (1) details the timeline of events concerning same-sex adoption in Massachusetts, a story that begins long before 2005, (2) discusses the impact of a sexual orientation non-discrimination mandate on the Catholic Charities of Boston and other religious institutions in Massachusetts that object to same-sex adoption, and (3) describes the Catholic Church’s underlying rationale for refusing to participate in same-sex adoptions in the face of charges of unjust discrimination.

The Article then argues that (4) best interest determinations should be permitted to incorporate moral considerations, (5) the Catholic Church’s moral considerations concerning sexual practices are not instances of prejudice or animus, and (6) the balance of interests should favor the religious freedom of Catholic adoption agencies to refuse to participate in same-sex adoption...

posted by Imapp Staff at 1:39 PM | link  

Australian Labor Govt. Will Support Recognition of Gay Unions

From "Law will recognise gay unions," Sydney Morning Herald, December 1, 2007:

THE incoming attorney-general [of Australia], Robert McClelland, says Labor is unlikely to block a proposal by the ACT [Australian Capital Territory] to legally recognise same-sex couples - a plan that was repeatedly stymied by the Howard Government [which was ousted in November]...

Mr McClelland told the Herald yesterday that Labor opposes gay marriages but would support moves to give same-sex couples the same legal rights as de facto heterosexual couples...

posted by Imapp Staff at 9:43 AM | link  

New Harvard Law Clinic to Focus on SSM

From "Same-sex marriage is law clinic's focus," Boston Globe, December 4, 2007:

To address the unique legal dilemmas raised in part by the state's legalization of same-sex marriage in 2003, Harvard Law School has opened a legal clinic that will represent low-income clients.

The student-run Gay, Lesbian, Bisexual and Transgender Law Clinic will provide free and low-cost legal services in cases involving divorce, custody, child support, adoptions, wills, school-related matters, and other family-law and estate planning issues...

Among the uncharted legal territory are questions over how marital assets should be divided during same-sex divorces, since federal law doesn't recognize same-sex unions as legal marriages; how to ensure that same-sex partners aren't taxed more than heterosexual partners for health insurance benefits; and how to deal with school systems that refuse to use books and curriculums that address gender diversity in families...

posted by Imapp Staff at 9:33 AM | link  

THE RISE OF FAMILY-FRIENDLY CITIES: Joel Kotkin

For much of the past decade, business recruiters, cities and urban developers have focused on the "young and restless," the "creative class," and the so-called "yuspie"--the young urban single professional. Cities, they've said, should capture this so-called "dream demographic" if they wish to inhabit the top tiers of the economic food chain and enjoy the fastest and most sustained growth.

This focus--epitomized by Michigan Gov. Jennifer Granholm's risible "Cool Cities" initiative--is less successful than advertised. Cincinnati, Baltimore, Cleveland, Newark, Detroit and Memphis have danced to the tune of the hip and the cool, yet largely remain wallflowers in terms of economic and demographic growth. Instead, an analysis of migration data by my colleagues at the Praxis Strategy Group shows that the strongest job growth has consistently taken place in those regions--such as Houston, Dallas, Charlotte and Raleigh-Durham--with the largest net in-migration of young, educated families ranging from their mid-20s to mid-40s.

Urban centers that have been traditional favorites for young singles, such as Chicago, Boston, New York, Los Angeles and San Francisco, have experienced below-average job and population growth since 2000. San Francisco and Chicago lost population during that period; even immigrant-rich New York City and Los Angeles County have shown barely negligible population growth in the last two years, largely due to a major out-migration of middle class families.

Married people with children tend to be both successful and motivated, precisely the people who make economies go. They are twice as likely to be in the top 20% of income earners, according to the Census, and their incomes have been rising considerably faster than the national average.
Indeed, if you talk with recruiters and developers in the nation's fastest growing regions, you find that the critical ability to lure skilled workers, long term, lies not with bright lights and nightclubs, but with ample economic opportunities, affordable housing and family friendly communities not too distant from work.

more
posted by Eve at 11:58 PM | link  

Divorce Damages the Environment

From "Planet feels heat of divorce," Sunday Times (UK), December 2, 2007:

Scientists have quantified for the first time the extent to which divorce damages the environment. The researchers found that the combined use of electricity across the two new households created rose 53% while water use was up by 42%.

Across America – one of 12 countries studied – divorced households used 73 billion kilowatt-hours of electricity in 2005 that could have been saved if the families had not split up...

“The global trend of soaring divorce rates has created more households with fewer people, has taken up more space and has gobbled up more energy and water,” said Jianguo Liu of Michigan University, who carried out the latest research.

The study, to be published tomorrow in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, found that the average number of rooms per household was between 33% and 95% higher for divorced couples than for married ones.

Liu also calculated that America now has an extra 38.5m rooms in houses and apartments built to meet the demand for more accommodation generated by divorce over the past three decades...

posted by Imapp Staff at 4:04 PM | link  

Abstinence Education Makes Sense

From "Virginia Is for Teen Lovers?" by Ryan T. Anderson, National Review Online, December 3, 2007:

Virginia governor Timothy M. Kaine (D.) announced this November that he was rejecting a $275,000 grant from the federal government for abstinence education as he eliminated the state’s abstinence education program altogether...

His decision came as the Centers for Disease Control released a report indicating that sexually transmitted diseases are up, and the Institute for Research and Evaluation released a report showing that an abstinence program in Kaine’s own state is achieving remarkable results in fostering teen chastity...

[M]aybe we’re rushing too quickly to reject abstinence education. Given the negative consequences that come with teenage sex, it seems that Governor Kaine should be more willing to do whatever is possible to delay the onset of sexual activity...

Not every teen who has sex ends up having problems, but in the aggregate the well-documented effects are alarming. If abstinence programs can reduce these problems, we ought to give them a try — and the evidence suggests that some of them are effective in doing just that.

posted by Imapp Staff at 12:46 PM | link  

Couples Put More Emphasis on Husband's Career

From "Even Today, Couples Put More Emphasis on Husband's Career," Newswise, November 20, 2007:

Newswise — Sociological research has shown that when couples move, the husband's career gets a boost, while the wife's career suffers...[C]ouples tend to put more emphasis on the man's career, even if the wife works full-time and is college-educated...

[Researchers] compared the employment status and salaries of [married working men and women] who moved from one metropolitan area to another...to those who stayed put.

They found that a year after the move, nearly all of the men remained employed, but the women who moved were 22 percentage points less likely to remain employed compared to women who didn't move. The men who moved boosted their salary by an average of $3,000 that year, compared to an average increase of only $700 for men who stayed put. But women who moved reported average salary increases of $750 less than women who stayed put.

"Our results support the notion that families migrate to enhance husbands' careers," [one of the researchers] said. "Women are very unlikely to initiate the move. They're more likely to be the 'trailing spouse,' following their husbands in a move for his promotion, raise, or better opportunities down the road."...

posted by Imapp Staff at 10:13 AM | link  

NYT Letter to the Editor: Marriage, by God or Government?

From "Letters: Marriage, By God Or Government?" NY Times, December 2, 2007:

To the Editor:

Stephanie Coontz [in "Taking Marriage Private" (NY Times Op-Ed, Nov. 26)] says we should “let couples — gay or straight — decide if they want the legal protections and obligations of a committed relationship.”

In every state in the nation, if they’re straight, they already can. It’s called “marriage.” And if they’re gay, in at least some places they also can.

But Ms. Coontz is arguing that in an age of high divorce, cohabitation and more, it’s not fair to determine who gets legal rights based on marriage. So how will Ms. Coontz’s “fair” system work?

Say a man dies. Two women appear before a judge and each wants to sue for wrongful death. Each says she was the man’s girlfriend. Family court judges will have to sort out this mess one case at a time.

Moreover, people who lived together and chose not to be married will find themselves nonetheless caught in legal entanglements. Do you owe payments to the girlfriend you lived with for 18 months? Can she tell the hospital to pull the plug? I say marriage is complicated enough. Let’s not make things worse.

Elizabeth Marquardt

New York, Nov. 26, 2007

The writer is vice president for family studies, Institute for American Values.

posted by Imapp Staff at 9:53 AM | link  

WI Gay Marriage Ban Challenge OK

From "Gay marriage ban challenge OK," The Capital Times, November 29, 2007:

...[A Dane County circuit judge ruled Wednesday that a University of Wisconsin-Oshkosh political science teacher] had legal standing to file the challenge to [a state constitutional amendment banning gay marriage and civil unions], which was approved by 59 percent of Wisconsin voters in a referendum...

The ruling means the lawsuit, in which [the] central argument is that the amendment violates the U.S. Constitution's guarantee of equal protections under law, can continue. It does not indicate what the eventual outcome will be...

posted by Imapp Staff at 9:28 AM | link  

New Poll: Floridians Support Traditional Marriage

From "Poll: Floridians Support Traditional Marriage," CitizenLink, November 28, 2007:

...[I]n a CNN poll released Tuesday, [nearly 80 percent of likely GOP voters in Florida] support traditional marriage, between one man and one woman. And 63 percent said abortion should be illegal or legal in just a few circumstances.

"This poll reflects what we've seen in polls and ballot boxes across the country — the majority of people believe marriage is for one man and one woman only," said Jenny Tyree, associate marriage analyst for Focus on the Family Action. "The presidential candidate who will defend marriage could win some votes in this important state."

posted by Imapp Staff at 9:22 AM | link