Showing posts with label Gay Adoption. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Gay Adoption. Show all posts

December 14, 2018

In Israel The Court Rules for Gay Parens in Birth Certificate



                                                                          
Illustrative: The High Court of Justice in session. (Miriam Alster/Flash90)




Thousands protest in support of the right of LGBT couples to adopt children at a demonstration in Tel Aviv on July 20, 2017. (Tomer Neuberg/Flash90)

Thousands protest in support of the right of LGBT couples to adopt children at a demonstration in Tel Aviv on July 20, 2017. (Tomer Neuberg/Flash90)
In a victory for same-sex parents, the High Court of Justice ruled on Wednesday that the Interior Ministry cannot refuse to write an adoptive parent’s name on a child’s birth certificate because of the parent’s sex.

The ruling came in an appeal by two gay men who jointly adopted a son. They attempted to procure a birth certificate from the Interior Ministry for the child, but ministry officials refused to write both the men’s names as the boy’s parents on the certificate, the Haaretz daily reported.


The couple, who filed their appeal together with The Aguda – Israel’s LGBT Task Force, a major gay rights advocacy group, argued that the refusal to record both legal guardians in the certificate could hurt both parent and child in the future, as it would make simple administrative and legal actions that required proof of the parent-child relationship more difficult in the case of the unrecorded parent. 
 
The judges noted that the case did not only concern the parents’ right to be recognized as parents irrespective of their same-sex relationship, but also, and more importantly, the child’s right to recognition as their child.
 
“The principle of ‘the good of the child’ argues for the recording of his entire family unit,” Hendel wrote, “and doesn’t permit us to limit ourselves to only one of his parents in the birth certificate…. The contrast with the treatment of a child adopted by a heterosexual couple, who has the right to have both adopted parents written in a birth certificate, is a contrast that applies both to the child and to the parents.”

From a simple administrative perspective, too, Hendel wrote, “it is unreasonable for the couple to be [legally] recognized as parents but for the certificate not to give expression to that fact.”

The court ordered the Interior Ministry to produce a birth certificate with both fathers’ names.

The ruling puts to rest an ongoing dispute between Interior Minister Aryeh Deri, of the conservative Haredi political party Shas, and Attorney General Avichai Mandelblit over the question. Deri has defended his ministry’s refusal in recent months to register same-sex couples on their children’s birth certificates, leading Mandelblit to openly come out against the policy. Once two individuals legally adopt a child, Mandelblit has argued, there are no legal grounds for refusing to register both parents on a birth certificate on account of the parents’ sex or sexual orientation. The policy amounted to illegal discrimination, Mandelblit has told Deri. 

Wednesday’s ruling is expected to influence two additional cases before the court, Haaretz reported. In one, a lesbian couple is appealing to force the Interior Ministry to have both women listed as parents on a birth certificate, for a child born to one of the women. In the other, a transgender man who was born a woman is asking the court to force the ministry to change his designation in his child’s birth certificate from “mother” to “father.”

“We’re happy that the court reminded the Interior Ministry of something that should have been self-evident — that parents are parents, no matter their sex, sexual orientation or gender,” the couple’s attorneys, Hagai Kalai and Daniella Yaakobi, said in a statement Wednesday.

“The court clarified that this policy of nitpicking, which abridges the rights of LGBT parents for no reason, cannot stand. We can hope that the court’s clear statement will lead the Interior Ministry to reconsider its policy of refusing to register two parents of the same sex in their children’s birth certificate, and refusing to register transgender parents in their children’s birth certificates with their correct gender.” 
 
Hen Arieli, chair of Aguda, said the decision “pulls the rug out from under the state’s strange arguments whenever LGBT parenthood comes up. It’s time to end the illegitimate discrimination against us. We will continue to fight in the streets, in the courts and in the Knesset until we are no longer second-class citizens.”



September 29, 2018

US Congress Rejects Anti LGBT Adoption Amendment!


These are great news!




 



Ryan Thoreson 

Researcher, Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, and Transgender Rights Program

Lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender (LGBT) people planning on fostering or adopting children in the US have a victory to celebrate.

The US House of Representatives approved an appropriations package for the Departments of Labor, Health and Human Services, Education, and Defense on Wednesday – but only after a  discriminatory amendment was removed. That amendment would have allowed child welfare providers to refuse to place children with LGBT parents.

The “Aderholt Amendment,” introduced by Rep. Robert Aderholt (R-AL), would have forced the federal government to fund adoption and foster care agencies that discriminate against LGBT people for “religious” or “moral” reasons by refusing them services.

In July, an appropriations committee in the House unexpectedly inserted the Aderholt Amendment into the funding package.

Human Rights Watch expressed alarm about the harm this amendment would inflict on LGBT parents seeking to foster or adopt children and joined with hundreds of other organizations to oppose the amendment. Our research has documented how these types of religious or moral exemptions function as a “license to discriminate,” allowing providers to turn away LGBT people, deterring LGBT people from seeking out services, and violating the dignity of LGBT people. These exemptions also jeopardize children’s rights, and unduly limit children’s chances of being placed with loving, qualified parents.

Following the House vote, the US Senate passed its own appropriations bill without this discriminatory amendment. Finally, the Aderholt Amendment was excluded from the conference report reconciling the House and Senate versions, and effectively died when the House agreed to that report on Wednesday.

While the defeat of the Aderholt Amendment is a positive development, more work remains to be done. Currently, ten US states – Alabama, Kansas, Michigan, Mississippi, North Dakota, Oklahoma, South Carolina, South Dakota, Texas, and Virginia – have laws in place that are similar to the Aderholt Amendment. By contrast, only three states and the District of Columbia prohibit discrimination in foster care based on sexual orientation and gender identity, and five more states prohibit discrimination based on sexual orientation alone.

In the upcoming year, lawmakers at the federal and state levels should reject these licenses to discriminate and strengthen nondiscrimination protections so that no loving, qualified parents are turned away solely because of who they are.



July 14, 2018

Under House Panel US Agencies Could Refuse Gay Couples Trying To Adopt




By Daniella Diaz, CNN


The House Appropriations Committee passed an amendment on Wednesday that, if implemented, would allow adoption agencies to refuse gay couples based on their moral or religious beliefs. 
The amendment, which was introduced by GOP Rep. Robert Aderholt of Alabama, would allow child welfare providers to decline to "provide a service that conflicts with its sincerely held religious beliefs or moral convictions," according to the congressman.
Because of this provision, the amendment would allow more religious organizations, such as Catholic Charities and Bethany Christian Services -- examples Aderholt provided -- to operate child welfare agencies.
"The reason for this is simply because these organizations, based on religious conviction, choose not to place children with same-sex couples," he said in a statement.
    He continued: "The amendment I introduced seeks to prevent these (state) governments from discriminating against child welfare providers on the basis that the provider declines to provide a service that conflicts with its sincerely held religious beliefs or moral convictions," he said in a statement. 
    The amendment could have consequences for LGBTQ-friendly states. It would require the US Department of Health and Human Services to withhold 15% of the federal funds for child welfare services from states and localities don't meet the same standards for protecting religious adoption groups.
    Progressive Democrats in the House are speaking out against the amendment, saying it would deny same-sex couples the right to adopt.
    "Same-sex couples are six times more likely to foster and four times more likely to adopt. Denying kids loving parents is wrong," Democratic Rep. Mark Pocan, a gay congressman from Wisconsin, said in a tweet.
    House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi called the amendment a "disgusting, deeply immoral and profoundly offensive effort." 
    "House Republicans chose to sacrifice the well-being of little children to push a bigoted, anti-LGBTQ agenda, potentially denying tens of thousands of vulnerable children the opportunity to find a loving and safe home," the California Democrat said in a statement.
    The office of House Speaker Paul Ryan, a Wisconsin Republican, did not immediately respond to a request for comment.

    May 21, 2018

    Czech Supreme Court Allows Gay Partners To Adopt ~Another First~When Professional Surfer in China Comes out as Gay



    The Czech supreme court has ruled for the first time that two gay partners should be legally recognised as the fathers of a surrogate child, the daily Mladá Fronta reported on Saturday. 
    The child was born a few months ago to a surrogate mother in California through artificial insemination. In its ruling, issued at the beginning of May, the Czech supreme court sustained a decision issued by a court in California, which recognised the two men as the baby girl’s parents.
    Since 2006, gays and lesbians in the Czech Republic can live in an officially registered partnership. However, they are still prevented from adopting children as a couple, which means that the non-biological partner does not have the same legal rights to the child.

    [This Page is reposted from Out Sports By 
    Xu Jingsen, or ASam, is a surfer from China.  

    A professional surfer in China has come out publicly as gay, believed to be 
    the first Chinese athlete who has come out as LGBT. 
    The surfer, Xu Jingsen, or ASam in an Anglicized translation, will attend 
    the August Gay Games in Paris. 
    In a post on China’s popular messaging service Weibo, read by more than 360,000 people, ASam explained his decision (as translated by the Federation of Gay Games and Bing)
    While homosexuality is legal in China, LGBT people still face societal and legal pressure. We can’t find another example of a Chinese athlete who has come out as LGBT. We also don’t know how extensive ASam’s athletic background is, though the World Surf database lists a Xu Jingsenwho competed professionally in 2013. 

    Surfing is not a sport at the Gay Games, but a photo from the Federation of Gay Games indicated ASam will be swimming and playing basketball. Regardless, he is taking a brave step forward for LGBT athletes from China.

    July 21, 2017

    In Tel Aviv Celebs Decry Israel Refusal to Allow Same Sex Adoptions








    In TEL AVIV (JTA),  Israel may pride itself on being an oasis of LGBT tolerance in the otherwise hostile the Middle East, but many gay citizens are less than wowed.

    On Sunday, the government came out in favor of effectively preventing adoption by same-sex couples. Responding to a petition to the High Court of Justice challenging the current policy, it said that given the “reality of Israeli society,” same-sex parents put an “additional burden” on their adopted children.

    Led by some gay celebrities, Israel’s LGBT community and its allies have launched a campaign against the government’s declared position, earning widespread public support. The Israeli media have been filled with criticism of the country’s right-wing leadership alongside accounts of loving same-sex parenting.

    Many have accused politicians of touting Israel’s LGBT bona fides to the world while failing to stand up for gay rights at home. Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, who in a U.N. speech in 2016 talked about gay rights, was singled out. But the top target of criticism has been Cabinet minister Ayelet Shaked, whose Justice Ministry, along with the Welfare Ministry, helped make the government’s case against same-sex adoption. 

    On Sunday, gay Israeli pop star Harel Skaat urged young LGBT Israelis to vote politicians like Shaked out of office. He further suggested they protest the government’s position by refusing to contribute to the country, or even by leaving. 

    “I call on you not to join the army! And you know what, not even to pay taxes on the money you will earn,” he wrote on Facebook. “Go and disperse all the great and varied good that you have to give in places that accept you and not those that don’t.” 

    Singer Amir Frischer-Gutman declared on television that gay Israelis were done making the country look good without getting government support in return. Pro-Palestinian activists over the years have accused Israel of “pinkwashing” its conflict with the Palestinians by promoting its gay-friendly laws and culture.

    “We as people have for years felt they are not accepting us. We are good only for speeches at the United Nations and to be the fig leaf of this country,” Frischer-Gutman told Israel’s Channel 2 on Monday. “I will not have an answer for my child the day he asks me why I have to pay taxes to this country. And why should I go to the army for a country that does not respect you and me?”

    Ohad Hitman, 40, a top Israeli singer and composer, told JTA that gay artists like him are stepping up because they are “dreamers” who want to create a better world. He said he personally felt an obligation to “speak his truth.”

    On Monday, Hitman, who is married to TV commercial producer Ran Hurash, 30, wrote a Facebook post addressed to Shaked from the perspective of their 2-year-old twins, Eva and Berry. The tongue-in-cheek message purported to agree that gays are bad parents, saying the children’s “emotional burden” includes limited TV watching privileges and an early bedtime.

    The post concluded with a call for an “in-depth dialogue of love” and national unity. By Wednesday it had received 24,000 “likes” and hundreds of mostly supportive comments.

    Hitman described himself as mostly apolitical but said representatives of several Israeli lawmakers have called to consult with him. Meanwhile, other members of the gay community have publicly pushed the government to change its position on adoption.

    Although adoption by same-sex couples has been legal in Israel since 2008, in practice it has been nearly impossible. Because opposite-sex couples have been given priority, only three same-sex couples have adopted in Israel out of 550 applicants. More than 1,000 opposite-sex couples have adopted in the past nine years.

    In its petition to the High Court, the Association of Israeli Gay Fathers, together with the Israel Religious Action Center of the Reform movement, called these policies discriminatory. In its response, the government essentially agreed but called them justified.

    Meanwhile, surrogacy has grown increasingly popular. In 2013, Israelis had 227 births by surrogate mothers; 87 of them were gay couples.

    Hitman and Harush paid a surrogate mother. In April 2015, they were among a group of gay male couples that made a high-profile flight to pick up their children from Nepal following a massive earthquake there.

    Gay couples cannot marry in Israel, but the state recognizes unions performed abroad. Hitman and Harush married in New York.

    Amid the public outcry over the government’s position against same-sex adoption, the National Association of LGBT in Israel quickly organized a protest of the policy to take place Thursday outside the Kirya government compound in Tel Aviv.

    “We will not be silent when our government calls us ‘exceptions,’” the group said on Facebook. “We will not say thank you because here we are not thrown from the rooftops.”

    On Tuesday, Amir Ohana, the only openly gay lawmaker in the ruling Likud party and Hitman’s neighbor, said he would refuse to vote with coalition lawmakers until the government changed its stance on adoption.

    There are signs the pressure was having an effect. The High Court on Tuesday gave the state two months to reconsider its position on adoption. Welfare Minister Haim Katz had asked the court for time to do so, saying the state’s response was unfortunately worded.


    Supreme Court Gives Israel Two Months To Rethink Gay Adoption Policy
    JTAJuly 18, 2017
    Spokeswoman Sharona Mann said the Welfare Ministry is recommending a “complete overhaul of the outdated law” on adoptions, though she said her suggestion is not immediately “connected to same-sex parents.”

    A poll commissioned last month by the Israeli religious pluralism group Hiddush found 76 percent of Israelis, an all-time high, support gay marriage, compared to 53 percent in 2009.

    Tom Canning, the associate director of the Jerusalem Open House — the LGBT group behind the Jerusalem Pride March — said such attitudes could ultimately make it difficult for the government to sustain its “regressive” positions.

    “We’re seeing overwhelming support in Israeli society for same-sex marriage and acceptance of LGBT people in different walks of life, even outside Tel Aviv,” he said. “Even regarding the latest adoption decision, there has been a huge outcry not only from LGBT people but from all Israelis, who feel it does not reflect their beliefs.

    “I don’t know if it’s enough to change government policy, but I think it’s going to be a concern for the government to manage public opinion.”

    Still, Hitman said he and his friends in the gay community are not optimistic about their future in Israel. He said they feel under siege by the country’s growing and increasingly powerful Orthodox Jewish population and by right-wing politicians they say are unwilling to stand up for democratic values.

    “People are worried and angry about the situation. They see Israel becoming like ‘The Handmaid’s Tale,’” he said, referring to the hit Hulu TV series about a right-wing religious cult that takes power in the United States. “Everyone knows that 20, 30, 40 years from now, the most religious people will be the majority. All of us are afraid for the first religious prime minister.”

    Eventually, Hitman said, he plans to live outside of Israel — in New York or London, where he hopes to stage his musicals – and believes his children will have more opportunities there. He is worried the Israeli government will make them, and their parents, “second-class citizens.”

    Hitman noted another challenge faced by gay couples: All children of non-Jewish surrogate mothers must undergo an acceptable conversion if they are to be considered Jewish by the Chief Rabbinate, which controls Jewish marriage and divorce. While this is little more than a formality for babies of opposite-sex couples, the Chief Rabbinate does not allow the conversion of those who will be brought up in gay households.

    “In Israel, they are not Jewish, they can’t even get married in a normal way,” Hitman said of his children. “Abroad, I believe they will be respected for who they are.”

    Despite his worries, Hitman said he has received dozens of positive messages about his Facebook post from religious Jews. Even several who oppose gay adoption told him they admired him and his family and wished them the best. He read JTA a message from a well-known religious musician, who told him that his Facebook post had inspired him to move toward coming out as gay. Hitman said he planned to offer counsel to his fellow musician.

    “These aren’t bad people,” he said. “I just want my kids to grow up in a decent country.”



    July 19, 2017

    We See Israel Now For What is Has Not Been-Not Gay Inclusive but An Enclave of Religious Gay Bigotry



                                   This is Tony and Brian and this is not happening in Israel👪⟱



    {Introduction}:

    The government of Israel has spent lots of advertising money through the years selling Israel as a Gay Paradise which has never been. True, Israel was one of the first nations to accept gay recruits for the IDF but that was done for self interests not for being fair and inclusive. A small nation in which is mandatory  to serve in its military did not want to exclude a big chunk of both men and women that they desperadly needed plus the science to separate straights from gays does not exists yet contray to some religious nations operating at least a century behind; Looking up at a mens butt hole will detect hemorroids but there is no such thing as gay or hetero ones. 
    There is something so wrong for a man, religious or not that would volunteer for that little job!😈👇

     Same-sex marriage is not legal in Israel. The Israeli Government has registered same-sex marriages performed abroad for some purposes since 2006. However, since the state has yet to legalize civil marriage in Israel, those who choose to get married must turn to one of the 15 religious marriage courts recognized by the state. As of 2017, none of the 15 religious courts permit same-sex marriage under their respective auspices. Consequently, Israelis who desire to have their same-sex marriage recognized by the Israeli Government must first wed outside Israel and then register upon returning home. (wiki)

    Adoptions is where the last bastions of extremism and discrimination is on nations that have open up to aloud people that love each other to be together legally. Discrimnation on adoptions not only hurt good couples that would make wonderful parents but kids and infants already born and without parents because the war, nature or poverty. If they can accept two men or two women being legally together why would they assumed that they would not make goood parents? The excuse that every child need both parents of opposite sexes is just fluff. Many of the kids that need adoptions have no parents at all. A kid that's growing up in a loving, secure environment would be a happy kid. Kids do not know how to be a bigot or how to discriminate. Those are thngs people, particulalry those that call themselves religious teach them.
    Adam Gonzalez, Publisher

    The following is a news and editorial I pulled from Hareets daily Newspaper and it describes the issue of gay discrimination and adoption in Israel. 

    The annual Gay Pride Parade in Tel Aviv, Israel, June 12, 2015. Ariel Schalit, AP
    Analysis Israel's opposition to adoption by same-sex couples proves: The state lags behind society
    Only three same-sex couples allowed to adopt in Israel since it became legal in 2008
    Israel tells top court it opposes adoptions by same-sex couples

    Texas Governor Greg Abbott signed a law last month that gives religion-based adoption services and welfare workers the right to refuse engagement with certain adoptive families on religious grounds. The law, which exists in a similar form in a few other U.S. states, is primarily meant to allow welfare workers that are devout Christians to deny adoptions to LGBTQ couples. In doing so, it also permits them to shun atheists, Muslims, Jews and just about anyone else their religion doesn’t appreciate.

    The passage of the law by the Texas legislature was hailed as a victory for freedom of religion. It is part of a nationwide rearguard action by Evangelicals, Catholics and other conservatives to limit the scope of the U.S. Supreme Court’s 2015 recognition of same-sex marriages. To their credit, unlike Israel’s Welfare Ministry, these reactionaries don’t hide their opposition to same-sex adoptions behind bogus assertions of the child’s best interest. They take pride in their principled objections to granting genuine full equality to families of gays, lesbians, transgenders and anyone else who deviates from the biblical blueprint of man and woman, preferably believers in Jesus.

    The quality and quantity of serious research papers that reach the conclusion that children adopted by same-sex couples are at a disadvantage compared to those adopted by opposite-sex couples is negligible anyway. As in the efforts to challenge global warming, in most cases their theological or political biases are transparent. Columbia University asserts that of 79 research papers that it has examined over the years, only four argued against same-sex adoptions, and their methodology was flawed. Some researchers maintain that adoptions by same-sex couples, such as girls who are raised by two fathers, can actually be healthier for the child.


    The Israeli government’s response to a petition to the High Court to formally allow same-sex adoptions initially cited a debunked claim that children adopted by gay and lesbian couples are bound to suffer because of the stigma attached to their families. They then changed tack and tried to blame Israeli society itself. “It isn’t legitimate enough,” they claimed, citing a well-worn excuse for preserving discrimination: After all, it “wasn’t legitimate enough” in the American south for African-Americans to wash their hands in the same sinks as white people. “There are some areas, like Tel Aviv, in which it is more acceptable,” they added, “and other areas in which it isn’t.” By this logic, ultra-Orthodox Jews shouldn’t be allowed to adopt either, because they would stand out in secular Tel Aviv suburbs, and leftists should be barred from adopting as well, because they would be completely ostracized if they chose to move to a radical Jewish settlement in the West Bank. Gay and lesbian people, like most other human beings, tend to live in places in which they and their children are received warmly and are not considered “deviant,” unless the Israeli government portrays them as such.

    As in Texas, fundamentalists and reactionaries who view members of the LGBTQ community as “perverts,” as a respected national religious rabbi recently said, wield enormous political power. In Israel, on the other hand, members of the LGBTQ community can console themselves with the thought that they are not alone. On matters of birth, death, marriage, conversions and a whole range of other issues, their country discriminates against mixed marriages, people disqualified from Orthodox marriages, Reform and Conservative U.S. Jews and more – never mind Arabs and Palestinians on both sides of the Green Line.
    Keep updated: Sign up to our newsletter
    Email* Sign up


    The public outcry that led Welfare Minister Haim Katz to ask the High Court on Tuesday to grant an extension so that the government could reassess its position is proof that the problem is not with Israeli society, which is mostly tolerant and open to persuasion, but with the government and coalition that runs its affairs. On the other hand, it’s quite possible that what forced the government’s hand is the heavy damage sustained by the ongoing hasbara campaign to portray Israel as an LGBTQ paradise, which was so convincing that even gay and lesbian people started to believe it actually existed. 
      
    Haaretz.com, the online edition of Haaretz Newspaper in Israel, and analysis from Israel and the Middle East. Haaretz.com provides extensive and in-depth coverage of Israel, the Jewish World and the Middle East, including defense, diplomacy, the Arab-Israeli conflict, the peace process, Israeli politics, Jerusalem affairs, international relations, Iran, Iraq, Syria, Lebanon, the Palestinian Authority, the West Bank and the Gaza Strip, the Israeli business world and Jewish life in Israel and the Diaspora.

    © Haaretz Daily Newspaper 
     Chemi Shalev
    Haaretz Correspondent

    July 18, 2017

    Israel's Pop Sensation Tell LGBT Youth Not to Enlist on Defense Forces Which Are Against Gay Adoptions



     
    Israeli singer Harel Skaat has a message for LGBT youth in Israel: Don't enlist in the IDF.


    The popular singer wrote an emotional Facebook post Sunday night after hearing that the government will petition the Supreme Court to oppose easing the restrictions on adoption by same-sex couples.  
    Skaat spoke earlier that evening to a gay youth group in Beersheba, and thanked them for listening to his words. 

    "The day will come in a few years that you will have to enlist in the army and do your part," began Skaat. "As an Israeli who loves his country and is proud to be a Jew and talks about that around the world, who served proudly in the army and whose boyfriend is an IDF major who serves almost a month out of the year, I call on you not to enlist in the army!" 

    Skaat, who represented Israel in the Eurovision in 2010, has had many hit singles in Israel, including "Now," "Kama Od Efshar" and "Boom." He also served as a judge this past year on the "Next Star for Eurovision" TV competition show.

    Skaat had other recommendations for gay youth living in Israel. 

    "And you know what, don't pay taxes either on the money you will soon be earning," he added. "Basically any requirement the country asks of you - ignore. Because that's what they do to you and the equal rights that are due to you." 

    Gay marriage is not legal in Israel. The country will register, but not recognize, same-sex unions performed outside the country - the same as it does for any civil unions. Same-sex couples are not banned from adopting children in Israel, but they are only considered if a heterosexual couple cannot be found for a child. Gay couples in Israel can also not use legal surrogates in the country, and for that reason, many turn to women living abroad to carry their offspring. 

    Skaat slammed Justice Minister Ayelet Shaked, whose Justice Ministry authored the government submission to the Supreme Court on adoption. 

    "To Mrs. Ayelet Shaked and all the other cowardly politicians like you," he wrote. "You aren't worthy of us. I can only hope that the millions of people who marched in Tel Aviv in the recent pride parade in order to allow you to boast to the world about your flawed acceptance of us, will become an electoral force that will finally kick you out [of office]. There is a new generation that won't tolerate your hypocrisy much longer." 
     

    Speaking to Ynet on Monday morning, Skaat made clear he didn't regret or retract anything he said. 

    "The government's decision hurt me a lot," he said. "This isn't a provocation, it's my life and the lives of hundreds of thousands here in Israel.... I perform with love and pride in front of soldiers and NGOs that support the IDF. I give what I can and I'll continue to do so."


    June 30, 2017

    Trump's New Papi Gorsuch is Against Having Gay Parents on Their Kids Birth Certificates







    (LifeSiteNews) — Newly appointed Supreme Court Justice Neil Gorsuch issued a blistering dissent to the Court’s decision to allow “spouses” of the same gender to appear on children’s birth certificates. 
    The court’s decision was predicated on the 2015 Obergefell v. Hodges case that legalized same-sex “marriage” across the country.  
    Because same-sex “marriage” is now the law of the land, the court reasoned that states must “provide same-sex couples 'the constellation of benefits that the States have linked to marriage.'" In particular, since the Obergefell ruling specifically identified birth and death certificates as two of those rights, states can no longer deny same-sex couples any rights related to birth certificates that are granted to opposite-sex couples.
    Obergefell v. Hodges laid the groundwork for rulings such as this, going beyond establishing a legal right to gay “marriage,” to asserting all rights normally associated with marriage.  

    The constitutional basis of Justice Gorsuch’s dissent

    Justice Gorsuch said, “[N]othing in Obergefell indicates that a birth registration regime based on biology, one no doubt with many analogues across the country and throughout history, offends the Constitution. To the contrary, to the extent they speak to the question at all, this Court’s precedents suggest just the opposite conclusion.”  
    “Neither does anything in today’s opinion purport to identify any constitutional problem with a biology-based birth registration regime.”
    Gorsuch asked, “What, then, is at work here?”  
    “Given all this, it seems far from clear what here warrants the strong medicine of summary reversal. Indeed, it is not even clear what the Court expects to happen on remand that hasn’t happened already. The Court does not offer any remedial suggestion, and none leaps to mind.”

    Gorsuch sets off LGBT alarm bells

    At ThinkProgress in a piece subtitled Donald Trump’s judge is doling out Mike Pence’s justice, Ian Millhiser said, “The Supreme Court took two actions Monday morning that provide a fairly clear window into how Gorsuch will handle claims alleging discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation.
    “First, the Court announced that it will hear Masterpiece Cakeshop v. Colorado Civil Rights Commission, a case brought by a baker who claims that religion gives anti-LGBTQ business owners the right to ignore civil rights laws.  
    “Second, the Court reversed an Arkansas Supreme Court decision permitting the state to engage in a subtle form of discrimination against same-sex couples. ... Taken together, these two cases suggest Gorsuch will join the Court’s right-most faction in matters relating to LGBTQ rights.”
    And over at Slate, Mark Joseph Stern, who covers law and LGBTQ issues, said Gorsuch’s “dissent should be deeply alarming to LGBTQ advocates; it indicates an eagerness to read Obergefell with implausible narrowness, and a hostility to the extension of civil rights to same-sex couples.”

    The true significance of the Court’s decision — for children

    Children’s rights activist Katy Faust, writing at ThemBeforeUs, reacted to the court’s decision: “(I)n the name of ‘equality’ for adults, today’s Supreme Court ruling denies children both the right to their mother and father and the right to their biological identity. ‘Equality’ for same-sex couples comes by way of children’s inequality.”
    Faust continued, “Children raised by gay couples will always be missing a biological parent as well as the dual-gender influence that children crave. Studies tells us thatchildren with same-sex parents will suffer as a result. Many of those children will also struggle with identity issues as a result of being donor-conceived. But those challenging the ban were not concerned about actual outcomes for these kids and instead argued, ‘When it comes to same-sex spouses, the state’s refusal to list both of them on the birth certificate “causes those children to suffer the stigma of knowing their families are somehow lesser …’”
    Justice Gorsuch, who joined the Supreme Court in April, has clearly aligned himself with the court’s conservatives.
    Gorsuch was joined by Justices Clarence Thomas and Samuel Alito, Chief Justice John Roberts and Justice Anthony Kennedy in the majority.  

    June 27, 2017

    Supreme Court Rules Gay Couples Entitled to Equal Treatment on Birth Cert.









    The Supreme Court on Monday reaffirmed its 2015 decision recognizing a constitutional right to same-sex marriage, ruling that states may not treat married same-sex couples differently from others in issuing birth certificates.

    The decision was unsigned. Justice Neil M. Gorsuch, joined by Justices Clarence Thomas and Samuel A. Alito Jr., dissented.

    The case concerns an Arkansas law about birth certificates that treats married opposite-sex couples differently from same-sex ones. A husband of a married woman is automatically listed as the father even if he is not the genetic parent. Same-sex spouses are not.

    Newsletter Sign UpContinue reading the main story
    Get the Morning Briefing by Email
    What you need to know to start your day, delivered to your inbox Monday through Friday.
     
    You agree to receive occasional updates and special offers for The New York Times's products and services. 

    The case, Pavan v. Smith, No. 16-992, was brought by two married lesbian couples who had jointly planned their child’s conception by means of an anonymous sperm donor. State officials listed the biological mother on the children’s birth certificates and refused to list their partners, saying they were not entitled to a husband’s presumption of paternity.

    New York Times


    May 21, 2017

    Anti Gay Judge is Side Step on a Gay Adoption Case





      
    LOUISVILLE, Ky. -- A Kentucky family court judge who openly declared his opposition to adoptions by gay couples has been blocked from instituting a measure that may have let him avoid handling such cases.
    Judge W. Mitchell Nance recently submitted a proposed procedural change to the state’s chief justice, John D. Minton Jr. Minton denied the request on procedural and substantive grounds, state Administrative Office of the Courts spokeswoman Leigh Anne Hiatt said Friday.
    Nance declined comment through a court official.
    The judge is under attack from civil rights groups seeking his removal from the bench. The American Civil Liberties Union of Kentucky and other groups complained this week to the state’s judicial disciplinary commission about Nance.
    Minton’s denial of the proposal was praised by gay-rights activist Chris Hartman.
    “Creating an additional legal hurdle for LGBT couples to jump over in order to achieve their adoption is inappropriate and against the law,” said Hartman, director of the Fairness Campaign, a Louisville-based, nonprofit LGBT advocacy group.
    Hartman said a complaint accusing Nance of violating the state’s judicial conduct code will still move forward.
    Kentucky law allows gay couples to adopt.
    The U.S. Supreme Court ruling in 2015 that effectively legalized same-sex marriage nationwide cited adoptions by same-sex couples as “powerful confirmation from the law itself that gays and lesbians can create loving, supportive families.”
    The ruling also emphasized that people whose religious doctrines forbid condoning same-sex marriage must be given “proper protection as they seek to teach the principles that are so fulfilling and so central to their lives and faiths.”
    Nance hears family court cases in Barren and Metcalfe counties, a rural stretch of south-central Kentucky.
    Before submitting his proposed rule to the state’s chief justice, Nance filed an order in late April stating that attorneys should notify court officials if their adoption cases involve gay adults, so he can take steps to recuse himself. He cited a state law requiring judges to disqualify themselves from proceedings when they have a personal bias or prejudice.
    In that order, Nance said he believes as a “matter of conscience” that “under no circumstance” would it be in a child’s best interest to be adopted “by a practicing homosexual.”
    He said his “conscientious objection to the concept of adoption of a child by a practicing homosexual may constitute ‘personal bias or prejudice’” that would require his recusal.
    That order had not been rescinded by Nance as of Friday afternoon, a Barren County court official said.
    The judge’s defenders include the Family Foundation of Kentucky, which also supported Rowan County Clerk Kim Davis, who spent five days in jailfor refusing to issue marriage licenses to same-sex couples based on her religious beliefs.
    Martin Cothran, a spokesman for the nonprofit family advocacy group based in Lexington, said this week that he couldn’t imagine the state’s Judicial Conduct Commission ruling against Nance “for doing what the law requires him to do — recuse himself if he believes his views might bias a case.”
    Meanwhile, Nance recently stepped aside from a case in which a transgender person was seeking a domestic violence order, and the case was transferred to another judge.
    Nance’s recusal “further illustrates why nothing short of removal from office will cure Judge Nance’s ongoing ethical violations,” said William Sharp, legal director for the ACLU of Kentucky.



    Print this article Back to Top

    Featured Posts

    A Mob of 10 Men Attacks a Gay Man in Arizona

    Police are investigating, though they aren't calling the attack as a hate crime. BY  MATHEW RODRIGUEZ Ou...