NOTE: I might come back to this blog one day. I can't be bothered right now.

Why Gay Couples, should be allowed to Adopt

The debate over civil rights, same-sex unions and gay marriage continues as per usual, It's likely adoption with follow in close pursuit...

Some people have some rather irrational and un-intelligent reasons against homosexual men/women's rights to adopt.

When you are born homosexual you are indeed somewhat cut out of the whole reproduction game. Supposedly many feel reproduction IS the very meaning of life. Some using that as reason against any form of gay rights.

But in doing so, millions of orphaned children remain parent-less and in poverty.


Consequence of a loving gay couple wanting to adopt a child, means they are actually more likely to be ready for that endeavour and of a sound matured mind.

Whereas Heterosexual couples can fall pregnant un-intentionally, many children around the world would have been born this way, through lapse of mind during a heated sexual moment proper protection isn't warn or taken, or protection is taken but doesn't prove effective to stop a pregnancy. Many people are against abortion so they have the unwanted/unexpected/unplanned child!

For a gay couple to have a child, they both have to be ready, it's currently scientifically impossible for one person or a couple of the same-sex to conceive a child without aide of someone of the opposite sex, or scientist/doctor's aide, and I'm pretty sure it's safe to say we'll never witness the events of the Arnold Schwarzenegger movie "Junior"     were a male is able to carry a child! Therefore it's simply impossible for us to accidentally have a child! No such thing as an unwanted/unexpected/unplanned child!


  • On paper, many gay couples will make better parents. They've often got more money, are often better educated and usually far less likely to commit a crime.

  • One male parent and one female parent guarantees nothing —any pair of imbeciles can have a child. But when you adopt, you face a thorough evaluation. Because all prospective gay parents will face this examination, the average gay parent will likely be far more adept and prepared than the average straight one.

  • Most importantly, if we can improve the life of any orphaned child, don'’t we have a moral obligation to do so? Even accepting ridiculous arguments that straight couples are ideal, wouldn'’t gay people and single parents offer a preferable future than the orphanage? Enabling them to adopt means thousands of children get parents and the prospect of a much better life. Who would deny them that?



adoption
    - a legal proceeding that creates a parent-child relation between persons not related by blood; the adopted child is entitled to all privileges belonging to a natural child of the adoptive parents (including the right to inherit).


Gay adoption
    refers to the adoption of children by a same-sex couple. Gay adoption is now legal in many Countries and States/Territory's around the world which include; Sweden, the Netherlands, Spain and England and Wales. Iceland, Norway, Germany and Denmark allow "stepchild-adoption" so that the partner in a civil union can adopt the natural (or sometimes even adopted) child of his partner. In the Republic of Ireland and some other countries, individual persons, whether heterosexual/homosexual, cohabiting/single may apply for adoption.

    Within the U.S., Florida is the only state that completely prohibits gay adoption. Mississippi, Oklahoma, Colorado and Utah all make same-sex adoption virtually impossible. Critics of anti-gay adoption policies also point out that in many of the states that have bans on gay adoption, gays are still able to act as foster parents.

    In other countries same-sex adoption is currently being reviewed along with the right to marriage/same-sex unions etc.


One prominent figure in America's gay adoption debate is actress and comedian Rosie O'Donnell, who is an adoptive parent in a same-sex relationship. O'Donnell is remembered for her efforts in challenging Florida's gay adoption ban.


Related:

    Adoption - The Free Dictionary by Farlex   






Confusion as Sony Music launches gay label

I'm struggling with internal confusion towards news that Sony Music is launching an all gay music label.

The recording industry is finally coming out of the closet. But should we be happy or sad?

Sony Music said it was launching the first major music label dedicated to nurturing lesbian, gay, bisexual and trans-gendered artists.

The label, Music with a Twist, is a joint venture with Wilderness Media & Entertainment, the company led by Matt Farber, who founded Viacom Inc's MTV Networks' new gay and lesbian channel LOGO   


Farber noted that the success of brands dedicated to the African American and Hispanic audiences have also helped talent in these communities cross over well beyond their core audiences.

Likewise, Music With a Twist's roster will feature gay artists who have mass appeal and hit potential across all musical genres. The label will collaborate with Sony Music's other US labels and divisions, including Columbia Records Group, Epic Records, Sony Nashville and Sony Urban Music.


The label also plans to release various compilations geared toward gay and bisexual audiences, as well as music fans everywhere, featuring hit songs by established artists that have been embraced by gay, bisexual and trans-gendered audiences as well as tracks from emerging gay artists.

The first of these compilations will be released in June 2006 during National Gay Pride Month.


Though I'm very glad gay artists with be nurtured under this label rather than fired or un-distributed (especially happens to us poor gay guys in Australia! Not yet seen any Will Young albums down here, I got my uncle to buy it for me when he was in the UK). I feel somewhat that it's kind of discriminating towards us that they only way to get this stuff is for them to NOW create an all gay label...

SOURCE: AAP/News Limited   

Government refuse gay aussies nuptial-bid overseas too!!

Heterosexual people should realize the stress' of homosexual people living in and being associated to such a homophobic country!!


I was really quite shocked to read this article, but not all together unexpected from a government that clearly see gays to be a challenge they're willing to take on...


But they're really denying us our rights to freedom and choice by obstructing gay couples wanting to get married in countries that DO recognize same-sex nuptials.


They are going to get a very LOUD and CLEAR message from the Gay community that they are going too far...


The Attorney-General's Department last year told at least two of Australia's embassies in Europe to refuse help to citizens requiring proof of their single status for a same-sex marriage.


The Age learnt of the policy through the case of an Australian man whose bid to marry his gay partner in the Netherlands was blocked by authorities.


The Australian embassy in Vienna refused Peter Kakucska, originally from Melbourne, a certificate confirming his single status once it was clear he needed it to marry Markus Muehlmann, an Austrian.


Like many countries, the Netherlands requires proof that foreign nationals wishing to marry there are not already married. Australian embassies provide this proof.


Mr Kakucska has actually lived in Vienna with his partner Mr Muehlmann, since 1993. Last year they took advantage of European Union laws that entitled them to apply to marry in the Netherlands.

Mr Kakucska said embassy staff knew his sexual orientation. When he requested single-status proof, a consular official produced a form that sought details about the prospective marriage partners in columns headed "Male" and "Female".

"I filled in our details, crossing out 'Female' and put the form down," Mr Kakucska said.

The official, Wolfgang Dobias, said he could not accept the form before contacting the Australian embassy in The Hague.

"When I came back he said he didn't have good news for me," Mr Kakucska said. "He showed me from behind a glass screen the official communique he received from Canberra."

The embassy later provided Mr Kakucska with a stamped "certification" dated August 16 and signed by Mr Dobias, the senior consular officer.

It stated: "Following the advice of the Australian Attorney-General's Department we herewith certify that Australian law does not allow the issue of a Certificate of No Impediment to Marriage to persons wishing to enter into a same-sex marriage."

Mr Kakucska received a similar document saying the embassy could not provide a Single Status Certificate.


Lucky for them, the Netherlands ultimately accepted the documents, and an affidavit from Mr Kakucska, as proof he was single. The couple were married in November.

He says he now plans to take legal action against the Australian Government.

A spokeswoman for Attorney-General Philip Ruddock said one purpose of the certificates was to certify a proposed marriage would be valid in Australia.


Most of the media conscious will recall that the Australian Government passed laws in 2004 that defined marriage to be exclusively as a union between a man and woman.

Australian National University senior law lecturer Wayne Morgan said:
"There is nothing in Australian law that would prevent a Certificate of No Impediment to Marriage (being issued) in such circumstances.

"This is an internationally accepted document that has nothing to do with the validity of the marriage back in the couple's own country."


Gay activist Rodney Croome, of the newly formed Australian Coalition for Equality, said:
"It's simply mean-spirited and bloody-minded for the Australian Government to block Peter's access (to documents) on no other basis than the gender of his marriage partner.

"The Government has already made clear its opposition to same-sex marriage in Australia. Why does it now have to export that prejudice to other countries and Australians living overseas? "



I've really come to feel so ashamed of this country since the Howard Government first came into dictatorship power!


My hope is the media (print, television & radio) report this case, and that we can gain the support of more heterosexuall Australians towards gay/civil rights.


We are one of the only Western Country's that is actually going backwards as far as civil rights, at a chilling pace since the Howard Government came into power on 11th March 1996.


SOURCE: The Age - Sat Jan 14th, 7:33 PM ET


Related Links



Anti-gay laws hinder AIDS-prevention efforts

Anti-gay laws hinder prison AIDS-prevention efforts in Namibia's prisons, South Africa's Mail & Guardian paper has reported.

AIDS activists cite blame on a 30-year old law banning male-to-male sex for preventing condom distribution and
HIV-prevention efforts in Namibia's prisons. Advocates for condom distribution have run into opposition from government officials who see their efforts as promoting homosexual activity.

Correctional facilities are a key front in halting the spread of HIV in the impoverished southern African country -- where statistics now show that nearly 20 percent of the nation is infected -- but attitudes about same-sex activity are hindering that effort, according to HIV prevention activists.

In the United States, HIV prevention advocates see strong similarities to their fight to distribute condoms in correctional facilities.

Julie Davids, executive director of CHAMP, a New York-based community HIV/AIDS mobilization project, said that, unlike in most correctional facilities abroad, programs like condom distribution are unavailable in the vast majority of U.S. jails and prisons.

"(Correctional facilities) in the U.S. say the same things they say in Namibia -- that condoms will condone sex and increase prisoner rape," she told the PlanetOut Network. "But if they really wanted to prevent prison rape, there are a lot of things they can do and aren't." Davids pointed to the Prison Rape Elimination Act passed by Congress last year, but rarely implemented due to lack of accountability across a wide variety of state, federal and municipal correctional systems.

The federal government estimates that about 30 percent of federal male prison inmates engage in sex acts -- consensual or not -- with other male inmates. However, most correctional facilities do not track incidents of sex.

Nor is the success in preventing HIV through condom distribution well documented. Only a few cities and states, such as Philadelphia, New York City, Vermont and Mississippi, allow condom distribution, but none have statistics on its effectiveness.

"This country needs to stop putting up obstacles to HIV prevention," Davids said. "Condom distribution is common sense and should be part of a continuity of care, both inside and outside of prison and part of a whole range of harm-reduction programs."

SOURCE: PlanetOut Network (via. Yahoo!) - Mon Jan 9, 7:33 PM ET

I'm ready to Blog!

Hello viewers,

As you can see, I've not yet really got started on this blogging thing, but I promise it's about to change!!

I'm ready to Blog!

Stay tuned for a good steamy blog!


All copyright content on this blog including downloads and photos remain the property of their rightful owners. If you require any copyright material on this site to be withdrawn please contact the site author for prompt removal. Comments are owned by the Poster. The rest copyright © 2004 - 2008 Pigeonholed Queerie's Blog (http://queeries.blogspot.com/)