Yahoo! 360° News | Beta Feedback
Start your own Yahoo! 360° page

Gunnar < Y! ID: gunnarcol... >

Top Page  |  Blog  |  Feeds  |  Friends  |  Lists

Add

Gunnar is not connected to you in Yahoo! 360°.

Last updated Mon Nov 13, 2006 Member since January 2006

Tag Cloud

A Biblical Affirmation for Gays & Lesbians - Truth or Nonsense ??--> Click here

1 - 5 of 42 First | < Prev | Next > | Last

Gunnar's Blog Full Post View | List View

Geeze, talking about this and that every now and then - we need to chat !!!

Kuwait: Repressive Dress-Code Law Encourages Police Abuse

Arrests Target Transgender People

(New York, January 17, 2008) – Authorities should immediately release more than a dozen persons jailed under Kuwait’s new dress-code law, Human Rights Watch said today. The law, approved by the National Assembly on December 10, 2007, criminalizes people who “imitate the appearance of the opposite sex.”

“The wave of arrests in the past month shows exactly why Kuwait should repeal this repressive law,” said Joe Stork, deputy director of the Middle East division at Human Rights Watch. “Kuwaiti authorities should immediately drop all charges against those arrested, and investigate charges of ill-treatment in detention.”

Security officials have arrested at least 14 people in Kuwait City since the National Assembly approved an addition (Article 199 bis) to Article 198 of the Criminal Code. The amendment states that “any person committing an indecent act in a public place, or imitating the appearance of a member of the opposite sex, shall be subject to imprisonment for a period not exceeding one year or a fine not exceeding one thousand dinars [US$3,500].”

Dress codes based solely on gender stereotypes restrict both freedom of expression and personal autonomy, Human Rights Watch said. The only known targets of the new Kuwaiti law have been transgender people – individuals born into one gender who deeply identify themselves with another. Kuwait allows transgender people neither to change their legal identity to match the gender in which they live, nor to adapt their physical appearance through gender reassignment surgery. The new law, coming after months of controversy, aims at further restricting their rights and completely eliminating their public presence. In September 2007, the newspaper Al Arabiya reported a new government campaign “to combat the growing phenomenon of gays and transsexuals” in Kuwait.

On December 18, 2007, Al Watan newspaper announced the arrests of three people at a police checkpoint in Salimeya, 10 km southeast of Kuwait City. Days later, police arrested three more people at a checkpoint in Kuwait City. On December 21, security officials detained another three people on Restaurant Street in the Hawalli district, 8 km south of Kuwait City. The same day, two other people were detained at another police checkpoint. Authorities have reportedly arrested three more people in January, one in a coffee shop and two in a taxi stopped by police. Police arrested all 14 because they believed they were “imitating the appearance of the opposite sex.”

All the people detained are being held in Tahla Prison. Friends of the accused told Human Rights Watch that police and prison guards subjected the detainees to physical and psychological abuse. Al-Rai newspaper quoted police as saying that the “confused [men were] deposited in the special ward,” and that the prison administration ordered guards to shave their heads as a form of punishment. The paper quoted a prison administrator as saying “this step [shaving heads] follows the passage of the law concerning men who imitate the appearance of women.” Friends report that at least three of the prisoners were beaten and one was left unconscious. Authorities deported one Saudi Arabian national among those arrested, to face trial in that country. None of the detainees has access to legal representation.

Transgender people in Kuwait tell Human Rights Watch that they are now afraid to leave their homes – even for work or to meet basic needs – for fear of arrest and ill-treatment. Arbitrary and intrusive gender-based codes for acceptable demeanor and dress violate the rights to privacy and to free expression protected under international law. The beatings and ill-treatment to which authorities reportedly subjected the prisoners violate internationally recognized prohibitions against torture or cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment.

“The intent of this measure is clear: to eradicate the freedoms and visibility of people who already face discrimination daily,” said Stork. “When states impose dress codes, whether on women or on men, they deny their basic rights to both privacy and free expression.”

In a December 31 private letter to Kuwait’s minister of justice, Abdallah Abd al-Rahman al-Matuq, and to the speaker of the National Assembly, Jassem Al-Kharafi, Human Rights Watch urged the government to release the detainees and drop charges against them. In the same letter, Human Rights Watch called on the government to work toward repealing the recent addition to Article 198.

The International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR), to which Kuwait has acceded, sets forth the prohibition against torture, cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment (Article 7). Article 14 of the same treaty affirms the right to counsel. The treaty also bars interference with the right to privacy (Article 17) and protects freedom of expression (Article 19). Kuwait has the obligation to respect and ensure these rights, and to do so in a non-discriminatory manner, as set forth in Article 2.

The Yogyakarta Principles on the Application of International Human Rights Law in relation to Sexual Orientation and Gender Identity (http://www.yogyakartaprinciples.org/), adopted by a group of 29 experts on international human rights law in 2006, calls upon states to “take all necessary legislative, administrative and other measures to ensure the full enjoyment of the right to express identity or personhood, including through speech, deportment, dress, bodily characteristics, choice of name or any other means” (Principle 19[c]).

Friday January 18, 2008 - 06:39am (CET) Permanent Link | 0 Comments
Seattle's gay marriage policy challenged
Seattle's gay marriage policy challenged magnify

Appellate court hears lawsuit

(Editor's note: This story has been changed since it was first published. The date that King County Superior Court ruled against the Pacific Justice Institute's lawsuit was misstated originally.)

A California organization has asked a court to throw out Seattle's policy of recognizing gay marriages of its workers.

The Pacific Justice Institute, a conservative, non-profit legal defense group specializing in religious freedom and parental rights, said Mayor Greg Nickels went beyond his authority in 2004 when he ordered city departments to provide equal benefits to employees married by governments that license same-sex marriages.

At issue is whether Nickels used language in his order and accompanying press release to effectively sanction gay marriage -- a move the group said is at odds with the state's ban on gay marriages.

"It's our position that this goes way beyond employee benefits," Matthew McReynolds, an attorney for Pacific Justice Institute, told a three-judge state Court of Appeals panel Tuesday. "He was just using this as an opportunity to undercut the (state) Defense of Marriage Act."

Representing the city, attorney Phil Brenneman countered that Nickels' policy was limited to employee benefits. Beyond that, the mayor's language only reflected his personal stance in favor of gay marriage, he said. "It's clear that this is the mayor's political position," Brenneman said.

One of the three judges on the appellate bench took issue with the discrepancy between the limited scope of Nickels' executive order and his broader public endorsement of gay marriage. "The mayor was misleading the public in terms of what he was trying to accomplish," Judge Stephen Dwyer said.

In practical terms, both the lawsuit and the city rules it challenges are largely symbolic. Nickels' order requires city departments to recognize same-sex marriages licensed in other states.

But that order was largely symbolic because the city already had provided benefits to domestic partners since 1989. However, the order does allow married same-sex workers to sign up for such coverage with less paperwork -- signing on as "married" rather than filling out separate "domestic partnership forms."

A King County Superior Court ruled against the institute's lawsuit in 2004.

Tags: gay, marriage, policy, court
Saturday July 28, 2007 - 03:43pm (CEST) Permanent Link | 0 Comments
U.S. Immigration Law Inhumane to Same-Sex Couples
U.S. Immigration Law Inhumane to Same-Sex Couples magnify

New Immigration Reforms Must End Discrimination Against Lesbians, Gays

 

(Washington, D.C., May 2, 2006) – Thousands of U.S. citizens and their foreign same-sex partners face enormous hardships, separation and even exile because discriminatory U.S. immigration policies deprive these couples of the basic right to be together, Human Rights Watch and Immigration Equality said in a report released today.

As Congress debates immigration reforms, it must end the discrimination that lesbian and gay Americans and their foreign partners endure under U.S. immigration law. The 2000 U.S. Census estimated that in the United States there were almost 40,000 lesbian and gay couples in which one partner is a U.S. citizen (or permanent resident), and the other a foreign national. This figure does not include the many thousands of binational couples who have to hide the fact they are partners, are forced to live apart, or who have been forced to leave the United States. Under discriminatory U.S. statutes, these couples have no recognition under the law.

“Discriminatory U.S. immigration laws turn the American dream into a heartless nightmare for countless U.S. citizens and their foreign partners,” said Scott Long, co-author of the report and director of the Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual and Transgender Rights Program of Human Rights Watch. “As Congress debates immigration reforms, it should end discrimination against lesbian and gay immigrants as well as their U.S. partners.”

The first-ever comprehensive report on the issue, “Family, Unvalued: Discrimination, Denial and the Fate of Binational Same-Sex Couples under U.S. Law,” documents how U.S immigration law and federal policy discriminate against binational same-sex couples. The 191-page report documents the consequences of this discrimination and shows how it can separate not only loving partners from one another, but also parents from children. It also shows how this policy has destroyed careers, livelihoods and lives.

“Our immigration laws are undermining the traditional American values of fairness and family,” said Rachel B. Tiven, executive director of Immigration Equality. “U.S. immigration policy is designed to keep families together. But the current law targets an entire class of American families and tears them apart.”

For more than 50 years, family reunification has been a stated and central goal of U.S. immigration policy. Immigration law places a priority on allowing citizens and permanent residents to sponsor their spouses and close relatives for entry into the U.S. Although the system remains imperfect, riddled with delays that rising anti-immigrant sentiment only intensifies, U.S. citizens and their foreign heterosexual partners can easily claim spousal status and the immigration rights that it brings.

U.S. citizens with foreign lesbian or gay partners, however, find that their relationship is considered non-existent under federal law. The so-called “Defense of Marriage Act,” passed in 1996, declared that for all purposes of the federal government, marriage would mean “only a legal union between one man and one woman as husband and wife.” Since lesbian and gay couples are excluded from the definition of “spouse,” U.S. citizens receive no legal recognition of their same-sex partners for purposes of immigration.

Based on interviews and surveys with dozens of binational same-sex couples across the United States and around the world, the report documents the pressures and ordeals that lack of legal recognition imposes on lesbian and gay families. Couples described abuse and harassment by immigration officials. Some partners told stories of being deported from the United States and separated from their partners. Many couples, forced to live in different countries or continents, endure financial as well as emotional strain in keeping their relationships together.

“No family should be forced apart, no matter what the sex is. This is how immigration laws have affected us,” a woman in North Carolina said, describing how her Hungarian partner and their children were forced to leave the United States. “We are separated and without each other.... We just want to be together, that’s all.”

Many U.S. citizens are forced into exile in countries where their relationships are recognized. At least 19 nations worldwide provide some form of immigration benefits to the same-sex partners of citizens and permanent residents, while the U.S. still refuses. These include Canada as well as 13 European countries (Belgium, Denmark, Finland, France, Germany, Iceland, the Netherlands, Norway, Portugal, Spain, Sweden, Switzerland and the United Kingdom). On other continents, this list includes Brazil, Israel, South Africa, Australia and New Zealand.

Notably, the report details how current U.S. exclusionary policies are rooted in a long history of anti-immigrant sentiment, in which fears of sexuality have played a steady part. From the McCarthy era until 1990, U.S. law barred foreign-born lesbians and gays from entering the country. The United States is also one of the few industrialized countries that imposes a blanket ban on entry by HIV-positive individuals, a bar that reinforces irrational fears and stigma but does nothing to protect public health.

Congress should immediately pass the Uniting American Families Act (UAFA), Human Rights Watch and Immigration Equality said. The bill, sponsored by Representative Jerrold Nadler (D-NY) and Senator Patrick Leahy (D-VT) would offer binational same-sex couples’ relationships the same recognition and treatment afforded to binational married couples.

The proposed law would add the term “permanent partner” to sections of the Immigration and Nationality Act where “spouse” now appears. Thus, a U.S. citizen or permanent resident could sponsor their permanent partner for immigration to the country, just as they can now sponsor such family members as siblings, children or husbands and wives. The bill was introduced in the current Congress on June 21, 2005; it has a total of 104 cosponsors from both houses.

In addition to repealing the Defense of Marriage Act of 1996, Congress should enact reforms to U.S. immigration law to guarantee respect for the human rights and labor rights of non-citizens. These reforms should include measures that end discrimination against lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender and HIV-positive individuals.

The Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, and Transgender Rights Program at Human Rights Watch, which is the largest U.S.-based human rights organization, advocates against abuses based on sexual orientation or gender identity worldwide. Immigration Equality is a national organization that fights for equality under U.S. immigration law for lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender and HIV-positive individuals.

Wednesday May 3, 2006 - 01:25am (CEST) Permanent Link | 3 Comments
Kentucky Gov. Gives Green Light to Discrimination
Kentucky Gov. Gives Green Light to Discrimination magnify
WASHINGTON - On Tuesday, Kentucky's Republican Governor Ernie Fletcher
issued an executive order repealing anti-discrimination protections
against gay, lesbian, bisexual and transgender (GLBT) state employees as
he celebrated "Diversity Day" in the state.

"The Governor's hypocrisy is outrageous and un-American," said Human
Rights Campaign President Joe Solmonese.  "No one should be fired from
their job simply because of who they are.  Governor Fletcher's backwards
step does nothing whatsoever to move diversity forward and puts
hard-working, tax-paying citizens at risk."

Ironically, Gov. Fletcher's order came on the same day he declared
"Diversity Day."

"There is no better example of adding insult to injury," said Solmonese.
"On a day when the state was supposed to celebrating diversity, Gov.
Fletcher was removing an entire group of Kentuckians out of the law."

Already in Kentucky, Jefferson County and the cities of Louisville and
Covington prohibit discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation and
gender identity.  Nationwide, at least 292 local jurisdictions have laws
or policies prohibiting discrimination in public employment based on
sexual orientation and 80 of these includes protections for transgender
people.  At least 2,546 private employers - including giants like Ford,
Microsoft and AT&T - have policies prohibiting discrimination based on
sexual orientation, with 218 of these including protections for
transgender employees.

"This order moves Kentucky in the opposite direction of the rest of the
country," said Solmonese.  "Everyday more and more businesses, colleges
and universities, and state and local governments are protecting their
GLBT employees."

A bill that would prohibit local jurisdictions in Kentucky from enacting
civil rights ordinances that include protections for GLBT individuals
has consistently failed or died in the state legislature.

"Clearly this mean-spirited order goes against the values of the
legislature and the people of Kentucky who want simple fairness for all
their friends and neighbors," concluded Solmonese.
Thursday April 13, 2006 - 08:59pm (CEST) Permanent Link | 4 Comments
Italy: Transgender person is elected to Italian parliament
Italy: Transgender person is elected to Italian parliament magnify

Five lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender (LGBT) people were elected as members of the Italian parliament. While Europe is more accustomed to the presence and visibility of LGB people in politics, the case of Vladimir Luxuria, a transgender person being elected as a parliamentarian, is probably the first of its kind in Europe.

This is a significant result not just for Italy but for the entire Europe and European politics as LGBT people are taking more prominent and visible place within the political arena.

The majority of the centre-left coalition Unione lead by the former President of the European Commission Romano Prodi is expected to introduce some form of legal recognition for same-sex couples as most coalition members supported the idea in their election manifestos. It is also likely that Italy will improve its anti-discrimination legislation and expand its hate legislation to include sexual orientation and gender identity, and possibly that the new government will improve the present gender reassignment legislation.

Riccardo Gottardi, Co-Chair of the ILGA-Europe Board, said:

“We are happy to see a transgender person being elected as Italian parliamentarian. This is a very important victory not just for Italy, but for all Europe. This is also a sign that the European electorate is becoming more open minded and embracing the diversity of human kind.

We hope the newly elected Italian politicians will fulfil their pre-election promises and will introduce Italy into a family of European nations legally recognising same-sex families as well as introduce further legislation to guarantee equal rights for LGBT people.”

Wednesday April 12, 2006 - 04:42pm (CEST) Permanent Link | 0 Comments

Add Gunnar's Blog to your personalized My Yahoo! page:

Add to My Yahoo!RSS About My Yahoo! & RSS
1 - 5 of 42 First | < Prev | Next > | Last