I just thought that I ought post this story from Sunday's Observer. For me it is the most serious of the anti-gay revelations regarding the Tory Party this election season. In short the Tory candidate for Sutton and Cheam used to be active in the leadership of a church that tried to cure a variety of ills, including drug addiction and homosexuality, through prayer. To me it strikes of being both anti-gay and a belief in the power of prayer rather than scientific evidence. So far Cameron has said nothing about this, I don't expect a leader in a tight election to suspend a likely winning candidate but he could say something.

On the other hand I am rather pleased about something the Tories have done. In their Equality Manifesto:-

Quote:We will also consider the case for changing the law to allow civil partnerships to be called and classified as marriage.

You may remember back in October a gang of youths beat up James Parkes, a trainee PC, outside a gay bar in Liverpool. He suffered multiple skull fractures and spent several weeks in hospital. (It was presumed to be homophobic but that has been disputed). The police arrested 15 youths but the CPS has now decided there is insufficient evidence to charge any of them. (Full details here.)

My question is this, how does no-one see anything well enough to charge any of them with anything? I can understand how for some it may be clear that they were there but not if they did actually do anything, but for all of them? I'd be tempted to consider homophobic police officers not doing a proper thorough investigation as a reason but Parkes was one of them and the Police do stick together.

[img2=left]http://www.gayspeak.com/forum/images/news/repealprop8.jpg[/img2]A drive to gather enough signatures for a vote to repeal the gay marriage ban in California failed earlier today. The Los Angeles-based Love Honor Cherish campaign attempted to gather 700,000 signatures in order for there to be a state wide vote on whether to repeal Proposition 8, a law that banned gay marriage in the state.

Just last week, a poll found that 52 percent of Californian respondents support allowing gay marriage in the state.

Fifty-two percent of the 1,515 people surveyed agreed that "same-sex couples should be allowed to become legally married in the state of California", while 40 percent disagreed.

Because Love Honor Cherish were able to gather the 700,000 minimum signatures to secure a place on the ballot paper, the group must now wait until 2012 before being able to put it to voters.

California has been the most high-profile battleground for same-sex marriage in the US in the last few years.

Gay couples were given the right to marry in 2008 but opponents succeeded in having this struck down at the polls with Proposition 8 just several months later.

The Supreme Court turned down an appeal by gay rights groups last year, although a trial examining whether the ban was constitutional is currently on hiatus and expected to resume shortly.

Love Honor Cherish's Executive Director John Henning said: "I'd rather repeal Prop 8 than see the Supreme Court review it, given the current composition of the court."

All of the 18,000 couples who married in the brief window have been permitted to remain married.

Last week, Californian politicians began to consider whether to repeal a law which requires the state to look for cures for homosexuality.

The legislation, which dates from the 1950s, says that gays are "sexual deviants" and requires the state to carry out research on "deviations conducive to sex crimes against children".

It was drawn up after a series of sex crimes in Los Angeles, including the rape and murder of a six-year-old girl.

Although the perpetrator was not a gay man, homosexuality was included in the list of sexual deviations in Welfare and Institutions Code Section 8050.

[img2=left]http://www.gayspeak.com/forum/images/news/chriscolfer.jpg[/img2]Chris Colfer, the actor who plays Kurt Hummel in Glee, has said he hopes gay teenagers can identify with the character.

The 19-year-old star was asked by Digital Spy about whether he thought Kurt could help gay teenagers.

He said: "I definitely hope so. I decided to play him the way I do because there are a lot of over- the- top flamboyant loud characters like Kurt on TV.

"I grew up in a small conservative town so I didn't know a lot of people like that, so that's why I decided to play him that way. I have so many letters and messages and fan mail. People are relieved to see someone being honest with who they are."

Kurt's most famous scene to date saw him teaching the football team how to dance to Beyonce's Single Ladies.

In the next series, which begins airing in the UK on April 19th on E4, Kurt gets a boyfriend.

Colfer said: "I think it's going to be the first couple of episodes of the second season, so we've got a while yet. I don't want to be the downside to the relationship so I'm hoping he's less good-looking than me!"

On spoilers for the upcoming season, he said: "We are in a heavy battle with Vocal Adrenaline and they are starting to see the ND as a threat, so they try to sabotage us a bit and we of course sabotage them right back.

"The focus in the next few episodes is probably Rachel, Finn and Kurt. Kurt wants Kurt's dad and Finn's mum to get married so he can get closer to him! The crush hasn't gone away – I think he'll always have a soft spot for him!"

Wonderful to hear some good news from Jamaica at last.

I take my hat off to these proud and brave people

Jamaica Stages First Public ‘Gay Pride’

I've just read this story from the Independent. The short version is Lance Corporal James Wharton of the Household Cavalry married his boyfriend on Saturday. A fellow Lance Corporal acted as his best man, both in dress uniform. The reception was then held within the Regimental barracks, after returning from their honeymoon they will be living as a couple within service accomodation. There were several warm quotes from Commanding Officers.

Obviously this is a heart warming story. But I thought I ought to share it with you because it shows how far our armed forces have come in just the last 10 years, quite incredible when you think about it.

(Baz, please correct me if I have got any of the military stuff/language wrong, and it shows there is hope for you yet )

I have just read this article, in the Telegraph. It concerns the effects of the recent House of Lords vote, to ammend the Equality Bill to allow for religious Civil Partnership ceremonies, on the Church of England. The article repeats a claim that vicars could be sued if they refuse to conduct Civil Partnership ceremonies. The article makes no attempt whatever to explain or question this claim. Surely, somebody at the Telegraph should have the number of a lawyer who could say whether there may be legal grounds for such litigation or whether it would be dismissed? Or am I asking too much of journalists?

I don't know if anyone has been following the story of the gay couple who have appealed to the European Court for permission to marry in their native Austria. I only heard about it at a lecture I attended on Tuesday evening. The case has been brewing for some time and our government has made representation to the court for the appeal to be turned down as I think is explained in the following from Hansard.

Quote:11.13 am

Lord Lester of Herne Hill asked Her Majesty’s Government:

Why they are intervening before the European Court of Human Rights in the case of Horst Schalk and Johann Kopf v Austria (Application No. 30141/04) to contend that same-sex relationships fall outside the ambit of family life for the purposes of Article 8 of the European Convention on Human Rights.

The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State, Ministry of Justice (Lord Hunt of Kings Heath): My Lords, the Government have intervened in the case of Schalk and Kopf v Austria primarily to support the proposition that Article 12 of the European Convention on Human Rights does not require same-sex couples to be allowed to marry. The noble Lord has raised an important technical issue about our observations in this case, for which I am grateful and upon which I am reflecting in consultation with my ministerial colleagues.

Lord Lester of Herne Hill: My Lords, I am grateful to hear that Ministers are considering the matter further. I have put the observations in the Library, so that those who want to can see exactly what the Government have said. It is not correct that they have confined their observations only to the right to marry. They have also said that the court should not develop its case law so that same-sex partners living in an enduring family relationship are protected by Articles 8 and 14 of the convention against sexual orientation discrimination in the enjoyment of the fundamental right to respect for family life. I have two questions. First, is that the Government’s aim because, if so, it seems bizarre? Secondly, in the light of our law’s recognition of civil partnership and recognition that for the purposes of adoption a couple includes two people of the same sex living as partners in an enduring family relationship, why on earth do the Government negatively seek to persuade the Strasbourg court that

10 July 2008 : Column 844

the convention does not require the creation of legal recognition of such relationships for same-sex couples, who cannot marry?

Lord Hunt of Kings Heath: My Lords, the noble Lord raises important matters and I am sure that all noble Lords will wish to see the memorandum he has placed in the Library. The Government are very proud of the legislation introducing civil partnerships and we strongly encourage other countries to do likewise. However, we do not think it appropriate for other countries—many of which have very different social attitudes towards marriage and relationships—to be compelled to introduce similar systems. That was the principal aim of our intervention. We would be concerned if an interpretation suggested that Article 8 compelled legal registration of any family relationship. However, I assure the noble Lord that we are considering this point very carefully.

I had a friendship request recently on Facebook from a woman I didn't know particularly well, but who lived in the same village when her children and my children were growing up. I remember hearing that, when she and her husband split up, she had entered into a relationship with a woman, but as far as I was concerned it was just village gossip.

In her message she brought me up to date on her current circumstances and asked after my "dear lady wife", so I thought I'd explain a few coincidences. Since coming out to her a few weeks ago I have had no further messages from her. Maybe she'd heard a rumour and her curiosity has now been satisfied; no matter. I've had a few friends from the distant past who have gone horribly silent after I have revealed the changes in my situation. That's a bit more hurtful, but I guess it's inevitable considering the majority who have been supportive. It is certainly the case that I have found out who my friends are.

I thought this article in The Guardian was interesting. Some of the stories touched a chord with me and I could identify with many points made by the writer.

Quote:I'm not sure why we should be shocked when someone ends a marriage and comes out of the closet. A quick browse on the internet will reveal plenty of websites with names such as My Husband Is Gay and Gay Husbands/Straight Wives, with checklists for worried wives ...

But why should we have such illusions about marriage anyway? There are many things spouses choose to keep secret, and homosexuality is just one of them ...

There are three powerful bonds between people and, for better and for worse, they often operate separately, rather than together: sexual attraction, long-term attachment and romantic yearning ...

I'm not much interested in war films, yet one of the best movie I've seen for 2010 have the war in Afghanistan as their backdrop. Brothers are solid, somber, and timely film. I can say this movie took me completely by surprise with its unflinching look at the affects of war on families. Of course, the events in Brothers are taken to the nth degree, but it's still one of the most in-depth looks at the adjustment to life out of the war zone I've seen reflected on film in recent years. Tobey Maguire delivers a career-defining performance.Maguire displays an emotional range I haven't had a chance to see in the actor lately, and you can't take your eyes off of him when he's on the screen. His performance is that powerful and he definitely deserve an Oscar recognition for this. It's not a pretty tale it tells, but Brothers absolutely delivers a convincing, intense and powerful story of a family in conflict and the forgiveness and understanding needed to heal terrible wounds.