Mr. Mom

From "Men Who Do Housework May Get More Sex," AP, March 6, 2008:

...[T]he average [American] dad has gradually been getting better about picking himself up off the sofa and pitching in, according to a new report in which a psychologist suggests the payoff for doing more chores could be more sex.

The report, released Thursday by the Council on Contemporary Families, summarizes several recent studies on family dynamics. One found that men's contribution to housework had doubled over the past four decades; another found they tripled the time spent on child care over that span...

The report's co-authors...said they were addressing a perception that women's gains in the workplace were not being matched by gains at home...

They said this perception was based on unrealistic expectations and underestimated the degree of change "going on behind the scenes" since the 1960s...

Among the findings they cited:

• In the U.S., time-use diary studies show that since the '60s, men's contribution to housework doubled from about 15 percent to more than 30 percent of the total. Over the same period, the average working mother reduced her weekly housework load by two hours.

• Between 1965 and 2003, men tripled the amount of time they spent on child care. During the same period, women also increased the time spent with their children, suggesting mutual interest in a more hands-on approach to child-raising...

posted by Imapp Staff at 10:49 AM | link

Polygamy in New York

From "A Polygamist State of Mind" by Lisa Schiffren, National Review Online, March 7, 2008:

...[T]here is now a full-blown culture of polygamous West African immigrants [in New York], most of them here illegally, who keep importing young, mostly illiterate, and therefore powerless brides from the villages of Mali, Senegal, and Guinea. It’s all very hush-hush. The women involved may be miserable, but they cannot risk complaining, since they can easily be divorced, kicked out of the community, and stranded. Because they are here illegally and their marriages are not valid in the United States (though they can serve as grounds for deportation of a polygamous husband), the women effectively have no rights. So they often put up with brutal conditions...

[S]ocial-service workers have learned not to make an issue of polygamy in handing out benefits and guiding applicants, legal and otherwise, through the bureaucratic mazes of the welfare system. Doctors at hospitals turn a blind eye. The men speak for their wives...

[S]uch marriages are not love matches...[T]he women do not come to them freely, nor is any wife an equal partner with her husband. She has, at most, one-third the status that he does — usually much less — and little or no bargaining power. Given the customs of their culture, even when these women are allowed to work outside the home, they are often forced to turn their earnings over to their husband, leaving them essentially working as slave labor...

[A]llowing this barbaric import to thrive in the U.S. will undermine all the advances that women have made in the past 150 years with regard to education, financial independence, and political and sexual equality. Polygamy, like slavery itself, cannot co-exist with true democracy...

posted by Imapp Staff at 6:53 PM | link

UK Plans to Give Cohabiting Couples Same Rights as Marrieds Put on Hold

From "Ministers put on hold laws that would give live-in couples the same rights as husbands and wives," Daily Mail (UK), March 7, 2008:

Laws that would give live-in couples the same rights as husbands and wives were put on hold yesterday...

The plans for a cohabitation law were finalised last year by Government advisers at the Law Commission.

They suggested that the better-off partner of a live-in couple that splits up would pay compensation to the other if they have children.

A live-in partner would also be liable for compensation once the couple had lived together for more than two years.

[But the] Justice Minister...said the Government wanted to wait to see the results of research into a law introduced in Scotland last year. There, couples who split can claim compensation from each other if they have been "living together as if they were husband and wife"...

posted by Imapp Staff at 7:55 AM | link

European Council Plans Hearings on SSM

"European Council plans hearings on same-sex marriage," CWNews.com, March 5, 2008:

Paris, Mar. 5, 2008 (CWNews.com) - The Council of Europe will hold parliamentary hearings on same-sex marriage in Paris on March 7.

The hearings, concentrating on the legal recognition of homosexual partnerships, will allow representatives of gay-rights organizations to address European lawmakers, presenting their case for state approval of same-sex marriage. Sponsors of the hearings-- representing Socialist and other leftist parties from several different European states-- said that the European Council should explore the possibility that same-sex marriage may be required under various provisions of the European Convention on Human Rights, including the guarantees of a right to privacy in family life and a right to marry. The failure to allow homosexuals to contract a legal marriage, the sponsors said, cannot be justified by a “predisposed bias on the part of a heterosexual majority against a homosexual minority.”

The sponsors note an "enormous variation" in the way different European countries treat the legal status of same-sex couples, and suggests that the European Council make suggestions for more appropriate policies.

posted by Imapp Staff at 8:12 AM | link

SUPPORT FOR GREEK COHABITATION LAW: Kathimerini

Academics and unmarried couples yesterday backed the government’s plans to introduce a cohabitation law in Greece that would give partners in a relationship the same rights as if they were married.

The plans, revealed over the weekend, would represent quite an innovation in Greece, a country with one of the highest marriage rates in the European Union and where relatively few children are born out of wedlock. ...

The contract would remain in effect, thus ensuring full protection of both partners’ legal rights, until they get married or one marries someone else. ...

Writing in Kathimerini, Alivizatos said that he believes the time is right for a cohabitation law to be passed in Greece.

“Even though the number of married couples in Greece is, along with Ireland, one of the highest in the EU, the number of couples living together out of wedlock is increasing,” he said.

“Marriage today is usually the culmination of a previous long-term relationship rather than the start of a new period in the life of the newlyweds,” he added.

Recent statistics also back up the assertion that the institution of marriage is changing in Greece.

more
posted by Eve at 5:48 PM | link

Dale Carpenter’s Observations on Oral Argument in the CA SSM Case

From "Observations on Oral Argument in the California Marriage Case," Volokh Conspiracy (blog), March 4, 2008:

I've now listened to the oral argument in the California marriage case — all 3 hrs, 38 minutes of it -- and have a few impressions.

First, the most likely result is that the gay-marriage litigants will lose 4-3 or possibly 5-2...

Even if the court doesn't order the immediate recognition of same-sex marriages in the state, however, the opinion it writes will matter for future litigation. It could issue an opinion in which it signals that it may revisit the issue if domestic partnerships do not, in practice, give substantive equality to same-sex couples...

Second, the state is defending a small sliver of territory in this case, which weakens the force of its arguments overall...As a matter of state public policy, it has already surrendered much substantive ground about the differences between gay and straight couples. The state's counsel was left to argue that withholding the title of "marriage" is justified by the state's unadorned desire to "preserve the common and traditional definition of marriage."

Third, even the justices that seemed sympathetic to the state were skeptical about child-raising rationales...Neither promoting procreation, nor its cousin, promoting responsible procreation, played a significant role...

Fourth, [though the] same-sex marriage litigants are hobbled by weak constitutional arguments and now by the weight of much adverse precedent, they have repeatedly enjoyed an advantage in quality of advocacy...

Finally, if gay-marriage litigants do lose the case, the loss may turn out to be a blessing in disguise for the gay-marriage movement as a whole...

[A] ruling that leaves the issue to the state legislature (which has twice voted to recognize gay marriage) and the governor (who has twice vetoed gay-marriage legislation, deferring the issue to this litigation) will mean that this issue will be resolved democratically. Either this governor or a future one will eventually sign a gay-marriage bill which, as I understand California law, means that the voters of the state will have another go at the issue. (In 2000, they voted to define marriage as the union of a man and a woman in state statute.) In that event, the issue will be presented to them in the best possible light: with the state legislature and the state governor solidly behind the change — not simply the sympathy the state's high court.

posted by Imapp Staff at 9:10 AM | link

Obama cites Sermon on the Mount to explain his support for civil unions: Christianity Today

here
posted by Eve at 2:23 PM | link

C of E Bishop Accuses Politicians of Downgrading Marriage

From "Bishop of Lichfield: marriage is downgraded," Telegraph (UK), March 4, 2008:

A Church of England bishop has accused politicians of failing the nation's children by conducting an experiment to "downgrade" marriage.

In a monthly pastoral letter, the Bishop of Lichfield, the Rt Rev Jonathan Gledhill, suggested that politicians had been wrong to abolish tax breaks for married couples.

In his letter, published in parish magazines across the Diocese of Lichfield, Bishop Gledhill also says the "great British experiment to downgrade marriage and the family" was showing no sign of running out of steam...

posted by Imapp Staff at 8:10 AM | link

Marriage Recognition in New York

The series of challenges to state marriage laws filed in the wake of the 2003 Massachusetts decision seem to be winding down with important decisions still pending in California, Connecticut and Iowa. A set of cases now pending in New York may give an indication of the types of marriage cases likely to arise next.

At the beginning of February, a New York appellate court ruled that a community college must provide spousal benefits to the same-sex partner of an employee married in Canada. Relying on this decision, a trial court in New York County ruled that a same-sex couple married in Canada could seek a divorce in New York courts. (Summaries of both cases are contained in the February 2008 Marriage Law Digest available here.)

The typical rule for recognition of marriages contracted in other jurisdictions is that a marriage valid where contracted will be treated as valid everywhere. There are two significant exceptions. First, a state may specifically provide by statute that a certain type of marriage will not be recognized. Second, some types of marriage described as prohibited by the natural law or a similar formulation, are deemed not worthy of recognition. The most common example would be a marriage involving incest.

The vast majority of states have provided by statute that they will not recognize same-sex marriages, but others like New York, have not yet done so. One could argue that same-sex marriages ought to be considered barred from recognition by the second exception, especially since only one state has ever redefined marriage to include same-sex couples and the concept is so novel.

These are the kinds of questions that are being considered now by New York courts in a number of cases in addition to the two mentioned already. The appellate decision is binding on other state courts unless there is a decision of the state’s highest court or a conflicting decision in another appellate division, so this is an area to watch in New York, and likely other states in the future.
posted by William Duncan at 12:42 PM | link

Pope Praises Americans Who Oppose SSM

From "Pope, ahead of U.S. trip, speaks of abortion, gays," Reuters, February 29, 2008:

VATICAN CITY (Reuters) - Pope Benedict, ahead of his first trip to the United States, praised Americans on Friday who oppose gay marriage and abortion and called for global nuclear disarmament.

In an address to new U.S. ambassador Mary Ann Glendon, [a Harvard law professor who has been a consultant to various Vatican departments,] Benedict touched on issues he will likely raise on his April 15-20 visit, during which he will meet President George W. Bush in Washington and address the United Nations…...

Benedict...spoke of safeguarding the family and "the institution of marriage, acknowledged as a stable union between a man and a woman."...

posted by Imapp Staff at 10:07 AM | link

CA Supreme Court SSM Arguments to Be Broadcast on Internet

From "Same-Sex Marriage Arguments Tuesday to Be Broadcast on Cable and Internet," AP, March 2, 2008:

Tuesday morning's historic arguments before the California Supreme Court on whether lesbian and gay couples have a constitutional right to marry can be seen by the public in live broadcasts on cable television and the Internet.

The high court will hear arguments at the State Building in San Francisco from 9 a.m. to noon Tuesday in six consolidated lawsuits disputing whether the state constitution provides a right to same-sex marriage.

After the hearing, the court's seven justices will have three months to issue a written decision...

A live webcast of the arguments will...be available on California Channel's Web site, http://www.calchannel.com/...

posted by Imapp Staff at 8:59 AM | link

New Poll: Iowans Oppose SSM, Support Civil Unions

From "Iowans lean in favor of civil unions," Des Moines Register, March 2, 2008:

Most Iowans believe marriage should be only between one man and one woman, but a majority of Iowa adults also support the creation of civil unions granting benefits to gay couples similar to those offered to heterosexuals in marriage, according to a new Iowa Poll.

Sixty-two percent of Iowans believe marriage should be only between a man and a woman, according to the poll by The Des Moines Register. Thirty-two percent believe same-sex marriages should be allowed, while 6 percent were unsure.

Iowans are split, however, on whether the state constitution should be changed to ban gay marriages...

The Register's poll shows that 48 percent of adults favor changing the Iowa Constitution to ban gay marriage, while 47 percent were opposed and 5 percent were unsure...

And more than half of Iowans who responded to the poll support Iowa allowing civil unions for same-sex couples. About four in 10 Iowans oppose civil unions, and 4 percent are unsure...

posted by Imapp Staff at 8:50 AM | link

WI School District to Rule on SSM Grievance

From "District To Rule On Same-Sex Marriage Grievance," Wisn.com, March 2, 2008:

SHEBOYGAN, Wis. -- Officials with the Sheboygan Area School District are expected to decide this week on a grievance filed by a female employee who said she should be granted paid leave when she weds another woman.

The district's contract with the support staff grants employees a maximum of two days for "marriage of the staff member or of a member of the immediate family." The contract doesn't distinguish between heterosexual and same-sex marriages.

...The women, who both live in Kiel, are unable to marry legally in Wisconsin [and plan to marry in Canada this week].

The district originally denied their request for paid leave, leading to a grievance hearing held Thursday before a committee of the district's governing board.

The committee has five working days, or until Thursday, to submit a written decision, according to terms of the support-staff contract...

posted by Imapp Staff at 8:38 AM | link

EU Orders Germany to Create SSM/Civil Unions

Almost no-one appears to have heard of this, in which the EU Commissioner of Employment is ordering Germany to pass gay marriage equivalents. A lot of power for one bureaucrat.

We heard about it from David Quinn at the Iona Institute in Ireland (http://www.ionainstitute.ie/), which circulated the letter below.

Maggie

European Commission targets religious freedom and the definition of marriage

Introduction

The European Commission has initiated infringement proceedings against 11 EU countries it accuses of being in breach of EU law. One of these countries is Ireland. This action is clearly interference in the laws of the member states. If successful, it will threaten family laws across the EU, leading to possible recognition of gay marriage, and could have profound implications for religious freedom. We will look at the action of the Commission below.

David Quinn
Director

Religious freedom and the Commission:

The European Commission has just sent the Irish Government a ‘Reasoned Opinion’ accusing Irish law of being out of line with an EU equality directive. This has potentially very far reaching implications because one of the Irish laws being targeted allows religious schools, hospitals etc permission not to hire prospective employees who they deem might be harmful to their ethos. This exemption from equality legislation is vital to the religious freedom of these organisations.

The action has been taken by the Commissioner for employment, social affairs and equality, Vladimir Spidla, former Prime Minister of the Czech Republic. Similar opinions have been sent to ten other countries. If the Commission does not receive a satisfactory response, Ireland can be taken before the European Court of Justice and if found to be in breach of EU law, it can be fined. It would then remain to be seen whether or not Ireland would narrow the exemption the Churches currently enjoy from aspects of equality legislation.

This exemption was negotiated a number of years ago to the satisfaction of the Government, the Churches and the other religions. The exemption was upheld by the EU’s Council of Ministers and became part of EU law. The European Commission now believes the exemption is too broad.

Marriage:

The European Commission is also targeting family law with its interpretation of the Equality Directive. Family law is not supposed to be a competence (or power) of the EU, but the Trojan Horse it is using to interfere in family law is its power in the area of anti-discrimination and equality.

The German Government has been told that the form of civil union it has made available to same-sex couples is in breach of the Equality Directive because it doesn’t confer on same-sex couples all of the rights of married couples. It has been told to make amends but is resisting. Same-sex couples can enter civil partnerships in Germany.
Ireland, as we know, plans to introduce some form of civil unions for same-sex couples. Now we know that if this is not exactly the same as marriage the European Commission will almost certainly instruct it to make it the same as marriage or face the consequences.

Leaders of Germany's Christian Democratic Party (CDU) have condemned this move as a sweeping and unjustified attack on the principle of subsidiarity and an unwarranted extension of the competencies of EU law. Peter Ramsauer, CSU (Bavarian Christian-Social) group whip in the German federal parliament, told a German daily newspaper that he believed that the Commissioner "obviously hasn't got a clue about German ideas with respect to subsidiarity," the EU principle that government power ought to reside at the lowest feasible level.

He added: "While we are talking about susidiarity control, Špidla does the blatant opposite." Ramsauer announced his party in the Bundestag plans to tie ratification of the Treaty of Lisbon to a resolution on subsidiarity control. His party colleague Markus Söder, Bavarian minister for European affairs, said that tightening German anti-discrimination law was "not feasible in Bavaria".

Conclusion:

The European Commission, by an act of political fiat, is changing the goal posts, and arguing that the exemptions granted to such bodies are “too broad”. The implications are sweeping. Overnight, this would represent a huge blow to the concept of religious freedom. Indeed, given the totally undemocratic nature of the move, it represents something of a hammer blow to any sort of freedom. Don't forget that there has been no democratic sanction for this action on the part of Commissioner Spidla; he has taken this action without any need to consult with our Government, or indeed any other Government. (Ten other governments have received similar notices informing them of the way they are, in the opinion of the Commission, not complying with an EU equality directive).

This is an appalling over-reach by the European Commission and needs to be condemned as such. The Commission, as a matter of course, should allow the individual member-states to interpret EU directives more or less as they see fit. Secondly, it should not interfere in family law by any ruse whatsoever which is what it is doing here.

posted by Imapp Staff at 1:55 PM | link