Monday night, the San Marcos, TX school board voted to start teaching Abstinence Plus. It is a program for grades six through 12 that not only teaches waiting but also educates students on how to have safe sex with the use of birth control and condoms.

There were 70 teen moms in the district in the last year.

Read the full article here.

South Africa's Caster Semenya has been cleared to compete as a woman after undergoing a series of controversial gender tests. Read the full article here. 

I have mixed feelings about Semenya being "cleared" as a woman. After more than a year of tabloid exploitation and humiliation, what does this ruling really mean for Semenya and intersexed athletes? Was it a win for Semenya? She seems to have "passed" the test, but the test itself has not been changed. What was it that made Semenya "woman-enough" to compete again? Was it one chromosome? One gene? 

Could the very idea of sports continue without the male-female divide? Have we learned any lessons from the handling of Semenya's case? (which is not the first nor certainly the last of its kind) Why have we never heard of a male being tested to see if he is truly "male enough" to compete among peers?

Take a look at the way Semenya was portrayed on a magazine cover during the controversy. What are we being told about appropriate femininity? At what point is someone woman-enough? Who gets to decide this?

After becoming the first openly head of state, Iceland's prime minister, Johanna Sigurdardottir, 68, has now become the first national leader with a same-sex spouse after marrying her long-time partner, Jonina Leosdottir.

On June 27, Iceland joined countries like Spain, Canada, and South Africa in granting full family parity to gays and lesbians. The law was passed unanimously by Iceland's parliament. Prime minister Sigurdardottir quickly applied to upgrade her 7-year civil partnership with Leosdottir to a legal marriage.  Marriage in Iceland is now defined as a union between "two consenting adults regardless of sex."

Iceland has long been a relatively friendly nation toward its gay and lesbian citizens, recounted Icelandic blog the Iceland Weather Report in a June 27 post. In 1996, Iceland extended civil partnerships to gay and lesbian couples. And while there has been some faith-based bias expressed against gay and lesbian families, even that appears to be changing: "The Bishop over Iceland, Hr. Karl Sigurbjörnsson, yesterday apologized publicly to gays and lesbians for a comment that he made in an interview in 2006, where he said that allowing gays and lesbians to marry was akin to ’trashing’ the institution of marriage," reported the Iceland Weather Report. "A great number of ministers in the church openly opposed this view and lobbied for the law to be changed--which was finally done a couple of weeks ago."

In the United States, by contrast, only six states allow same-sex families to wed, and even then the rights and protections offered are limited to the state level. Federal law--the 1996 so-called "Defense of Marriage" Act--bans any federal recognition of same-sex families, with the result that gay families are faced with a wildly disparate patchwork of rights and protections from state to state. 

What an incredible story. I echo Perez Hilton's wishes:

Congratulations ladies! What you've achieved in your country we hope makes its way to ours very soon! Make sure you mention how happy you all are at the next UN Summit!

CNN's website features a really interesting article titled "The last person out of the closet? The bisexual male."
I appreciate that the article puts a human face and story to the often stigmatized notion of male bisexuality. I had a close friend who struggled tremendously with coming out as bisexual. From her I learned how unfortunately easy it is to overlook instances of biphobia in everyday life. Something as simple as saying "gay and lesbian community" and failing to mention the bisexual component can be hurtful. My friend's story sensitized me to this struggle as I hope this article's subjects do for others. I am impressed by CNN for running this article and hope that it opens up the conversation on biphobia in both the straight and queer communities. 

This is a fascinating video. I would love to hear your opinions! Is first grade too young?

http://www.cnn.com/video/#/video/us/2010/06/24/dnt.condoms.for.elementary.kids.wcvb?hpt=T2

The federal Advisory Committee on Blood Safety and Availability ruled on Friday to uphold the long-standing ban preventing gay and bisexual men from donating blood. CNN reported that the policy faced review thanks to pressure from a group of 17 senators, led by Sen. John Kerry (D-MA). Despite the senators' efforts, the ban was upheld by a committee vote of 9 to 6, according to the Los Angeles Times.

Addressing the committee on Thursday, Kerry said he was joined by the nation's largest blood-banking organizations in opposition to the current policy. The American Red Cross, the American Association of Blood Banks, and America’s Blood Centers have all blasted the policy as “scientifically and medically unwarranted.”

"This is a discussion with real social significance for gay men," Kerry said before the committee. "They are clearly the target of this policy, which was initiated in the early '80s, when little was known about HIV/AIDS, except that gay men seemed to be contracting it almost exclusively. Today, this lingering policy carries with it a social stigma for this population that is still engaged in battles for civil rights on a whole array of fronts."

In a unanimous vote the panel also called the policy "suboptimal," however, and recommended that distinctions be made between low- and high-risk potential gay donors in a report to the assistant secretary of HHS.  

In 1983 the Food and Drug Administration, a subagency of HHS that regulates the nation’s blood supply collection, barred any man who’d had sexual contact with another man since 1977 from donating blood. FDA policy allows heterosexual men and women who have had sexual contact with an HIV-positive partner to give blood after a one-year deferral period.

National Gay and Lesbian Task Force executive director Rea Carey called the committee's decision "outrageous, irresponsible, and archaic." 

Steven Monjeza and Tiwonge Chimbalanga, the gay Malawi couple that drew international attention when sentenced to 14 years in prison and later pardoned, have separated. Monjeza is now seeing a woman.

“I have had enough,” he says. “I was forced into the whole drama and I regret the whole episode. I want to live a normal life, not a life where I would be watched by everyone, booed and teased.”

Dorothy Gulo is Monjeza’s new wife and the freshly minted husband disavows any past with “gay trash”  Chimbalanga.

“We were pardoned but I know the law can bounce back on us if we are not careful. Although I claimed that I still love Tiwo, I did not mean it. I have never had sex with him as was revealed in court. That is why the medical examination failed to establish any anal penetration. I was coerced into the whole thing.”

Chimbalanga says he will continue to be "a gay." 

This story saddened me greatly. Who can blame Monjeza for wanting a "normal life," as he puts it? I am sorry that he feels this way and hope that one day, Malawi is a country in which gay individuals are free to express their love without fear of persecution.  

A 38-year-old gay man, Michael McKoy, was found stabbed to death in his Anacostia apartment on May 27. He is the fourth gay man killed in the D.C. area since December.

McKoy’s stabbing death follows two other slayings of gay men in Southeast D.C. neighborhoods over the past six months. In December, District resident Anthony Perkins was found shot to death inside his car, which was parked on the 2900 block of Fourth Street, S.E. Antwan Holcomb, 20, a nearby resident, has been charged with first-degree murder while armed in connection with the killing. A police affidavit says a witness told investigators Holcomb met Perkins through a gay phone chat line and Holcomb pretended he was gay as a means of luring Perkins to a location where Holcomb could rob Perkins.

On Jan. 10, Maryland resident Gordon Rivers, also gay, was found shot to death on the street next to his car along the 2600 block of Naylor Road, S.E. Police have said witnesses told them a suspect shot Rivers in a botched holdup attempt inside Rivers’ car. Anthony Hager, 22, of Temple Hills, Md., and William Wren, 17, of Southeast D.C., have since been charged with first-degree murder in connection with Rivers’ death.

Police said Rivers drove to the area where he was shot after Wren reportedly called Rivers, inviting him to meet with Wren. Police have declined to say how Rivers and Wren first met and whether their meeting was through the Internet or a phone chat line.

Gay D.C. middle school principal Brian Betts, who was found April 15 shot to death in his house in Silver Spring, Md., met through a sexually oriented Internet and phone chat line catering to gay men at least one of three 18-year-old men charged with his murder, according to police sources.

The growing number of cases where gay men appear to have been thusly targeted prompted Gays & Lesbians Opposing Violence to issue an alert warning locals of the dangers associated with meeting people through such venues.

Googling 'LGBT news' is a trying process. First, I come across a video in which Bill O'Reilly compares a gay-friendly McDonald's television ad in France to a terrorist-friendly one.  Then I read an article in which an Oklahoma City councilman compares Oklahoma City Pride to an assembly of "pedophiles". Then, Mr. McKoy's life is cut short, making him the fourth gay men found dead in DC in just six months. 

All of this, yet DADT doesn't have a chance for repeal until December, ENDA has failed to pass. I appreciate Obama's recent move to extend benefits to the same-sex partners of federal employees (even though this too is limited by existing law).  When is our nation going to wake up and realize the blatant hate we are allowing to pollute our televisions, newspapers, and laws?

On June 2, President Obama signed a memo extending child care, employee assistance, credit union membership and other benefits to gay and lesbian federal employees' same-sex domestic partners and their children.

Obama's memo clarifies that the children of employees' same-sex partners are also considered the employees' children and dependents, and said those employees are now eligible to receive child care subsidies and services offered by an agency. Same-sex partners and their children also count as family members for other employee assistance programs.

The memo also makes same-sex partners of State Department employees deployed abroad eligible for noncompetitive appointments to federal jobs when they return to the United States, as heterosexual spouses are now.

And gay and lesbian feds can now use family and medical leave to make school arrangements for their partners' children, or for medical care for their partners, as well as their partners' children and elderly relatives.

Employees' partners also now have access to agency-sponsored fitness facilities and planning and counseling services.

Excellent news, but Obama is still prevented by law from extending health insurance, survivor annuities and other benefits to employees' same-sex partners.  He went on to urge Congress to pass HR 2517 and S 1102, the Domestic Partnership Benefits and Obligations Act, which would make same-sex partners eligible for the same benefits as married heterosexual spouses of federal employees.

In CNN's Belief Blog, Tony Perkins, president of the Family Research Council, an ordained minister, and Marine Corps veteran, argues against the repeal of Don't Ask, Don't Tell because of the threat he believes it poses to the religious liberty of servicemen and women who openly express their disdain for homosexuality.  

This means that all 1.4 million members of the U.S. military will be subject to sensitivity training intended to indoctrinate them into the myths of the homosexual movement: that people are born “gay” and cannot change and that homosexual conduct does no harm to the individual or to society.

Anyone who disagrees with the "equal opportunity policy," or what he also calls the "pro-homosexual political correctness" of repealing DADT, will suffer the consequences.

For no other offense than believing what all the great monotheistic religions have believed for all of history, some service members will be denied promotion, will be forced out of the service altogether, or will simply choose not to reenlist. Other citizens will choose not to join the military in the first place. The numbers lost will dwarf the numbers gained by opening the ranks to practicing homosexuals.

Perkins says that the repeal will be especially damaging to military chaplains, as it is they who will "suffer" the most. They will be forced to choose between expressing their faith's "true" stance on homosexuality thereby risking their careers, or affirming a "lifestyle" their faith condemns. Perkins concludes with a reference to the plight of pilgrims.

It was religious liberty that drew the Pilgrims to America and it is religious liberty that leads off our Bill of Rights. But overturning the American military’s centuries-old ban on homosexual conduct, codified in a 1993 law, would mean placing sexual libertinism - a destructive left-wing social dogma found nowhere in the Constitution - above religious liberty, our nation’s first freedom.

Beyond outrage, this blog raises a number of points and questions for me:

1) I find Perkins's language incredible amusing and ironic, particularly when he says that 1.4 million servicemen and women will be "indoctrinated" into "the myths of the homosexual movement."  Who exactly is doing the indoctrinating here? Are we indoctrinating folks with the "myths" of the homosexual movement, or with the "myths" of outdated religious dogma?

2) Perkins fails to acknowledge the overlap between Christians and homosexuals, as if the two were mutually exclusive. Whose religious liberty is being threatened? Would he deny the faith of those servicemen and women who remain closeted or have been discharged under DADT? He sets religious liberty and non-heterosexuality in direct opposition with one another. I had no idea that one's sexual orientation was a "destructive left-wing social dogma."  

3) If it were up to Perkins, would women have ever been allowed in the military? (there are a number of biblical stories that would suggest women should not be engaged in battle)  Is that equal opportunity clause acceptable in a way that homosexuality is not? What about atheists? Or people of non-Christian faiths?

Who deserves protection under the law?