by David Badash on November 30, 2011
The New Civil Rights Movement
In yet another example of anti-gay tunnel vision, NOM, the National Organization For Marriage, displaying a complete lack of understanding of the nature of same-sex headed households, links to and quotes a fatally-flawed op-ed that suggests children parented by gay couples will not get “child care, groceries, health care, home maintenance, household products, insurance and juvenile products,” nor will these children of gay or lesbian couples be “acquiring the skills and social capital they need to become well-adjusted, productive workers.”
NOM posted an excerpt — four short paragraphs — of a ludicrous anti-gay op-ed penned by a Republican Minnesota state legislator, Steve Drazkowski. (Let’s pause of a moment and think of all the anti-gay news that’s come out of Minnesota, starting with Michele Bachmann and her husband, Marcus, and the high student suicide contagion rate in the schools in her district, the recent “license to bully” legislation in their not anti-bullying but pro-bullying bill, and take it from there.)
Representative Steve Drazkowski’s supercilious analogy says that “eight of the top 10 ‘best states for business.’ according to a survey of 556 CEO’s by Chief Executive Magazine. have a state marriage amendment in their constitution. [sic]” Well, since only six states/jurisdictions support same-sex marriage, and 31 states have some form of legal ban on marriage equality, saying eight of the top ten states ban marriage equality is like shooting fish in a barrel; you’re bound to hit a good number, and 80% is about right. Heck, you could also argue that eight of the top ten best states for business also have an average temperature of at least 70 degrees.
Here’s the money quote of the ludicrous insinuation:
“Children, raised in married, mother-father families play a huge factor in the health of the economy because they consume many services and goods, especially in child care, groceries, health care, home maintenance, household products, insurance and juvenile products.”
So, children raised by gays don’t get those vital necessities, apparently.
Never mind that gay parents generally adopt, and so are scrutinized and monitored far more than their heterosexual counterparts.
Of course gay couples provide for their children, at least as well as straight couples do, and, again, if they’ve adopted, probably better. Anyone who has been through the adoption process knows there are standards that have to be met, and rightly so, as long as those standards aren’t one man-one woman marriage.
Drazkowski, by the way, is quoting from a May, 2011 article in Chief Executive magazine that has absolutely nothing to do with same-sex marriage or same-sex parenting.
Drazkowski also writes of a report that “emphasized that children, raised in married, mother-father families, have an advantage when it comes to acquiring the skills and social capital they need to become well-adjusted, productive workers.”
Seriously, what are NOM and Rep. Drazkowski thinking? Oh, right, they’re not.
Well, folks, here’s a lesson for you. When NOM’s Maggie, John, Bryan, and their anti-gay ilk, like Rep.instant payday loans Drazkowski, say things like, “studies show that kids need a mom and a dad to be happy/successful/healthy, etc.,” what they’re not telling you is that the studies don’t offer the option of same-sex parents in their analysis, nor do these studies, like the one Rep. Drazkowski, which you can access here, even mention the word “gay” or “homosexual.”
To read the complete article, go to: http://thenewcivilrightsmovement.com/nom-suggests-kids-raised-by-gay-parents-dont-get-food-or-health-care/politics/2011/11/30/30961#
December 6, 2011
By STEVEN LEE MYERS and HELENE COOPER
GENEVA — The Obama administration announced on Tuesday that the United States would use all the tools of American diplomacy, including the potent enticement of foreign aid, to promote gay rights around the world.
In a memorandum issued by President Obama in Washington and in a speech by Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton here, the administration vowed to actively combat efforts by other nations that criminalize homosexual conduct, abuse gay men, lesbians, bisexuals or transgendered people, or ignore abuse against them.
“Some have suggested that gay rights and human rights are separate and distinct,” Mrs. Clinton said at the United Nations Human Rights Council in Geneva, “but in fact they are one and the same.”
Neither Mr. Obama nor Mrs.Dipyridamole online Clinton specified how to give the initiative teeth. Caitlin Hayden, the National Security Council’s deputy spokeswoman, said the administration was “not cutting or tying” foreign aid to changes in other nation’s practices.
Still, raising the issue to such prominence on the administration’s foreign policy agenda is important, symbolically, much like President Jimmy Carter’s emphasis on human rights.
With campaigning already under way in the 2012 presidential contest, Mr. Obama’s announcement could bolster support among gay voters and donors, who have questioned the depth of his commitment. He chose the Rev. Rick Warren, a pastor who opposes same-sex marriage, to deliver the invocation at his inauguration. Mr. Obama himself has not come out officially in favor of same-sex marriage. But he successfully pushed for repeal of the “don’t ask, don’t tell” policy that prevented gays from serving openly in the military. And the Justice Department has said it will no longer defend in court the Defense of Marriage Act, which defines marriage as between a man and a woman.
The initiative also invites attacks from Republicans trying to appeal to a conservative base in the primary and caucus states.
One Republican candidate, Gov. Rick Perry of Texas, said: “President Obama has again mistaken America’s tolerance for different lifestyles with an endorsement of those lifestyles. I will not make that mistake.”
To read the complete article, go to:
http://www.nytimes.com/2011/12/07/world/united-states-to-use-aid-to-promote-gay-rights-abroad.html?scp=1&sq=Clinton%20gay&st=cse
By Deborah Skolnik, Parenting.com
updated 12:10 PM EST, Wed November 30, 2011
CNN.com — There was a time when gay parents and single adoptive mothers were unheard of, but the new norm is that almost anything works well as long as there’s a dedicated adult and plenty of love
Christopher Fraley, 42, and Victor Self, 41, Parents of 20-month-old Coco
Christopher Fraley and Victor Self have been married three times — to each other. They first exchanged vows in St. Barts in 2008, and again in South Africa on their honeymoon. Then this past summer, on July 24, 2011, they became the first same-sex couple in Rye, New York, to legally wed. Coco, their daughter, was right by their side.
Fraley and Self met in 2003. “I saw kids in my life, and Chris did, too,” Self remembers. Eventually, “we decided to get married,” adds Fraley, who works for an investment fund. He bought Self a ring, but didn’t ask Self’s mother for his hand. “Nobody is the wife,” he insists. “However,” he adds, “Victor and I will be offended if Coco’s suitor doesn’t ask us for her hand.”
While their attitude toward fatherhood is traditional, the way they became dads isn’t: Coco was born through a surrogate, using a donor egg. In expanding their family, Self and Fraley joined the growing number of same-sex parents in America today: somewhere between 1.5 million and 5 million, according to rough U.S. Census estimates, up from 300,000 to 500,000 in 1976.
The surrogacy process took two years: One egg donor became ill, then a first surrogate failed to get pregnant. But in February 2010, Kira, their second surrogate, gave birth to 8-pound-9-ounce Coco. “We post pictures of Coco on Facebook that Kira can look at,” says Self.
To read the complete article, go to: http://www.cnn.com/2011/11/29/living/the-new-normal-p/?hpt=us_mid
By Maria Puente, USA TODAY – August 23, 2010
When it comes to gay marriage and gay families, politicians are still bickering and courts are still deliberating. But in entertainment, it’s all over but the shouting.
Hollywood, which once routinely depicted gay people as miserable, dysfunctional or tragic, now produces movies and TV shows — such as this summer’s film The Kids Are All Right, ABC’s Modern Family and Fox’s Glee — in which gay relationships and gay families are portrayed as just like other families — normal, unremarkable, no big deal.
“The general trajectory has them transitioning from minstrel acts and punch lines to relatable everyday characters,” says David Hauslaib, founder of Queerty, a media-watching blog “by and for the queer community.” He adds, “It’s a new era where (being a gay family) is no longer a significant part of the story.”
Why is this happening now? Is Hollywood following the culture, or is the culture following Hollywood?
STRAIGHT OR GAY: Casting goes both ways
Jarrett Barrios, president of GLAAD, the Gay and Lesbian Alliance Against Defamation, says it’s no accident that positive depictions of gay families are increasing.
“These stories are interesting, they’re edgy, they make for good entertainment,” he says. “Hollywood is a business, so they’re telling good stories because it’s good business. Gay, lesbian, bisexual and transgendered people have stories that are capturing the imaginations of Americans because fundamentally, we’re as American as everyone else.”
The Kids Are All Right is a comedy-drama starring Annette Bening and Julianne Moore as a couple with two teens, who refer to them collectively as “Moms.” The plot (sperm-donor dad turns up, leading to laughter and tears) isn’t driven by the lesbian relationship; it would work the same if the couple were straight.
“It’s the perfect post-gay film,” says Howard Bragman, a Hollywood publicist known as the “coming-out guru” for helping gay celebs go public. “Gays are just part of the landscape, which is where we want to be.”
The opposition speaks out
It’s a landscape that many Americans still don’t accept.
Such movies and TV shows “desensitize the public to the raft of problems associated with homosexual behavior,” says Bryan Fischer, director of issue analysis for the American Family Association, one of the proponents of Proposition 8, California’s constitutional ban on same-sex marriage now tied up in court. “Hollywood is conveying a deceptive message about that behavior and doing a disservice to (viewers) who are coming to conclusions based on what they see on the silver screen. It’s a distortion of reality.”
Says Glenn Stanton, director of family studies for Focus on the Family: “When actual gay and lesbian weddings are shown on TV (as in news coverage), we win. When they’re shown through the lens and creativity and artifice of Hollywood, we don’t. Hollywood is succeeding, but they’re doing so by not representing reality.”
Defenders of films and TV shows that depict the ordinary, even mundane, details of gay family life say that’s exactly what it is — reality.
Kids, which is already stirring Oscar talk for Bening, is unclear about whether the women are legally married, but they behave as if they were married, their kids and other characters treat them as if they were married, and at one point one of the women actually says, “I’m married.”
“It shows how regular our families are; it goes a long way toward gay and lesbian families introducing ourselves to straight families as not that much different,” says Dustin Lance Black, the writer/director who won an Oscar for the screenplay of Milk, about murdered San Francisco politician Harvey Milk (played by straight actor Sean Penn, who won an Oscar). Milk was the first openly gay man elected to public office in California.
“And unlike in Milk and so many (past) gay movies, the lead characters don’t die,” Black adds.
For a small art-house film, Kids has demonstrated success at the box office: a respectable $18 million since it opened this summer. Director Lisa Cholodenko, herself a lesbian mom, says she didn’t set out to tell a political story or even a lesbian story; she set out to tell a family story.
“We wanted to make a film about a family and a marriage in midlife, at a low point, the things you don’t see in most movies about what families look like behind closed doors,” she told USA TODAY’s Donna Freydkin.
Gay-friendly roles on TV
Entertainment friendly to gays and gay relationships is proliferating, especially on TV.
•On Glee, a hit about the triumphs and travails of a high school glee club, the story line featured a subplot in which teen-age Kurt comes out as gay to his father, who is not as homophobic as expected.
•On Modern Family, the lineup includes a gay couple, played by Eric Stonestreet (straight) and Jesse Tyler Ferguson (gay), who have adopted a baby and are eagerly, comically trying to fit into the new-parent life. The show has been critically acclaimed and popular, and co-creator Steve Levitan says there has been virtually no push-back from opponents of gay marriage.
“We set out to do a family show with different kinds of families because it seemed to us that families are changing and (a gay family) was a logical type to explore,” Levitan says. “We didn’t think it was the most commercial choice. We thought it might marginalize our audience a bit, but much to our surprise, it hasn’t.”
•On ABC’s Ugly Betty, the final season ended this spring with an understated yet affecting episode in which Betty’s fashion-obsessed teen nephew, Justin, comes out to his loving Latino family, marking the first time a network audience watched a gay child grow up and embrace his identity. Other shows, such as Gossip Girl, United States of Tara, 90210 and Weeds, also have featured story lines about teens in various stages of self-recognition.
•A number of network dramas feature gay characters whose problems/issues have little to do with being gay. On Fox’s House, the bisexual Dr. Remy “Thirteen” Hadley has more angst about her Huntington’s disease than her sexuality. And on ABC’s Brothers & Sisters, the gay brother and his spouse are way less whiny and screwed up than some of his siblings.
•CBS, which received a failing grade recently in GLAAD’s annual report rating TV networks on use of gay characters and programming, just announced that three gay characters will be added to three shows next season: the highly regarded The Good Wife, the returning half-hour Rules of Engagement and new comedy $#*! My Dad Says.
CBS also will launch a The View-style show this fall featuring actress Sara Gilbert (Roseanne) as executive producer and panelist. Gilbert had never discussed her private life, but at the news conference announcing the show, she acknowledged she is a lesbian mother with a partner.
•At least two network shows this fall will feature story lines about California’s Proposition 8, according to AfterElton.com, which tracks depictions of gays in the media: NBC‘s new Law & Order: Los Angeles will explore the various religious groups that funded the campaign for Prop. 8, while cable channel FX‘s dark comedy It’s Always Sunny in Philadelphiawill showcase story lines about one character’s freak-out reaction to the marriage of a transgendered character, and two other male characters who form a domestic partnership to get health care benefits.
“I really do think every year it gets a little bit better,” says Candis Cayne, a transgendered actress who has appeared in ABC’s now-canceled Dirty Sexy Moneyand Lifetime’s hit Drop Dead Diva in transgendered roles.
‘There will come a day …’
“Five years ago, ABC would never have put on a transgendered woman in a loving relationship with someone — it just wouldn’t have happened,” says Cayne, who hopes to be cast in dramatic roles playing straight women. “There will come a day that will happen — I know it.”
So is the entertainment industry now ahead of the culture or just following it?
“The overarching movement is in the culture,” says Stephanie Coontz, history professor at Evergreen State College in Olympia, Wash., and an expert on contemporary families. “Hollywood never had the courage or strength or ability to get positive portrayals of gays until things began to change in the culture at large.
“When it did, Hollywood jumped on it. But they couldn’t do it unless marketers and investors realized there’s an audience for it.”
Eric Stonestreet, left, and Jesse Tyler Ferguson play a couple getting used to being adoptive parents.
By LISA LEFF (AP) –November 2, 2009
SAN FRANCISCO — Same-sex couples who identify as married are similar to straight spouses in terms of age and income, and nearly one-third of them are raising children, according to Census data released Monday that provides a demographic snapshot of gay families in America.
The study released by a think tank based at UCLA also found that Utah and Wyoming were among the states with the highest percentages of gay spouses in 2008, despite being heavily conservative states with no laws providing legal recognition of gay relationships.
The data from the annual American Community Survey showed that nearly 150,000 same-sex couples in the U.S., or more than one in four, referred to one another as “husband” or “wife,” although UCLA researchers estimate that no more than 32,000 of the couples were legally married.
The couples had an average age of 52 and household incomes of $91,558, while 31 percent were raising children. That compares with an average age of 50, household income of $95,075 and 43 percent raising children for married heterosexual couples.
“It’s intrinsically interesting that same-sex couples who use the term spouses look like opposite-sex married couples even with a characteristic like children,” said Gary Gates, the UCLA demographer who conducted the analysis. “Most proponents of traditional marriage will say that when you allow these couples to marry, you are going to change the fundamental nature of marriage by decoupling it from procreation. Clearly, in the minds of same-sex couples who are marrying or think of themselves as married, you are not decoupling child-rearing from marriage.”
Gates said the report is the first to reliably compare same-sex couples who identify as married with gays who say they’re in unmarried partnerships and with married opposite-sex couples.
In the past, same-sex couples who referred to one another as “husband” or “wife” automatically were recorded as unmarried partners, a step gay rights activists lobbied the Census Bureau to eliminate as more states have legalized same-sex unions.
Unsurprisingly, Massachusetts, where gay couples have been able to get married since 2004, had the highest proportion of same-sex couples who were either legally married or considered themselves married, 3.63 for every 1,000 households. Vermont, which allowed same-sex couples to enter in civil unions with all the rights and obligations of marriage in 1999 and made same-sex marriages legal this year, came in second, with a rate of 2.71 per 1,000.
But Hawaii, Utah and Wyoming — states with neither civil unions nor same-sex marriage — came in next, ahead of California, Nevada, Connecticut, New Jersey and Rhode Island. What accounts for the phenomenon is unclear, but “it does provide this evidence that there are clearly couples in conservative parts of the country who do use these terms and do see their relationships in that framework.”
Melissa Bird, a 35-year-old Utah lobbyist, said she understood why her home state has so many same-sex couples who see themselves as married, even though the state government does not recognize them that way. Bird and her 26-year-old partner had a commitment ceremony two years ago in Utah that wasn’t legally binding. They tied the knot legally in California last year before voters approved a gay marriage ban.
“There is very much a marriage mentality here in Utah,” said Bird, whom considers her partner her wife. “We know a lot of people who get ‘married’ in quotes. It never crossed our minds not to do it.”
Once same-sex couples who labeled themselves as unmarried partners were factored in, however, the geographic distribution changed significantly. The District of Columbia came in first, with same-sex couples — both unmarried partners and those who called themselves married — representing 14.12 of every 1,000 households. Maine, where voters on Tuesday will decide whether to repeal a law that legalized same-sex marriage, was next, with gay couples heading up a little more than eight of every 1,000 households.
Although the report includes the first official estimates for the number of same-sex couples who call themselves wives or husbands, Gates said collecting accurate data on the marital status of gay couples remains difficult because of the hodgepodge of laws affecting their relationships. In addition, many couples may be reluctant to identify themselves as such if their neighbors, families and employers do not know they are gay, he said.
The Census Bureau has promised to produce a report on the marital status of gay couples after the once-a-decade national census is completed next year. However, the bureau said there was too little time to change the questionnaire to separate out legally married gay couples in the nationwide tally.
As many of you know or may not know. There is a huge battle being fought by Gay America against Proposition 8. It is so important to educate yourself on what you can do to help and what outlets exist.
Some great websites exist.
One being www.hrc.org they have alot of helpful information.
I also recently discovered this website http:/equalityvideos.org
If you have a moment please check it out, there are so many inspiring videos. You can also upload your own story.
Remember do the right thing, talk about, pass it on and take action.
Until next time.
THE CASE FOR COMPREHENSIVE MEDICAL TESTING OF GAMETE DONORS
A commentary by Wendy Kramer, Director & co-founder, Donor Sibling Registry, http://www.donorsiblingregistry.com
(May 26/09. BioNews)
http://www.bionews.org.uk/commentary.lasso?storyid=4365
“The Donor Sibling Registry (‘DSR’) is a non-profit, web-based, worldwide organisation dedicated to educating, connecting and supporting those affected by gamete donation, including donors, recipients and offspring. At 25,000 members, the DSR has connected 7,000 genetic first degree relatives; hundreds of donors enjoy contact with offspring and thousands of half-siblings interact together.
However, the DSR doesn’t just generate genetically-related joy — it also shines light on serious genetic concerns about gamete donation. Frequently, the DSR counsels recipients whose children have inherited undisclosed genetic disorders, or who have discovered their donor was dishonest regarding health, or that the sperm bank didn’t notify them about reported illness or amended the medical profile.
The number and severity of these health matters is discomfiting. Since US donors can father many offspring (one DSR donor has more than 120 known offspring) donors can transmit disease to scores of children.
Ranking only second to seeking contact with genetic relatives, DSR members cite interest in sharing or warning about health issues. The DSR is the only facility whereby donors, recipients and offspring can unrestrictedly and immediately share medical information. Thousands use it for this purpose.
Currently, many US sperm banks either refuse to update donor/offspring medical information or, even if they accept updates, refuse to share the information, or make the process of reporting so complex or expensive that donors and recipients simply cannot comply or afford it.
Amazingly, in this era of genomic sequencing, some US sperm banks don’t carry out basic genetic screening techniques such as karyotyping – a test to look for chromosomal abnormalities which might cause genetic problems. Recently, the DSR undertook to notify recipients that a New England Cryogenic Center (‘NECC’) donor had a balanced translocation of chromosomes manifesting in offspring as an imbalanced translocation with consequent severe retardation, deafness, blindness and immobility. The DSR took on this task because the NECC was intransigently refusing to notify recipients. The DSR not only notified recipient members, it also trawled its database to find discussion group visitors mentioning that particular donor.
Yet more frustrating than the time and cost expended doing such activity, is the fact that were the NECC simply kartyotyping, this donor would have been excluded for having pieces of his 10 and 22 chromosomes swapped around. Tragically, the cost of karyotyping is less than the price the NECC charges for a single vial of sperm: $400 v $530.
Despite providing a clearinghouse for medical updating, the DSR knows it can’t reach all affected recipients. Unfortunately the sperm banks — who could so easily notify recipients — rarely do. They ignore their moral and obvious obligation to prevent sick children being procreated even when they know a donor is transmitting hereditary illness.
In 2006, when 5 babies conceived by the same donor were diagnosed by a leading medical expert as suffering from a rare disorder called severe congenital neutropenia, the New York Times reported that when International Cryogenics heard about the problem ‘it did not notify other recipients … at first because the company’s own genetics consultant questioned Dr. Boxer’s findings, and later because the company reasoned that even if other children had developed the disease their families would already know it’.
But such reasoning is faulty. Recipients often store sperm for years and reserve vials are frequently gifted if not needed. Also, embryos can be frozen for years before using. Recipients clearly need to be warned about hereditary disorders to prevent unnecessarily sick children being born.
The few genetic tests US sperm banks perform, they skimp on. Only Jewish and French-Canadian donors are tested for Tay-Sachs, ignoring the reality that although those ethnicities are more likely to carry the mutation, there is still risk in other groups. Tragically, offspring have inherited Tay-Sachs due to this policy.
Despite larger sperm banks grossing $1,000,000 – $2,000,000 per donor through sale of vials, plus around the same amount again through selling profiles, consultations and vial storage, US sperm banks generally shun genetic testing. The less screening carried out, the fewer donors need be disqualified and fewer tests also equals less cost.
The sacrificing of offspring’s health to profits goes on. In the case of Johnson v California Cryobank (No. B137002, 2000 WL 638843), the doctors deliberately rewrote a page within the donor’s medical profile deleting information the donor provided indicating kidney disease in his family. This led to the conception of a girl who by the unusually tender age of six had kidney failure. Because Autosomal Dominant Polycystic Kidney Disease normally strikes sufferers in their forties, doubtless the doctors thought any prospect of litigation would be long tolled before the anticipated wave of offspring sufferers would manifest. Since 1500 vials of the affected donor were sold, based upon conservative estimates around 75 offspring will ultimately be struck with kidney disease.
The DSR believes that just as self-regulation failed with monetary banks, it has failed with sperm banks. Therefore, to protect donors, recipients and offspring, the DSR is calling for the implementation of strict regulation, mandatory genetic testing and the establishment of a central gamete donor registry run by an independent authority.”
Very Important….
ADOPTION and why its indispensable for your family’s survival.
One thing that all same-sex couples face is legal guardianship of the baby or babies. In a perfect world we wouldn’t really need to deal with adoptions but in our time now its vital. Not only god forbid a physical emergency happen with the baby but also to be able to protect your right as a parent. I have heard such horrible stories that the hospitals wont let you exercise your parental nurturing because of silly rules. You think it wont happen to me but you don’t want to find yourself in that horrible predicament, Imagine a stranger tell you , sorry your not the parent! I would flip but that’s besides the point- I’m covered 🙂 thanks to Anthony, we will come back to that soon.
Now no one wants to think of breaking up or unforeseen relationship stress. If you don’t adopt whether the child was made with your egg or your partners egg and you were to attempt a battle you would have no grounds and you would have NO RIGHTS!!! The woman that gave birth to the child under NY State Law is the Mother and sole guardian.
Equally important is what if something happens to your partner and she carried and you never adopted? Well I’m sad to say but that child now belongs to her family or in some cases the state.
The only way to protect yourself and have the legal power to make decisions for your child is adopting. Now I have an amazing attorney and gentleman named Anthony Brown 🙂 who is savy with gay rights and just a kind soul. He will make the whole process seamless.
Maria and I just finished our Adoption this past March. It was a very special day. In a nut shell after waiting months and submitting loads of paperwork. The court gives you a date. You come dressed to impress of course, and sit with a judge who states some facts on the papers you signed. Then he has some closing remarks which are extremely emotional.
You are now a legal partner of the most precious human in your life, your child. It feels great and best of all no one can ever challenge your parental rights.
You can find Anthony’s information this website.
Until next time……….