Malta votes for civil unions, non-discrimination for transgender individuals, mutual recognition

On Monday evening, the Parliament of Malta voted to allow same-sex couples to enter civil unions and adopt children; amend the constitution to forbid discrimination against transgender people; and ensure same-sex marriages conducted abroad would be recognised.

Civil unions

The Civil Unions Act amended Maltese law, allowing same-sex couples to enter partnerships with rights and duties similar to marriage. Partners will be able to adopt children.

Claudette Abela Baldacchino MEP, a Maltese member of the LGBT Intergroup, said: “Introducing civil unions was an important step towards fully embracing true European values. This is not merely a question of minority rights, but an issue of what kind of society we want to live in.”

“As an MEP, I believe respect for human rights and fundamental freedoms are the basis of any democracy. No country may call itself truly European unless it treats its citizens equally.”
Gender identity and sexual orientation in the Constitution

MPs also voted to amend the Constitution, prohibiting discrimination based on sexual orientation and gender identity. Malta is the first EU Member State to enshrine non-discrimination based on gender identity in its constitution.
Recognition of foreign marriages

The Civil Unions Act voted on Monday will also ensure that same-sex couples married or in a partnership from another country will see their union recognised in Malta.

Sophie in ‘t Veld MEP, Vice-President of the LGBT Intergroup, reacted: “I congratulate Malta for this very positive step. It’s particularly important that fellow lawmakers ensured unions conducted abroad would be recognised on Maltese soil.”

“The European Commission will perhaps see that this issue is of crucial importance. In these five years, it breached its own promise to work towards the mutual recognition of the effects of civil status documents. Thankfully, some Member States stopped waiting.”

Read more: HERE

N.J. Same-Sex Marriage Now Legal on October 21

New Jersey Superior Court Judge Mary Jacobson’s ruling on September 27 would make New Jersey the 14th stateto allow same-sex couples to marry. Judge Jacobson directed that her ruling take effect on October 21 to allow the state enough time to put the ruling into place or to appeal it.

Christie Expected to Appeal Decision

Republican Governor Chris Christie favors civil unions which New Jersey has had in place since 2007. Under the state constitution, civil unions guarantees those same-sex couples the same rights and benefits of opposite- sex married couples.

Governor Christie opposes gay marriage and plans on appealing the head judge of Mercer County’s deccision – all the way to the Supreme Court. Christie wanted to have a referendum on gay marriage on Election Day. He argued that the matter was out of Jersy’s hands since the only pressing questions were over federal, not state benefits.

However, since the Democrat -contolled Legislature refused to allow the people to decide, the state Supreme Court will make the constitutional determination which could take months. In the interim, Jacobson’s order may be frozen while the appeal is pending.

State Assembly Speaker Sheila Oliver (D-Essex) and U.S. Senator Robert Menendez (D-N.J.) are both urging Christie NOT to appeal. The Executive Director of the American Civil Liberties Union of New Jersey Udi Ofer, stated that a coalition of groups would keep pressing state lawmakers for an override of Cristie’s gay-marriage veto last year.

The Law According to Jacobson

According to Jacobson, who granted an emergency request by six couples, said that gay couples would be denied federal benefits if the state kept allowing only civil unions. Jacobson modeled her decision on the U.S. Supreme Court’s ruling on United States v. Windsor.

This is the first state judicial ruling ordering same-sex marriage since the U.S. Supreme Court struck down the Defense of Marriage Act last June. The judge wrote in her 53-pageopinion that “same sex couples must be allowed to marry in order to obtain equal protection of the law under the New Jersey constitution. The ineligibility of same-sex couples for federal benefits is currently harming same-sex couples in New Jersey in a wide range of contexts. For example, civil union partners who are federal employees living in New Jersey are ineligible for marital rights with regard to the federal pension system, all civil union partners who are employees working for businesses to which the Family and Medical Leave applies may not rely on its statutory protections for spouses, and civil union couples may not access the federal tax benefits that married couples enjoy.”

New Jersey to Become 14th State Allowing Gay Marriage

If the ruling stands, New Jersey will be the fourteenth state to allow same-sex marriage. If not appealed, “October 2 should be a very exciting day for many loving couples. Justice has already been denied for far too long. Let’s clear the way for equal rights for all families.”

The unofficial practice by churches in using marriage to cure homosexuality

Hello readers,

I held on to this post until today International Day against Homophobia and Transphobia, IDAHOT and also Children’s month to highlight another challenge and related social issue out there for LGBT people here in Jamaica. In a follow up discussion on LOVE 101FM’s Morning Watch hosted by theologian Reverend Clinton Chisholm dealt with the issue of supposed heterosexual spouses of homosexual partners known or unbeknownst to them on the strength of a letter to the Gleaner’s editors on May 13, 2013, the poll question of the day dealt with the issue as well and some of the answers were as expected espousing sheer ignorance and indifference:

“It should never even by thought of by anyone”

“There is no way to stop a person from being a gay, that’s not the church business”

“That only shows that they have no knowledge of the dark kingdom, being gay is caused by a spirit”

“The only treatment for sin is repentance”

“.......... Homosexuality cannot be cured by marriage it is a demonic force of darkness............”

“ ........... a scriptural biblical mockery ................”

“Marriage does not fix that behaviour it can worsen it .................... "

Guests on the show were (anti gay) Psychologist Dr Leachim Semaj (formerly known as Michael James) who seems not to follow the DSM’s guidelines on homosexuality, Dr Reverend Neil Walker – a Guyanese living in the states who also runs a reparative outfit, the letter writer a Jamaican living in Miami Florida nurse Mrs. Debbie Thomas Brown who also runs a faith based outreach and advocacy site South Florida Connect Inc for other wives or women who have found themselves in marriages or relationships with a down low man or vice versa.

The discussion for the most part seems level but what bothered me was there were no guests representing the MSM side of the equation but I shouldn’t be surprised supposed discourse like this tends to be one sided although the letter’s author made her position quite clear very early in the exchange which to be fair to her was respected as her tone did not come across as homophobic although she did hint to a possible cure without saying it in so many words, although she also used the word “orientation” as opposed to “lifestyle” as done by other anti gay voices.

“..................... my letter to the editor was to bring awareness .............. to open a dialogue that we never seem to have that we should have had a long time ago ................ people misunderstood what I was trying to say ............... as the men who are gay they seem to understand that they can do that to hide their orientation and to make themselves look stronger and appear more effective .......”

“....... because of our culture in Jamaica that treat homosexuals in a bad way ......”

She continued that the church is not paying attention to what has been happening and women are being hurt. Dr Semaj weighed that deception is the issue as persons use that reality to cover up their behaviour. He mentioned the married but just for the record bit as well that exists in social circles. He said persons deliberately or consciously set out to destroy another person’s life as persons present themselves as one entity he then made the disease connection where he said many wives were at risk at HIV/AIDS, I found that a bit problematic as it tacitly presents the disease as a homosexual one even after all these years although we must take into account the high rates of infection in the MSM population. My other concern was innate bisexuality was never brought up in the exchange even though the cross infection was hinted to.

What if the partner was innately bisexual but due to fear or recrimination did not or could not disclose his same gender attraction as well?

Would that be deception altogether on his part or the withholding of information with disastrous consequences? Many persons would fear that during courtship that might be the end of the formation of the union and other more far reaching consequences with family and social standing.

Dr Semaj continued that in the development of the relationship all the cards must be dealt face up, that is easy for him to say as a psychologist tell that to the man who has a decision to make knowing our own homophobia and indeed biphobia from within the gay community as well as they are also seen as disease carriers and misguided or confused, there are many other layers that this exchange never even came close to addressing. The denial or ambivalence upon learning the information was briefly examined where Dr Semaj juxtaposed the issue of incest as well where blame has to go somewhere in that case the child in a down low case however self blame or hate may set in and the feeling of competing with a man for another man or the acceptance or tolerance of another woman as the extra marital partner works to find out it is a man is too much in some case, it also raises self esteem concerns for the woman involved. “The purpose of the defence mechanism is to preserve ego, preserve the self ...... you have to put the blame somewhere else ...........” after a while the whole thing starts to crumble. He said women require a lot of work to put the blame where it really should be and move on to healing.

The other guest Rev Dr Walker spoke to his familiarity with the down low phenomenon in the United States as he runs an outfit that address such issues, the rift also between mega churches versus small churches where pastors are sometimes labelled as mumblers came through as he made the point that it is easier for a down low man to camouflage himself in larger populated congregations that his smaller outfit. After declaring his heterosexuality (with full support from Dr Semaj – “heterosexual body, mind & spirit” other guests laughing) as it were he continued on the point of his referral system where churches send him clients where he addresses the females who suffer from the fallout of the secret coming to light. He highlighted the emotional rollercoaster and the devastation the women feel. Reverend Chisholm brought the down low clergy ambit in the mix where Dr Walker again touched on the mega church versus small church issue and Bishop Eddie Long’s recent troubles, he lamented that pastors such as Bishop Long consider themselves superstars as they command mega churches and are immune to the issue of the down low phenomenon, he criticised Bishop Long saying he had an opportunity to come clean instead resorting to the infamous five stone comment he made in response to the allegations of inappropriate behaviour with male members.

Nurse Thomas Brown brought her own experience to bear with her near miss marriage to a down low man and her emotional turmoil that led to her research and formation of her advocacy group. She lamented that local churches have this issue and it is the place where other down low men come and use the covertness to meet and hide their relationship. She pointed out clearly that a gay man cannot recover from his homosexuality through marriage, “ .......... that will never happen through marriage ......” one thing was clear that she was not one of those guests as is customary to be spoon fed points in the thrust to drive the point home. She continued that it was a public health issue but the figures she quoted seem unverifiable as she said about 56,000 MSM may be here and of down low men 50% of them are in relationships with heterosexual women, she never provided her source for this data that flowed easily of her tongue.

She continued on the point of social pressure and the noveau intelligentsia who marry into a heterosexual set up to become accepted or regularise themselves although she seemed to have overlooked the commensurate side to this in that many single men are known to be gay and do exist unperturbed by open hostility at the upper socio economic levels it is when one starts to descend the ladder that the caustic responses sometimes translating itself via violence get more pronounced. The aesthetics was briefly examined as well where she rightfully looked at effeminacy, masculinity and profiling and that most down low men bear no discerning signs. “They can hide in a mega church, they can hide in any church because they look as macho and as masculine as the next straight guy, you cannot look at them and tell our women don’t understand that because Jamaican women are accustomed to them being effeminate ... and they are not like that.......you will never see it if that’s what you are looking for.” She then promoted her website.

Nurse Brown concluded that for women who find themselves in this situation that there is nothing wrong with them and that they should try to move on as best as possible, she said “......... you cannot change him, you did not make him gay, don’t listen to ignorant people who are gonna ask you, he married you so he must not have been gay when he married you? He was, he just did a very good job of hiding it from you and everyone else, so don’t blame yourself for your spouse being gay, it has nothing to do with you and don’t ever think that you can change him because yes you cannot compete with a man .........” she went on that heterosexual men also complain about having lesbian wives meeting them in church in some instances but are afraid to expose them. Dr Semaj brought up the threesome piece or ménage-a-trois which locally for all intents and purposes I dare say is very popular just go to any strip club and see open erotic lesbian themed entertainment.

Reality coming to the fore here has brought some sense to an exchange about homosexuality it seems only when it hits very close to home that theologians or anti gay voices have to face such reality, as for the deception aspect of this coming out open and honest is still a major issue across the board and in intimate relationships be they gay, bisexual or heterosexual couples, disclosure is also a major complaint I have heard a lot over the years. The matter of advocacy here in Jamaica not matured (only in age it seems) and sophisticated enough cannot be overlooked as my expectations for a fifteen year old agency would be to address if by a tight referral system issues such as this but again another possible outcome of poor leadership and program development crops up again.

Peace and tolerance

H

Anglican bishops reject same-sex marriage ...... Church of England ask for "gay friendly bishop"

Like two poles miles apart literally in distance and in ideology in the same week, what different takes on the issue reflecting the cultural forwardness or backwardness if you will.

THE leadership of the Anglican Church in the West Indies has issued a firm rejection of same-sex marriage and has urged Caribbean Governments to resist attempts at compromise from outside the region.

In a draft provincial statement on same-sex unions issued yesterday, the House of Bishops and Standing Committee of the Church in the Province of the West Indies said that they were aware that Caribbean political leaders were being subjected to pressures from nations and institutions from outside the region.

"Frequently they are pressured to conform to the changes being undertaken in their redefinition of human sexuality and same-sex unions, under threat of economic sanctions and the loss of humanitarian aid," the bishops said.

"We urge our leaders of government and of civil society, as well as the people of our nations, to resist any attempt to compromise our cultural and religious principles regarding these matters.

"The dangling of a carrot of economic assistance to faltering economies should be seen for what it is worth and should be resisted by people and government alike," added the bishops, who are meeting in Barbados.

They said that during their deliberations they had taken note of trends within countries of the developed world and international forums in which these countries exercise a controlling interest in which matters related to human sexuality have been elevated to the level of human rights and are being promulgated as positions which must be accepted globally.

"Frequently, failure to conform by developing nations, like our own, results in the threat of various sanctions, including the withholding of economic aid," the bishops said.

"More specifically, there is a redefinition of gender to accommodate gay, lesbian and transgendered people, and the creation of a plurality of definitions which leaves the issue of gender to self-definition, thereby dismissing traditional definition of male and female," they argued.

"Additionally, there is the passage of legislation among a number of metropolitan nations whereby marriage is defined as a human right in which any two persons may be joined, inclusive of persons of the same sex."

As such, they said, the "marriage" of persons of the same sex is justified as a human right on the basis of marital equality with heterosexual unions.

The bishops said that while they acknowledge that there is a diversity of family patterns within the Caribbean, "these have been understood by our people to be between a man and a woman, whether defined in terms of the natural order of creation or on the basis of religious beliefs which see these grounded in the purpose of God".

They pointed to the Pastoral Statement from the House of Bishops of the Church of England in 2005 which defines marriage as "a creation ordinance, a gift of God in creation and a means of His grace. Marriage, defined as a faithful, committed, permanent and legally sanctioned relationship between a man and a woman, is central to the stability and health of human society. It continues to provide the best context for the raising of children".

The bishops also said that characteristic of our patterns of cohabitation and family life is the notion that such unions are based on a relationship between a man and a woman.

"The idea of such unions being constituted by persons of the same sex is, therefore, totally unacceptable on theological and cultural grounds," they insisted.

The bishops said that while they recognise that the church's mandate is informed by pastoral and doctrinal concerns and in drawing the attention of the faithful to the source and purpose of marriage, and in solemnising such unions, they accept that governments have the responsibility of providing the kind of legal framework for protecting, but not defining, this most basic social institution on which the stability of society and the socialisation of its members rest. They also appreciate that governments must protect the members of such unions against abuse and injustice.

However, they pointed out that the threat and use of economic sanctions are not new experiences to the region's peoples, "neither is the claim to a superior morality convincing for peoples who have known the experience of chattel slavery in our past.

"While claiming to invoke human rights as the basis for such imposition, we submit that the same principle must allow us the right to affirm our cultural and religious convictions regarding our definitions of that most basic of social institutions — marriage."

The Church of England matter however - The Diocese of Manchester has instructed the official panel appointing its new bishop to select someone who can establish “positive relationships” with gay Anglicans and non-worshippers.

The panel, which met on Friday, was told that the successor to the Rt Rev Nigel McCulloch, who retired earlier this year, should build on “significant engagement” with “lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender (LGBT) communities” in Manchester.

The move comes amid growing tensions within the Church over its attitude to gay worshippers and clergy.

Such a public endorsement of working with gay Anglicans by a major diocese will cheer liberals but be seen by traditionalists as a further erosion of their views.

Manchester’s move comes months after the Church dropped its prohibition on clergy in civil partnerships becoming bishops

American Academy of Pediatrics Supports Gay Marriage ..... says it is good for kids

Concludes Same-Sex Marriage As Good For Kids

The American Academy of Pediatrics, representing 60,000 pediatricians and other pediatric specialists, “supports pediatricians advocating for public policies that help all children and their parents, regardless of sexual orientation, build and maintain strong, stable, and healthy families that are able to meet the needs of their children.”

The AAP’s position comes from the perspective of what is best for the children’s well-being: these factors include potentially better access to health insurance, as well as the legal rights for the children and families by marriage, such as parental visitation and custody in case of divorce. There are estimated to be three million lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender parents in the United States, according to the Family Equality Council.

Present and Past Research

The AAP policy statement, “Promoting the Well-Being of Children Whose Parents Are Gay or Lesbian,” and an accompanying technical report will be published in the April 2013 Pediatrics(published online March 21). The report examines some thirty years of research on the well-being of children raised by gay parents and concludes there is no evidence to suggest children are worse off compared with those with heterosexual parents. 

 The policy statement and accompanying technical report adds recommendations in support of civil marriage for same-gender couples, adoption by single parents, co-parents or second parents regardless of sexual orientation and foster care placement regardless of sexual orientation. In a previous 2002 policy statement and reaffirmed in 2012, the AAP supported second-parent adoption by partners of the same sex as a way to protect children’s right to maintain relationships with both parents, financial security, and eligibility for health benefits.

What the Co-Authors of the Policy Statement Say:

According to Ellen Perrin, M.D., a pediatric professor at the Floating Hospital for Children at Tufts Medical Center in Boston, and co-author of the policy statement, there may also be emotional benefits for kids from the stability that comes from marriage. “children with gay parents tend to realize their family is different than others and express relief when their parents are able to get married. If a child has two loving and capable parents who choose to create a permanent bond, it’s in the best interest of their children that legal institutions allow them to do so.”

Benjamin Siegel, MD, chair of the AAP Committee on Psychosocial Aspects of Child and Family Health, and co-author of the statement, remarked that “children thrive in families that provide permanent security, and the way we do that is through marriage. The AAP believes there should be equal opportunity for every couple to access the economic stability and federal supports provided to married couples to raise children.”

What is Not Healthy for the Children

The Policy statement says that many factors confer risk to children’s healthy development and adult outcomes, such as poverty, parental depression, parental substance abuse, divorce, and domestic violence. But the sexual orientation of their parents is not among them.” Many studies point to the normal development of children of same-gender couples when the child is wanted, the parents have a commitment to shared parenting, and the parents have strong social and economic support.

additional reading:

Promoting the Well-Being of Children Whose Parents Are Gay or Lesbian

1. COMMITTEE ON PSYCHOSOCIAL ASPECTS OF CHILD AND FAMILY HEALTH

ABSTRACT

To promote optimal health and well-being of all children, the American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP) supports access for all children to (1) civil marriage rights for their parents and (2) willing and capable foster and adoptive parents, regardless of the parents’ sexual orientation. The AAP has always been an advocate for, and has developed policies to support, the optimal physical, mental, and social health and well-being of all infants, children, adolescents, and young adults. In so doing, the AAP has supported families in all their diversity, because the family has always been the basic social unit in which children develop the supporting and nurturing relationships with adults that they need to thrive. Children may be born to, adopted by, or cared for temporarily by married couples, nonmarried couples, single parents, grandparents, or legal guardians, and any of these may be heterosexual, gay or lesbian, or of another orientation. Children need secure and enduring relationships with committed and nurturing adults to enhance their life experiences for optimal social-emotional and cognitive development. Scientific evidence affirms that children have similar developmental and emotional needs and receive similar parenting whether they are raised by parents of the same or different genders. If a child has 2 living and capable parents who choose to create a permanent bond by way of civil marriage, it is in the best interests of their child(ren) that legal and social institutions allow and support them to do so, irrespective of their sexual orientation. If 2 parents are not available to the child, adoption or foster parenting remain acceptable options to provide a loving home for a child and should be available without regard to the sexual orientation of the parent(s).

Pope/Catholic Church backlash after his anti gay comments continue

So the backlash is on in earnest as it has since the news first came earlier this year that the Catholic Church will be opposing countries such as the United States and Europe who have opened the gates for gay marriage rights and indeed LGBT rights on a whole. 

Pink News UK and indeed several other platforms have been reporting in rapid succession the actions taken by LGBT activists and Catholics alike who are opposed to the moves by the Vatican on this vexed issue for many who just want to live their lives in the open with a family structure and why not, maybe to alleviate some of the world's problems we could get on with the business of granting such rights and state benefits as those are what the real issues are about.

Dutch Catholics seek to "deregister" from the Church

According to the founder of a Dutch website which aims to offer information to those looking to leave the Catholic church, thousands of Catholics have been researching how to do so.

Tom Roes, who operates a website containing the documents required for members of the Catholic church to “deregister” themselves, said the number of visitors to the site went from around 10 a day to over 10,000, reported the Irish Times.

“Of course it’s not possible to be ‘de-baptised’ because a baptism is an event, but this way people can unsubscribe or deregister themselves as Catholics,” Mr Roes said.

He went on to say that he had no way of knowing how many people actually went on to leave the church after visiting his site,ontdopen.nl.

Out of the population of the Netherlands, around 28% is Catholic, while roughly 44% is not religious. Reports suggest that 18% of the population is Protestant.

In his ‘World Day of Peace’ remarks last week, the Pope said: “There is also a need to acknowledge and promote the natural structure of marriage as the union of a man and a woman in the face of attempts to make it juridically equivalent to radically different types of union.
“Such attempts actually harm and help to destabilise marriage, obscuring its specific nature and its indispensable role in society”, the Pope told worshippers.

Pope Benedict XVI was also pictured giving a blessing to Rebecca Kadaga, the Speaker of the Ugandan Parliament, who has promised to pass the country’s notorious Anti-Homosexuality Bill as a “Christmas gift”.

On 26 December, a petition started to push Barack Obama to label to the Roman Catholic Church a “hate group”, following a similar petition to label the Westboro Baptist Church the same.

The petition cites comments made by the Pope at Christmas where he said that gay people are manipulating their sexual orientation to alter god-given nature, and that they ”deny their nature”, which is “given to them by their bodily identity.”

The Netherlands was the first country to legalise equal marriage, back in 2001, and official statistics report that, by the end of 2010, 14,813 gay couples were married in the country,

Back in October, the country’s government began looking into changing the law to take into account its 25,000 LGBT families, and issues faced by step-parents or sperm donors

As for the petition 

With more than 77 million registered members, the Catholic Church is the largest single denomination in the United States of America and it is highly unlikely that the president would wish to alienate such a large number of people. Released less than 24 hours ago, it has failed to gain any signatures and is currently not visible on the main White House petitions website.

In is ‘World Day of Peace’ remarks last week, the Pope said: “There is also a need to acknowledge and promote the natural structure of marriage as the union of a man and a woman in the face of attempts to make it juridically equivalent to radically different types of union.
“Such attempts actually harm and help to destabilise marriage, obscuring its specific nature and its indispensable role in society”, the Pope told worshipers.

Pope Benedict XVI was also pictured giving a blessing to Rebecca Kadaga, the Speaker of the Ugandan Parliament, who has promised to pass the country’s notorious Anti-Homosexuality Bill as a “Christmas gift”.

The petition can be found here.

On December 17 I posted on Gay Jamaica Watch the protest at the Vatican by LGBT representatives who vehemently opposed the Pope gay marriage slight as it was described then, 

A group of demonstrators protesting against the Roman Catholic Church's stance on homosexual marriage tried to enter St Peter's Square in the Vatican on Sunday as Pope Benedict was giving his weekly address to pilgrims.

The protesters - who were kept out of the square by police - were upset over a speech by the pontiff on Friday in which he appeared to include efforts to legalize gay marriage among the threats to peace in the world.

"We find intolerable the assertion that gay unions are dangerous to the world. Weapons are much more dangerous," Gianfranco Mascia, 52, an activist who organized the protest told Reuters. "No to arms, yes to rights for everyone,"

The group of about 15 people held up signs reading "Gay unions don't harm peace, weapons do" in various languages.

In another previous post on GLBTQJAMAICA in response to a Gleaner letter entitled: Same-Sex Marriage A Misnomer, Fraud (Gleaner Letter) I lamented that at no point did anyone in the struggle locally, JFLAG or otherwise have asked for gay marriage rights or rights similar to those heterosexual couples get after tying the knot or related state recognition when we can't even get passed privacy and consensual sex matters. 

check out the latest figures from the Statistical Institute 

Local groups such as the Lawyers' Christian Fellowship, Jamaica Coalition for a Healthy Society (founder imaged below) and Reverend Al Miller all repeatedly suggest marriage will be poison to humanity.

Certainly we are nowhere near the end of this debate and it seems homosexuality is to become the dividing issue between believers and non believers alike where as far as I see it the existence of God is not my problem but how the word has been reinterpreted for varying agendas.

Peace and tolerance

H

Mexico's supreme court removes Oaxaca Civil Code Article 143 ..... marriage is now "between two people"

The Mexican Supreme Court today made a unanimous ruling which could signal the beginning of equal marriage rights across the entire country.

The ruling by the court has not been officially announced yet, however the advocates of equal marriage who started the case, have said that this decision “opens the door to equal marriage in the whole country”, reports After Marriage Blog.

The Supreme Court ruled in favour of three couples wishing to marry in the southern Mexican state of Oaxaca.

The court ruled that the ban on same-sex marriage is discriminatory, and that it is unconstitutional. The decision was partly based on a ruling from February, in which the Inter-American Court of Human Rights decided that governments couldn’t discriminated on the basis of sexual orientation.

The court already ruled in 2010, that same-sex marriages performed in Mexico City, where equal marriage is already legal, would be recognised throughout the country.

Today’s ruling could set a precent which would see the removal of any remaining equal marriage bans, in other states.

This decison by the Supreme Court does not mean an immediate end to some limitations of the definiton of marriage as one man and one woman, as the court does not have the power to do so, however Alex Alí Méndez Díaz, the lawyer who brought the case, said it represented the beginning of the end for equal marriage bans.

Today’s ruling could also have international repercussions, as courts in other Latin American countries which recognise the Inter-American Accord on Human Rights could follow this precedent. Not only that, but the Inter-American Court could be more likely to recognise universal marriage rights.

Three couples in Chile have already begun a case to remove the ban on equal marriage there.

Almost 400 same-sex couples married in Mexico within the first six months of the law permitting same-sex marriage coming into effect. The law also allowed gay couples to adopt.

The The SCJN removed Oaxaca Civil Code Article 143 which stated that marriage is only between a man and a woman.

The Supreme Court of Justice of the Nation ( SCJN) eliminated Oaxaca Civil Code Article 143 which stated that marriage is only between a man and a woman.

Beginning today, is replaced with the Court ruling, involving marriages "between two people", so it does not matter if they are of different sexes or the same.

So that there is case law needed five resolutions in the same direction, so the three injunctions granted this afternoon, missing only two cases that are approved without interruption.

By now the three theses cases are isolated, but feel the precedent for any partner country for protection in order to be recognized as a marriage.

The case could be a support for cases that couples are granted, but does not imply that it should based on approved, but up to the judge to analyze each case.

The SCJN attracted three shelters on marriage between same sex in Oaxaca. The three couples went to the registry office in Oaxaca to get married, but the refusal of the authorities, took refuge.

In amparos 457/2012, 567/2012 and 581/2012 , alleging the unconstitutionality of discrimination of Article 143 of the Civil Code of Oaxaca and the failure to protect homo families.

The injunction was resolved in favor unanimously by the Court was the 581/2012, led by Minister Arturo Zaldivar.

In 2011, a federal judge granted an injunction Oaxacan capital to a couple of women who tried to legalize their union before the civil registrar of the city.

Since August 2011, the concerned submitted their application to the first Administrative Office of Vital Records downtown Oaxaca, but were rejected on the grounds that e l Article 143 defines marriage as a union between one man and one woman.

Lizeth and Montserrat promoted an injunction against the decision of the court Oaxaca, arguing that Article 143 of the Civil Code of Oaxaca violates their fundamental rights to equality and non-discrimination.

The project aimed Minister Arturo Zaldivar sort, for the first time a state government to recognize and register the marriage between two people of the same sex.

The project was approved by three of the five members of the First Chamber. Was approved unanimously.

All civil codes allow only heterosexual marriage registration, unless the City, because in August 2010 the Supreme Court declared constitutional marriage between same sex in this capital.

However, with today's resolution of the Court opens the door to ensure that marriage is equal throughout Mexico.

also see: 

The US Supreme Court's Four Most Likely Moves On Gay/Lesbian Couples' Marriage Rights .............

US Supreme Court Wait Continues For Same-Sex Couples

Marriage equality proponent Kat McGuckin of Oaklyn, New Jersey, holds a gay marriage pride flag while standing in front of the Supreme Court, Nov. 30, 2012.
Image by Chip Somodevilla / Getty Images

On Monday, the Supreme Court again gave no word on the status of several cases addressing the rights of gay and lesbian couples. Next news could come Friday.
WASHINGTON — After a weekend of waiting, the Supreme Court issued no word Monday morning on the status of several cases involving same-sex couples' marriage rights. The justices are scheduled to reconsider the cases at their next conference, Dec. 7.

No new cases were granted in an order list issued on Monday morning, including the cases challenging the Defense of Marriage Act and California's Proposition 8. None of the cases' petitions were denied by the court either, meaning they remain before the justices.

The justices had been slated to consider 10 petitions on Nov. 30 asking the court to review various cases challenging DOMA, Proposition 8, and an Arizona law that would rescind domestic partner benefits to state employees. Although it is possible the cases were considered at that conference, the dockets for the petitions were updated Monday morning to state that the justices will consider them at their Dec. 7 conference.

The justices could continue to consider the petitions beyond the Dec. 7 conference; however, that would mean a delay of nearly a month for any likely decision on them, as the next conference after that is not scheduled to take place until the new year, on Jan. 4.

The Proposition 8 Case Supreme Court Docket:

thanks to Chris from Buzzfeed for this again the buzz has been providing excellent details on this development. 

Some surmise that they are afraid that it would end up as a 5-4 decision to support full equality for all. So they are using the typical route of delay, delay, delay. Maine is expected to commence their gay marriages on December 29th while in Nevada a Federal judge says the state can ban same sex marriage, in the judgement handed down Judge Robert C. Jones, a George W. Bush appointee, found that the U.S. Constitution's guarantee of equal protection of the laws does not "[prohibit] the People of the State of Nevada from maintaining statutes that reserve the institution of civil marriage to one-man–one-woman relationships."

Jones ruled that a prior Supreme Court precedent — a 1972 case, Baker v. Nelson, that denied a same-sex couple's marriage claim as lacking any "substantial federal question" — controlled his decision. Even if not, he ruled that the "exclusion of same-sex couples from the institution of civil marriage" was constitutional "[b]ecause the maintenance of the traditional institution of civil marriage as between one man and one woman is a legitimate state interest."

In reaching his decision, Jones found that a classification like Nevada's marriage law, which distinguishes between heterosexual and homosexual people (his analysis did not address bisexuality), should not be viewed with additional scrutiny, as are laws that distinguish based on sex or race. The analysis, made as part of challenges claiming a violation of the Constitution's equal protection guarantees, asks whether the group claiming discrimination under the law has experienced a history of discrimination and continues to face levels of political powerlessness.

In these areas, Jones found — contrary to a recent decision by the Second Circuit Court of Appeals — that gay and lesbian people did not exhibit the characteristics necessary for additional protection.

"Homosexuals have not historically been denied the right to vote, the right to serve on juries, or the right to own property," he wrote, in dismissing claims of a history of discrimination. Noting recent ballot successes on marriage issues, Jones wrote, "It simply cannot be seriously maintained, in light of these and other recent democratic victories, that homosexuals do not have the ability to protect themselves from discrimination through democratic processes such that extraordinary protection from majoritarian processes is appropriate."

Once Jones decided that "rational basis," the lowest type of scrutiny, would be applied to Nevada's prohibition on allowing same-sex couples to marry, he quickly found several reasons for upholding the differential treatment.

"The protection of the traditional institution of marriage, which is a conceivable basis for the distinction drawn in this case, is a legitimate state interest," he began, adding that if the state recognized same-sex couples' marriages, "it is conceivable that a meaningful percentage of heterosexual persons would cease to value the civil institution as highly as they previously had and hence enter into it less frequently ... because they no longer wish to be associated with the civil institution as redefined."

More as the developments unfold, these are interesting times even as our local lawmakers' delay of the suggested buggery review by Prime Minister Portia Simpson Miller (then in opposition) in the last election debate however opposition spokesman on Justice Delroy Chuck today lamented that there was so much free time in the houses as there are no major law altering bills on the order paper as legislators spend little time doing nothing much these days which seems to put a cloud over the PNP's delay in reviewing the problematic law. 

Lest we also not forget that the delay was hinted to by a young first time member of parliament Damion Crawford who at one point jeered at the suggestion by his boss at a function earlier this year:

originally aired on CVM TV February

Also the fear by anti buggery/gay advocates for the futuristic gay marriage rights that they see as coming on the heels of a buggery review they also suggest there will be prosecution eventually for persons who remotely speak out against any same sex related matter. I say highly unlikely.

Other evidence of the fear coming from sections the religious movement came from the Jamaica Coalition for a Healthy society, JCHS where instead of really doing things to foster a healthy and inclusive nation it pays hundreds of thousands for full paged ads in newspapers yet thousands literally are homeless and hungry on our streets. Here is an ad that came out after dancehall/reggae artist made a mockery of our 50th celebrations by hitting out at gay marriage (a right never asked for in Jamaica)

Where are the priorities here? well that may change one day when we all get some sense in our heads. 

also see from Gay Jamaica Watch: The US Supreme Court's Four Most Likely Moves On Gay/Lesbian Couples' Marriage Rights .............

Peace and tolerance

H

also see the following for some more background on the other GLBTQJA blogs: 

MoBay Church Fraternity Says No To Buggery Review 

Vatican vows to fight gay marriage after gains made on sister blog GLBTQ Jamaica

Group braces for costly fight against gays

Gay Parenting (a view on the ground) (an oldie)

Gleaner - Prime Minister Golding: No to same-sex unions

No Same Sex Marriage says Prime Minister in Charter of rights  (Bruce Golding)

2008 - Brazil's President backs same-sex unions

Same-Sex Marriage A Misnomer, Fraud (Gleaner Letter) and my response to it.

CHURCH ANGRY, GAYS HAPPY PNP ON COLLISION COURSE WITH CHRISTIANS ………………. BUT SOME OF US ARE NOT IMPRESSED

BUGGERY LAW BACKLASH – BLAIR: THE CHURCH HAS BEEN SLEEPING – BLAIR WARNS REVIEW COULD LEAD TO SAME-SEX MARRIAGES

NOT READY FOR GAYS ……. GAY MARRIAGE SMOKE SCREEN REINTRODUCED ……………. POLITICAL DODGING

REV AL MILLER SAYS GAY LOBBY IS USING THE GUISE OF TOLERANCE TO GET THE NATION TO ACCEPT THE “GAY LIFESTYLE” ON SEPTEMBER 11, 2011

Jamaican Lesbians wed in Thailand

Bashy wedding in Thailand leaves local model happy

Adrian Frater, News Editor The Gleaner

Western Bureau: As a child, Tracey Dawkins often struggled with her identity.

She knew she was a girl but unlike her peers, who began to show interest in boys in their teenage years, she was attracted to girls.

After leaving Jamaica more than a decade ago and experiencing life in countries such as St Martin and Thailand, the former Miss Jamaica World contestant, who had a successful modelling career locally, shed her Christian upbringing and fully embraced the lesbian lifestyle.
Last week, the free-spirited Dawkins, who is now a successful fashion model in Thailand, married her lesbian lover, Lisa, also a Caribbean national, in what she described as "an experience laced in love".

"I have never been happier in my life," said Dawkins, who once hosted a popular entertainment programme on a community television station in her Montego Bay, St James, hometown.

"As a child, I wanted to travel, fall in love and get married to the right girl, and that is exactly what has happened."

When she was reminded that the vast majority of Jamaicans would be offended by her "lesbian nuptial", Dawkins says most Jamaicans are hypocritical as the country is being ripped apart by crime and violence yet, "Jamaicans are behaving like homosexuality is the only sin".

"I grew up in the Church and at the tender age of 13, I was molested by a deacon," alleged Dawkins, a graduate of a prominent high school in St James.

"Today, men are raping eight-year-olds in Jamaica … people are being murdered daily and yet all the people seem to be concerned about is beating and humiliating people with same-sex lifestyles," declared Dawkins.

"I now live in Thailand, a Buddist country of 70 million people," continued Dawkins.

"Nobody cares about your sexual orientation; you are judged by your contribution to the development of the country and guess what? The crime rate here is almost zero ... the people here have their priorities right."

forced to hide sexuality

In reflecting on her teenage years in Jamaica, the outspoken Dawkins, who appeared in several music videos and radio and television commercials in the 1990s, said she was forced to establish relationships with men to hide her sexuality.

"I used to talk to boys, I even had quite a steady boyfriend at one time," said Dawkins.

"However, on the side, I had a few affairs with girls, which I kept a secret."

After leaving Jamaica for St Martin in the 1990s before moving on to Thailand, the Arianox Business & Technology College graduate said she felt at home in both countries as the people there exhibit the kind of tolerance to lesbianism which would spark hostility in Jamaica.

"Except for my mother, who only seems to have a problem with me being a lesbian when I am in Jamaica, I don't think anybody close to me is either surprised or disappointed with the life I have chosen," said Dawkins.

"Basically, I don't care how people feel … I am happy and that is what is important to me."

Despite being in a same-sex relationship, Dawkins is harbouring thoughts of one day mothering children of her own.
According to her, her partner is quite comfortable with the idea.

"We are thinking of using a sperm bank," said Dawkins.

"The good thing about that is we will get a chance to select the race of the child I want … also (we get to) choose a person with above-average intelligence so that we have smart children."

In looking back on her wedding, which took place on a luxury boat with all the trappings of a traditional wedding, Dawkins said it was an unforgettable experience, which has left her bubbling with delight.

"It was a beautiful experience … the wedding of my dreams. This was what I was dreaming of as a child in Jamaica but could not say it out because of the way things are in Jamaica."

no religion

Unlike her childhood days when the fear of God and God's judgement held her back, Dawkins has not only shed Christianity but she has refused to embraced any other religion.

"God … I am no longer a believer … I am atheist and I am comfortable with it," said Dawkins who, in addition to being an established fashion model, is appearing in numerous television commercials and fashion magazines in Asia.

"Unlike the Christians, who live to die and go to heaven, I live because I have life. That is more fulfilling based on my personal experiences."

Quizzed about whether or not she would ever come back to live in Jamaica, Dawkins readily accepts that the country is one of the most beautiful places on earth, however, she does not believe Jamaica is yet ready for what she is bringing to the table.

"I love Jamaica and I still have friends there," said Dawkins, whose marriage is legal in Europe and Asia. "I will come back to Jamaica one day but right now, Jamaica is not ready for me."

ENDS

And she is right (in the last line of the article) as the Jamaica Coalition for a Healthy Society has anything to say about it and they have been saying and doing and spending alot recently against projected gay marriage agitations locally supposedly on the heels of a buggery review and or repeal for that matter. 

Here was one of the three ads thus far they have taken out full paged in local newspapers and that is not a cheap venture yet thousands are on the our streets hungry, naked and homeless, why not for a real healthy society assist those in need and who are visible for ALL to see? instead they fear the unknown. That particular ad was placed on the heels of the out of turn comments made by a secular dancehall/reggae and rastafarian artist Tony Rebel, ideological hypocrisy? 

Here is one of their members and former President of the Lawyers' Christian Fellowship in a recent documentary, the clips were excerpted and joined together to make the point of the fear by this JCHS group. Take note of the deliberate use of "lifestyle" to describe homosexuality ......... orientation is nowhere in the minds of these holy folk.

By the way, their very tag line is blatantly espousing theocracy: "Working for a Jamaican society in which Judeo-Christian values nourish and enrich the social, spiritual, physical, emotional and mental health of all citizens."

You be the judge.

Peace and tolerance

H