IGF CultureWatch

The Evan B. Donaldson Institute, a prominent research group specializing in adoption issues, has a new report on adoption by gays. It's quite supportive.

Apparently, both Christians and gays are being targeted for death by Iraqi terrorists. But I don't expect much state-side mutual empathy to come of it.

More. Are things worse now for gays? Winnipeg Sun columnist Charles Adler opines, "Homosexuality in Saddam Hussein's Iraq was punishable by death.... Had the the Peacemakers succeeded in keeping Saddam Hussein in power, a homosexual in Iraq would have zero hope for having an openly gay life.... the threat to gays wasn't coming from Western Imperialism."

Vaclav Havel, the former Czech president who helped bring down communist totalitarianism, defends spousal rights for gay couples as his country's Chamber of Deputies passes a law on registered partnerships. Says Havel:

I was most intrigued in the debate by the absurd ideology advocated by the Christian Democrats and [current president Vaclav] Klaus, who argue that family should have advantages since, unlike homosexual couples, it brings children to life. This is the concept of family as a sort of calf shed in which bulls can inseminate cows so that calves are born. ...

This is nothing spiritual, nothing intellectual. This is a purely material concept of family. This is what made me most upset in the debate.

I'm glad Havel continues to distinguish himself by standing up against injustice.

It's interesting that President Bush, in defending a guest worker/citizenship program for undocumented aliens, is willing to stand up against the reactionary House Republicans who want to build a big wall along the Mexican border and drive all the undocumented workers back across. Bush sees Hispanic Americans as a potential bloc for the GOP, unlike gays (who would alienate the religious right base).

Interesting, too, that NGLTF put out a press release in support of the McCain/Kennedy immigration reform bill (which, to me, does sound like a reasonable measure), but missed the opportunity to discuss the problems of gay immigrants, especially partners of U.S. citizens who can't gain residency. Guess that's "mission creep" (or fear of offending their supposed Latino "allies" by bringing up gay-immigration matters).
--Stephen H. Miller

Monday's Wall Street Journal carried a page one feature (online for WSJ subscribers only) on couples "uncoupling" in the digital age. It began:

A few days after breaking up with his boyfriend, Jeff Ramone couldn't resist logging on to Friendster-a popular online social community-to check out his ex's profile page.

Dr. Dobson, as well as anti-assimilationist (and anti-Wall Street) gays, will no doubt be displeased by such inclusion.

Elsewhere, the Washington Post had an interesting story on the decline of marriage in the African-American community. Somehow, they'll blame this on us, too.
--Stephen H. Miller

More Recent Postings
03/26/06 - 04/01/06

Tom Palmer, writing a column in the Washington Blade, looks at why intolerance toward gays, in Russia and elsewhere, puts economic growth at risk:

Studies...have demonstrated quite effectively that the more open and welcoming a city or region is to peaceful diversity, the more economically productive, prosperous and commercially and technologically advanced it is likely to be.

But the fight against "insularity, prejudice, poverty, and backwardness" will be a long one, over there and over here.

More Recent Postings
03/19/06 - 03/25/06

We've posted John Corvino's insightful look at polygamy illogic and the "slippery slope" argument. Over at Slate, William Saletan also joins the debate with a column worth reading, in which he observes:

Fidelity isn't natural, but jealousy is. Hence the one-spouse rule. One isn't the number of people you want to sleep with. It's the number of people you want your spouse to sleep with.

Saletan also recognizes a key point, "Gays who seek to marry want the same thing. They're not looking for the right to sleep around. They already have that. It's called dating."

More. Uh, oh. HBO's "Big Love" muddies the waters. Here's their synopsis of this week's episode:

Roman's been busy on several fronts. With son Alby as his P.R. aide, he grants an interview to the Los Angeles Times to defend the practice of polygamy.... With Alby's prompting, he offers the journalist a final talking point: "If the Supreme Court says yes to the privacy rights of homosexual persons, surely it's time to recognize our rights to live in peace, too."

--Stephen H. Miller

This isn't exactly a gay item, but given that San Francisco's politics has more input from its gay constituents than just about anywhere else, it's worth noting David Boaz's posting on how government over-regulation is driving families (undoubtedly including a good many gay families) out of town.
--Stephen H. Miller

The Democrat-dominated Florida Supreme Court, the one that killed school choice and tried to elect President Gore, turns sharply rightward when it comes to gays. Having upheld, in 1995, that state's worst-in-the-nation ban on letting gays adopt, the court has now ruled a sweeping anti-gay marriage amendment can go on the ballot. The amendment reads:

Inasmuch as marriage is the legal union of only one man and one woman as husband and wife, no other legal union that is treated as marriage or the substantial equivalent thereof shall be valid or recognized.

But the Florida constitution prohibits "logrolling" in constitutional amendments (that is, putting something into an initiative that voters like, and then adding something else that voters wouldn't necessarily approve on its own). Since the amendment in question first defines marriage (one man, one women), and then adds in language that bans even civil unions and domestic partnerships (i.e., "other legal unions"), it seem like a pretty clear case of impermissible logrolling. But count on the Florida Supremes to ignore the language of the law and again rule on their own prejudices.

More. Like those Japanese soldiers at the end of WWII who hid in the jungles and refused to surrender, some of our readers still insist that Bush stole the 2000 election. Nothing will convince them that Kos and Moore aren't reliable sources, but for the rest, this should.

Brokeback Mountain continues to demonstrate why it was not only the best film of the year (not withstanding the Academy's snub), but one of the most significant of its era. This commentary, for instance, looks at how it speaks to and for oppressed gays in Arab countries.