[note] Equal rights in perspective.

I'll bet the rotated map left you feeling more disoriented than the fact we still live in a world where people are systematically killed for being gay.

Learn more about international human rights at International Gay and Lesbian Human Rights Commission.

(link to original map)

(link to wikipedia societal attitudes toward homosexuality)

[news] Arkansas Court Allows Gay Adoption, For Now

I know we've been quiet lately, but it's summer and when the sun comes out in Michigan the last place you want to be is in front of a computer. But, this was interesting, so I came inside to post it.

Arkansas cannot bar gay men and lesbians from becoming foster parents because there is no link between their sexual orientation and a child's well-being, the State Supreme Court ruled Thursday.

On a vote of 7 to 0, the justices agreed with a lower court judge that the state's Child Welfare Agency Review Board, which adopted the ban in 1999, had improperly tried to regulate public morality and had violated the separation of powers between the executive branch and the General Assembly, Arkansas's legislature.

Now, the outcome of a case is not nearly as important as the reasoning of the case. You can win cases for all the wrong reasons. So, here's the opinion (pdf). And here's a quick summary of the case.

The Arkansas Department of Human Services and Child Welfare Agency Review Board is an administrative body created by the state legislature for the purpose of "promulgat[ing] rules and regulations that: [] promote the health, safety, and welfare of children[.]" That means it can only do things that promote the welfare of children--it cannot do things to hurt children (like set them on fire) and it cannot do things unrelated to the welfare of children (like make a peanut butter and jelly sandwich).

The Board stipulated to a few facts that certainly didn't help their case.

The defendants are not aware of any child whose health, safety, and/or welfare has been endangered by the fact that such child’s foster parent, or other household member, was "homosexual", as defined (Stipulated Facts, #28).

The State has no statistics indicating that gays are more prone to violence than heterosexuals or that gay households are more unhealthy than heterosexual households (Stipulated Facts, #30).

Based on its foster care statistics the defendants do not know of any reason that lesbians and gay men would be unsuitable to be foster parents (Stipulated Facts #31).

The lower court went on to find a whole slew of facts that basically boil down to: kids with gay parents are statistically no more screwed up than kids with straight parents.

Next came the members of the Board, who provided great testimony, like Robin Woodruff, who said: (1) same-sex relationships are wrong; (2) homosexual behavior is a sin; (3) homosexuality violates her biblical convictions; (4) adults who have same-sex orientation should remain celibate; and (4) she would not be a proponent of her children spending time with openly gay couples.

So there was no evidence that kids with gay parents do worse than kids with straight parents, and lots of evidence that the Board didn't like gay people. Conclusion: prohibiting gay people from adopting had nothing to do with child welfare and everything to do with how icky the Board thought they were. It's like they made a peanut butter and jelly sandwich and threw it at gays. They can't do that.

This wouldn't prevent the legislature from coming back and allowing them to do it, though. Only one justice, in concurrence, said that treating gay folks differently violated Equal Protection (pointing to Lawrence, which says you can't treat people differently just because you think they're icky). That means if the legislature gave the Board the mandate to bar gay folks from adopting, it'd presumably be legal again.

[note] Gay Pride Month

It's gay pride month here in Michigan (maybe even around the world, but I wouldn't know because I'm not on the right mailing lists), and this flag is one of the only two public displays I've seen. The other, which I'll get a picture of later, is a street-corner utility box painted rainbow with a small white note on each face, politely asking people not to post flyers on it because it is art.

My own feelings on public art aside (or at least parenthetical: I think public art should engage public interaction, and putting signs limiting such response is lame), I give kudos to the one person in Ann Arbor who decided to privately celebrate Gay Pride Month in a publicly visible way.

I'm sad to report that the salon below his window and his landlord do not share my support.

Yesterday I got a knock on my door from someone who works at the "New Age" Salon, a hair salon whose clients are predominately Asian. The woman told me that her customers were complaining about the flag despite her telling them that it was from my apartment. She asked if I would remove the flag. I left it up. The rainbow flag is supposed to be representative of diversity which I thought the Asian people who frequent the New Age Salon would appreciate. But as we know it is usually minorities who are most critical or other minorities so this is not all that surprising.

Today I received an email from my landlord telling me that I had violated a clause on my lease which states that "advertisements, banners,or signs; including political endorsements, are prohibited from being displayed such that they are visible from the exterior of the premises."

I replied to the email telling them that I will remove the flag but I am particularly drawn to this part in the lease, "Some things your landlord writes in the lease or says to you may not be correct representations of you rights ... If you think that a clause in your lease or something your landlord says to you is unfair, you may contact your lawyer."

(link to grooveadam's post)

He's contacted the university's legal services.

Around the corner is the Ann Arbor-infamous NYPD Pizza, a common stopping point for many (especially the queer boys on Friday night) between the bars and home, that found itself under attack first from queers for homophobic statements allegedly made by an employee, and then from one uber-religious guy (link to copy of his letter) for putting up a rainbow sticker to apologize.

What is it about this corner? It's like the Gettysburg of gay rights.

[news] Watch the "Debates"

I guess they're debates.

(link to cspan)

[plug] Looking for LGBTQ to Interview About Queer TV Shows

Can't get enough of gay characters on TV? Already seen too much?

A UM Communications grad. student is interviewing LGBTQ TV viewers about attitudes and opinions of television visibility, including scripted ensemble shows like Queer as Folk, The L Word, and Noah's Arc.

If you are interested in being interviewed or have questions about the project, please email Catherine.

[event] Summer Starter Outlaw Meet and Greet

Outlaws (UMLS's LGBT student association), the 4Ls (still in town, tackling Barbri), and I (Robert) warmly welcome you to Ann Arbor (which was warm enough already). As part of that welcoming, we'd like to invite you to join us, this Saturday at Leopold Bros. (see below for details), to meet and to greet with other GLBT law folks, our friends, and our families.

We look forward to meeting you.

The Plan.
Saturday, June 6th.
9:40pm -- meet on the Reading Room Steps, head to Leopold Bros around 10:00.

Alternatively, if you're running late...
Same day -- Go right to Leopold Bros.
529 S. Main St. (map)

Email me if you have questions.