NewsWrap for the week ending February 14, 2004 (As broadcast on This Way Out program #829, distributed 2-16-04) [Written by Cindy Friedman, with thanks to Graham Underhill, Fenceberry, Rex Wockner, and Greg Gordon] Anchored this week by Cindy Friedman and Christopher Gaal The Legislative Assembly of the Australian Capital Territory this week passed its Labor Government's bills amending more than 2 dozen territorial laws towards equal treatment of gays and lesbians and especially same-gender couples. An omnibus measure passed almost a year ago already amended more than 3 dozen other territorial laws including several responding to transgender issues. The latest move eliminates the so-called "homosexual panic" defense, which has sometimes served to reduce charges from murder to manslaughter in homicides where the killer claimed to be reacting to a homosexual advance by the victim. It also makes the ACT Australia's third region to criminalize vilification based on sexual orientation or HIV/AIDS status. Same-gender partners gain status including standing to claim workers compensation for on-the-job injuries, and recognition under territorial law that they lack under Australian federal law. But the most controversial element, dominating both debate and media coverage, was opening adoptions to same-gender couples. The ACT's Parentage Bill is believed to be the first in the nation to allow gay and lesbian couples to adopt children not related to them. So-called "stranger" adoptions are rare in Australia, with couples seeking children outnumbering children needing homes. Of course all actual adoption decisions are made on a case-by-case basis in the courts. But Christian conservatives staged three major rallies attended by hundreds of people to protest the move, and Liberal Party Assembly members vigorously opposed it, labeling it "social engineering". Even Australia's Liberal Party Prime Minister John Howard restated his personal opposition, telling reporters that although he "doesn't seek to discriminate against" gays and lesbians, he believes "that gay adoption goes against what the community regards as the traditional family formation and that is a mother and father." He said, "I don't support gay adoption and I regret attempts to achieve it in different parts of Australia. I don't believe changes of this nature will strengthen family life." Ultimately the ACT bill passed 11-to-6, with 3 independents joining the Democrats, Greens and Labor in support. The ACT's gays and lesbians gain equality in other aspects of parenting as well. Lesbian partners of biological mothers can be named as parents on birth certificates whether the child was conceived by medical or private artificial insemination or through intercourse. The territory has some provisions for legal surrogacy agreements, and same-gender couples now have equal access to them. The Australian Capital Territory and Italy are heading in opposite directions on parenting issues, as Italy's Chamber of Deputies has approved harsh new restrictions on assisted reproduction that explicitly exclude lesbians and gays. The Italian Senate had already OK'd the bill before the lower house voted for it by a 10% margin this week, but it still needs President Carlo Azeglio Ciampi's signature to become law. Physicians would be punished with fines and license suspensions for violating the new rules, which represent the nation's first-ever regulations for assisted reproduction. Artificial insemination would be available exclusively to heterosexually married or partnered women, and even for them artificial insemination will be allowed only with sperm from their husbands -- and only if those women are of child-bearing age and their husbands are still alive. Women requiring in vitro fertilization will be allowed only 3 embryos which must be implanted at the same time. Surrogacy and cloning will be entirely banned. Slovakia's cabinet this week approved a bill prohibiting discrimination, including bias based on sexual orientation. Christian Democrats opposed the m ove, but the rest of the multi-party ruling coalition outvoted them. The measure is designed to bring national civil rights protections into line with the standards of the European Union, which Slovakia hopes to join -- yet its fate in the parliament is not clear. The Slovak Government's proposal exempts religious groups from employing gays and lesbians, and does not deal with issues of adoption or legal recognition of same-gender couples. The European Court of Human Rights this week ordered compensation paid to a man prosecuted under an unequal age of consent law, even though he was acquitted. The British man known in court papers as "BB" was prosecuted in 1998 for having sex with a 16-year-old male, at a time when the age of consent was 16 for heterosexual acts but 18 for homosexual acts. The court agreed with "BB" that this constituted prohibited discrimination, and ordered Britain to pay him 7,000 Euros to compensate for his suffering for having been prosecuted. The ruling added that the compensation would have been higher had he been convicted. Britain has since equalized the age of consent at 16, but the nation now faces the prospect of more retroactive compensation claims from other men previously prosecuted. Britain's House of Lords this week approved the Government's sweeping Gender Recognition Bill by a nearly 3-to-1 margin. It will return to the House of Commons next, but its enactment is now virtually assured and it's expected to go into effect in the coming year. It will allow transsexuals to revise their birth certificates to reflect their self-identified gender and to marry someone of the opposite gender. Churches can refuse to perform those ceremonies, but a Tory move to allow discrimination against transsexuals for other "religious activities or ceremonies" was narrowly defeated. U.K. Anglicans were also talking about marriage this week at the Church of England's General Synod meeting. There was open debate on the key questions as to whether the church should bless same-gender couples and whether openly partnered gays and lesbians should be ordained. Current policy rejects both, as established for the Church of England in 1991 and later overwhelmingly affirmed by a meeting of all the bishops of the worldwide Anglican Communion. The basis for this week's discussion was a report called "Some Issues in Human Sexuality," which was developed by a group of bishops without any input from open gays or lesbians. The General Synod endorsed the report, a move which was widely viewed as opening the door to future union ceremonies for same-gender couples -- particularly since the Synod also adopted a resolution supporting legal recognition of unmarried couples. Last year controversy forced openly gay but avowedly celibate nominee Jeffrey John to decline a bishopric in the Church of England, and the Anglican Church has been divided worldwide by US Episcopalians consecrating openly partnered gay Gene Robinson Bishop of New Hampshire. Marriage dominated U.S. news this week for several reasons. Massachusetts lawmakers held a Constitutional Convention with denial of marriage rights to same-gender couples at center stage. The state's highest court had just reaffirmed its earlier finding that gays and lesbians cannot be denied marriage equality under the Massachusetts constitution, and amending that constitution would be the only way to override the court. But despite national media attention, heavy lobbying, massive demonstrations, and intense debate, the so-called "Con-Con" failed to take any action before recessing for another month. A series of proposed anti-marriage amendments, some of them described as "compromises" because they explicitly allowed for civil unions, were defeated by narrow margins. If the legislature fails to approve an amendment this session, it will add another year to the minimum time before the constitution can actually be changed. Legislation to block same-gender marriages continues to progress in other s tates. This week the Idaho state House approved a move to amend the state constitution to restrict marriage to heterosexual couples, and the Virginia state House voted for a bill to deny legal recognition to civil unions and domestic partnerships as well as same-gender marriages. Both those measures move to their state Senates next. But another so-called Defense of Marriage bill in South Dakota appears dead at the hands of a House committee. Across the U.S., the 6th annual Freedom to Marry Week is in progress, featuring numerous actions seeking marriage equality for same-gender couples. Gay and lesbian couples in states including California, Connecticut, Florida, Ohio, South Carolina, Texas, Virginia, and Wisconsin applied for marriage licenses and were denied them. At least two high-profile California couples rejected in Beverly Hills -- Metropolitan Community Church founder Troy Perry and veteran activist Robin Tyler and their partners -- intend to pursue lawsuits for marriage equality with the help of famed attorney Gloria Allred. And finally... San Francisco managed to steal the spotlight even from those celebrities. In what's been described as a publicity stunt by some and as an act of civil disobedience by others, Mayor Gavin Newsom announced February 10th that he wanted to marry a gay or lesbian couple within the week. He called on the County Clerk to remove gender specifications from all forms relating to marriage licenses, and to begin issuing licenses to gay and lesbian couples applying for them. On February 12th, City Assessor Mabel Teng officiated at the marriage of much-honored veteran lesbian activists Del Martin and Phyllis Lyon, a couple of 51 years standing. They've been followed by a continuing line of gay and lesbian couples obtaining licenses and getting married as quickly as officials could manage, with over 80 marriages performed and over 90 licenses issued on the first day and well over 940 marriages held by the end of February 13th. The clerk's office extended its hours through the Valentine's Day weekend. Of course opponents asked a court to stop the marriages, but the judge refused to issue a preliminary injunction and the court won't reopen until February 17th... so the marriages continue. Do the marriages have any legal significance beyond creating lawsuits? Probably not. But they've made a lot of couples happy, won a lot of media attention, and made a little money for San Francisco: a record $50,000 in marriage license fees through February 13th... plus profits from champagne sales at the City Hall café.