IN THIS MODERN DIGITAL WORLD?

1.           Caste system is the one that has been made all over this world. This has come up so that human beings could live as an integrated society, as family with discipline and morality. But, because of the hindrances to this caste system, it has been destroyed gradually. Because of this, the present world is confronted with several threats leading to the deterioration of traditional family set up, that is, Father, Mother and Children.

2.           One day, six catholic Christian Nadars of Kanyakumari District were speaking together in Chennai (South India). Among them, two friends had married women belong to other castes after loving them, while speaking like; there was talk about the Nadar Community. Two of them asked what was there is community. God created Adam and Eve. From then onwards, the human beings originate. We are Christians we should not take into account the divisions among us, in the name of the caste. They argued that the communal set up was not necessary by citing the words of St.Paul who wrote to the Galatians and some more facts.

3.           Therefore, this essay was written emphasizing the fact that the caste system is necessary, by citing the facts, mentioned in the Bible, so that the Christian Nadars should understand that the caste system is compulsorily indispensable and act accordingly.

4.           St. Paul, the Apostle has written the Epistle to the Galatians, “There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither bond nor free, there is neither male nor female: for ye are all one in Christ Jesus”. [Gal.3:27-28 and Col.3:11]. As per the aforesaid verse, there are no difference among the Communities and men. Before God, it is true that there is no difference among men. But, St.Paul had stated in the aforesaid verse “There is neither male nor female”. If it is so, shall we infer that there is no difference between man and woman?

5.          In this digital world, in Western countries, especially in United States, indiscipline and indecencies escalate and families have been scattered, moreso it is dismanteling the Traditional Family system, that is, Father, Mother and Children. This scenario has been gradually spreading to other countries also. For example, in the United States of America,
1.       Only 16% of Baltimore Teens raised with Married Parents. (Enclosure-1)
2.       45.4 percent of American Moms in their twenties have never been married. (Enclosure-2)

3.       If 39 Percent of the Elderly want to die because they’re lonely. (Enclosure-3) http://constitution.com/39-percent-elderly-want-die-theyre-lonely-state-pay-suicide/

4.       Single Americans now more than half of U.S. population. (Enclosure-4)

5.       Americans Think Homosexuals Make Up a Quarter of the Population. (Enclosure-5)

6.       Parent One, Parent Two to replace references to mother, father on passport forms. (Enclosure-6)

7.       CA Governor Bans the Words 'Husband' and 'Wife' In Marriage. (Enclosure-7)

8.        Nebraska Teachers Told To Call Kids 'Purple Penguins' As 'Boys And Girls' Is Not 'Gender Inclusive'. (Enclosure-8)

9.       40 percent of Americans believe that marriage is becoming obsolete. (Enclosure-9)

10.   6.80 Crores of Americans Have Criminal Records – More Than Population of France. (Enclosure-10)
11.   Census: More Americans 18-to-34 Now Live With Parents Than With Spouse. (Enclosure-11)

12.   'First Time in Human History': People 65 and Older Will Outnumber Children Under 5 (Enclosure-12)

13.   Polyamory can be between many people of differing genders and is always consensual. (Enclosure-13)
14.   About the American Association for Nude Recreation
                     http://www.aanr.com/about-aanr (Enclosure-14)

15.   California Allows Children to Have More Than Two Legal Parents (Enclosure-15)

6.The root cause for all of these irregularities is that in foreign countries an American marries a German woman, a German man marries an Italian woman, an Italian man marries a French woman, and the Frenchman marries an English woman, without any principle or without any binding whatsoever. Since, the marriages have been held like this, nobody has affection and love for anybody. There is no code of conduct. There is no fidelity. There is no obedience. There is no love and affection. There is no culture or decency. There is no older or younger one. Consequently, the families have been ruined, the families have been dismantled. It has become very usual that one man lives with a woman today, some days, later, he will live with another woman and even after some period, he will live with another woman. Further it has become very usual that without getting married man and woman live together and cohabits together as long as they require and later on, estrange from each other. Whether the world will survive? Whether the world will prosper?

7.Today, the Tamil Culture and tradition follow only the same condition. Where has gone the period in which it was preached “For one man, one woman, “Husband is only the visible God”, “Husband is husband though he may be like a stone or grass? The leaders and the spiritual leaders do not speak about these and discipline. The Dravidian Culture has peruncated and the tradition and culture of Tamil People have been spoiled. On 17.07.2007, news was published in the English Newspaper, “Indian Express” in Chennai edition, with the following statistics,
a)   In the year 1960, 1 or 2 divorce cases were filed.
b)   In the year 1980, 100 to 200 divorce cases were filed.
c)    In the year 1990, about 1000 divorce cases were filed.
d)   In the year 2005, 9000 divorce cases were filed.
                      -The New Indian Express dated 17.07.2007.
e)    Later, 4 family courts have started functioning in Chennai City, since 2009.
f)     In the year 2011, all the Family courts in Chennai City functioned even on all Saturdays and Sundays.
g)    The Governor has granted his approval in 2015 for constituting 5 more Family Courts, excluding the aforesaid 4 Family Courts in Chennai.
8.Who is responsible for the escalation in the number of Family Courts, like this? It is because people have failed to follow the moral order. The Dravidian leaders acted in an indisciplined manner. That has spoiled the culture and tradition of Tamilians.
9.Only owing to this, in the olden times, a man marrying his sister’s daughter (niece) and the marriage between a man and the daughter of his elder sister, and the marriage between a man and the daughter of his paternal or maternal aunt (cousin sister) and the marriage between the family relations were in vogue. Besides this, marriage with the same community was prevalent. If problem crops up between the wife and husband, the elders belonging to the family of husband or wife will compromise the couple. There was respect for the words of the elders in the family and the Society. Hence, the families have not been scattered and spoiled.

10.The communal system is very much indispensable for the world to function orderly and smoothly and it enables the people to adhere to the moral and disciplinary code. Therefore, we have to compulsorily follow the communal system. We come cross with many details in the Old Testament of the Bible. Further, Nehemiah, the son of Hachaliah stated that
“And Esdras the priest stood up, and said to them: You have transgressed, and taken strange wives, to add to the sins of Israel.
 And now make confession to the Lord the God of your fathers, and do his pleasure, and separate yourselves from the people of the land, and from your strange wives”(Ezra.10:10-11).Further, Nehemia said that “In those days also I saw Jews that married wives, women of Azotus, and of Ammon, and of Moab.  And their children spoke half in the speech of Azotus, and could not speak the Jews' language, but they spoke according to the language of this and that people.  And I chid them, and laid my curse upon them. And I beat some of them, and shaved off their hair, and made them swear by God that they would not give their daughters to their sons, nor take their daughters for their sons, nor for themselves, saying:”(Nehemia.13:23-25).

11.On 23.03.2014, the fourth Annual Day was celebrated in the Loyola Engineering College, Chennai. When, Hon’ble Bharath Joshie, the British Deputy Commissioner Spoke in that function, he instructed the students “Never forget your roots” (The New Indian Express, dated 24.03.2014)

12.Further, God created Adam and Eve. The human kind has originated from them. But, how it is possible that Americans are tall, the Japanese People are short, the Africans are black in their complexion, the Europeans are fair in their complexion, and the Indians are neither fair nor dark in their complexion, but almost wheatish in their complexion? Similarly, the communal system also originated from the ancient period. It was created so that man could lead a morality base disciplined life, with solidarity.

13. Therefore, if intercaste marriage is held or solemnized the discipline will crumble. The code of discipline will be destroyed. Therefore, let us give the girls in marriage, within our respective castes and let us choose the girls, for marriage within our respective castes. Let us follow the world with the code of discipline. Let us follow the world with the code of moral order. Let us follow the world with the the code of Natural Order.

14. Finally, let us take into consideration of the identical advice, imparted by Moses to the Israelites, as an order. “The Israelites were told “not to marry the Canaanites”. Moses answered the children of Israel, and said by the command of the Lord: The tribe of the children of Joseph hath spoken rightly.And this is the law promulgated by the Lord touching the daughters of Salphaad: Let them marry to whom they will, only so that it be to men of their own tribe.  Lest the possession of the children of Israel be mingled from tribe to tribe. For all men shall marry wives of their own tribe and kindred:  And all women shall take husbands of the same tribe: that the inheritance may remain in the families,  And that the tribes be not mingled one with another, but remain so As they were separated by the Lord. And the daughters of Salphaad did as was commanded :”( Numbers. 36:6-10).

16.Therefore, let us take steps to follow the Natural Order and  Moral Order, by adhering to the traditional and cultural heritage and by strengthening the caste-system in order to make the world as orderly and peaceful.
                                By  G. ALEX BENZIGER, ADVOCATE

      ENCLOSURES-1 to 15

Bottom of Form
Report: Only 16% of Baltimore Teens Raised With Married Parents
By Lauretta Brown | May 7, 2015 | 6:57 AM EDT
 (CNSNews.com) – A new report released by the Family Research Council’s Marriage and Religion Research Institute (MARRI) says that only 16 percent of 15- to 17-year-old teens in Baltimore have been raised in an intact, married family.
The report, released Wednesday and compiled in light of the recent Baltimore riots, cites Census Bureau statistics showing that, in terms of family units, Baltimore is “one of the five least intact counties of America,” along with Cuyahoga, Ohio; the Bronx, N.Y.; the District of Columbia; and Shelby County, Tenn.
The report cites studies indicating that children who grow up in intact, married families are least likely to experience poverty during their youth, because married families generally earn higher incomes than stepfamilies, cohabiting families, divorced families, separated families, and single-parent families.
The report says children raised in intact, married families tend to have better educational attainment and achievement than those from non-intact families. They are more likely to achieve higher education after graduating from high school than those from other family structures.

“There is a profound crisis in the black community, not just in Baltimore, but nationwide --the crisis is in marriage and family,” Bishop E. W. Jackson, Family Research Council Senior Fellow for Church Ministries and President of S.T.A.N.D, said in a statement on the study.
“Seventy two percent of children are born out of wedlock. Too many fathers are missing from the home, and an alarming number of mothers are still children themselves. Boys in these circumstances are inculcated with the values of the streets, and become susceptible to every negative influence.” Jackson continued.
“Instead of pursuing education, many embrace the attitude of victimization.  Instead of seeking employment, too many prefer to hustle. Race and poverty become excuses for criminality. These social pathologies are perpetuated from one generation to the next.
“Only God -- not government -- can redeem the situation. Only prayer can move the heart of God. Only Pastors led by God can shepherd people out the darkness into the light of faith, family and responsibility. The church is the only institution with the credibility and spiritual power to transform the lives of the people and communities they serve,” Jackson concluded.
Dr. Pat Fagan, director and senior fellow of MARRI, also released a statement on the report.
“The breakdown of marriage in inner city Baltimore is a tragedy for the city and the state of Maryland.  That this level of public violence happened is not surprising, given all that the data tell us about the family life of the inner city,” he said. 
“Three and four generations of single parent family life puts in place conditions of poverty, addiction, crime and abuse.  Children who grow up in these conditions become hardened and distorted, as the riots made visible.  The solution lies in the opposite direction: love and fidelity between fathers and mothers, chastity for the young so that they can be loving and faithful in their turn; prayer and worship to gain the strength to live this love and fidelity and neighborliness to help those around.” 
“When this happens, educational success follows, and business and jobs flow into communities.  Government can do much good, but it cannot deliver love, fidelity or prayer. Leadership on these must come from other institutions,” Fagan concluded.



By Ali Meyer | May 11, 2015 | 2:21 PM EDT

(CNSNews.com) - Forty-five percent of American mothers in their twenties have never been married, according to data that the Census Bureau releasedleading into the Mother’s Day weekend.

As of June 2014, according to the Census Bureau, there were 8,118,000 American women who were mothers and were from 20 to 29 years of age. Of these 8,118,000 American mothers in their twenties, 3,689,000 had never been married. That is 45.4 percent.
"In comparison with all mothers, young mothers are more likely to have had their first birth when they were neither married nor cohabiting,” states the Census. “Among young mothers who had their first birth between 2005 and June of 2012, 38 percent were neither married nor cohabiting at the time of the first birth.”
While the percentage of babies who are born to unmarried mothers is increasing, the average number of babies born per woman is declining.
“The average number of children ever born has dropped from more than three children per woman in 1976 to about two children per woman in 2012,” says the Census Bureau’s report on “Fertility of Women in the United States: 2012,” which was published in 2014.
Of the 4,125,353 who had a child in the 12 months prior to the 2012 Census Bureau survey, 31.3 percent had never been married and 7.0 percent were not married at the time of the survey. Only 61.8 percent of the new mothers was “currently married.”
Women living below the poverty line, according to the Census Bureau, had a higher birth rate in 2012 than women living above it.
“Twenty eight percent of women with a birth in the prior year were living in poverty in 2012, up from 25 percent in 2008,” said the Census Bureau report. “The fertility rate for women in poverty was 82 births per 1,000—higher than the fertility rate of those with incomes at 100 to 199 percent of poverty (63 births per 1,000) and almost twice as high as those with incomes at or above 200 percent of poverty (45 births per 1,000).”

Bottom of Form
FFF: Mother’s Day: May 10, 2015
May 06, 2015
Release Number: CB15-FF.08
The driving force behind Mother’s Day was Anna Jarvis, who organized observances in Grafton, W.Va., and Philadelphia, Pa., on May 10, 1908. As the annual celebration became popular around the country, Jarvis asked members of Congress to set aside a day to honor mothers. She succeeded in 1914, when Congress designated the second Sunday in May as Mother’s Day.
How Many Mothers
43.5 million
Number of women between the ages of 15 and 50 who have children. These mothers gave birth to 95.8 million children.
Source: Fertility of Women in the United States: 2014, Detailed Tables, Table 2
3.9 million
Number of women between the ages of 15 and 50 who gave birth in the past 12 months.
Source: U.S. Census Bureau, 2013 American Community Survey, Table B13002
Percentage of women age 15 to 50 who had a birth in the past 12 months who were unmarried.
Source: U.S. Census Bureau, 2013 American Community Survey, Table S1301
How Many Children
Number of births per 1,000 women age 15-44 in 2013, down 1 percent from 2012.
Source: National Center for Health Statistics, National Vital Statistics Reports, Page 4
Percentage of women age 15 to 50 who have had two children. About 42.4 percent had no children, 17 percent had one, 11.7 percent had three, and about 6.8 percent had four or more.
Source: Fertility of Women in the United States: 2014, Detailed Tables, Table 1
Characteristics of Women with a Recent Birth
3.932 million
The number of registered births in 2013, less than 1 percent fewer births in 2012. Of this number, 273,105 were to teens 15 to 19.
Source: National Center for Health Statistics, National Vital Statistics Reports
Percentage of women age 16 to 50 who had a birth in the past 12 months who were in the labor force.
Source: 2013 American Community Survey, American FactFinder, Table S1301
The percentage of women who had given birth in the past 12 months who had a bachelor’s degree or higher.
Source: 2013 American Community Survey, American FactFinder, Table S1301
Percentage of women age 15 to 50 who gave birth in the past year and who have at least a high school diploma.
Source: 2013 American Community Survey, American FactFinder, Table S1301
Number of births in the past year per 1,000 women age 15 to 50 with a graduate or professional degree. The number was 53 per 1,000 for women whose highest level of education was a bachelor’s degree.
Source: 2013 American Community Survey, American FactFinder, Table S1301
Noah and Sophia
The most popular baby names for boys and girls, respectively, in 2013.
Source: Social Security Administration

Mothers Celebrated
Number of florists nationwide in 2013. The 62,222employees in floral shops across our nation will be especially busy preparing, selling and delivering floral arrangements for Mother’s Day.
Source: County Business Patterns: 2013 (NAICS 45311)
Number of employees of greeting-card publishers in 2013.
Source: County Business Patterns: 2013 (NAICS 511191)
The number of cosmetics, beauty supplies and perfume stores nationwide in 2013. Perfume is a popular gift given on Mother’s Day.
Source: County Business Patterns: 2013 (NAICS 44612)
Number of jewelry stores in the United States in 2013 — the place to purchase necklaces, earrings and other timeless pieces for mom.
Source: County Business Patterns: 2013(NAICS 44831)
Stay-at-Home Moms
5.2 million
Number of stay-at-home moms in married couple family groups in 2014.
Source: America’s Families and Living Arrangements: 2014
Taking Care of the Kids
Number of child day care services employees across the country in 2013. They were employed by one of the 74,939 child day care services. In addition, there were 693,325 child day care services without paid employees in 2012. Many mothers turn to these centers to help juggle motherhood and careers.
Source: County Business Patterns: 2013 NAICS 6244
Nonemployer Statistics: 2012
Single Moms
9.9 million
The number of single mothers living with children younger than 18 in 2014, up from 3.4 million in 1970.
Source: America’s Families and Living Arrangements, 2014.
Number of women age 15 to 50 who had a birth in the past 12 months and were living with a cohabiting partner.
Source: 2013 American Community Survey, American FactFinder, Table B13004
The following is a list of observances typically covered by the Census Bureau’s Facts for Features series:

African-American History Month (February)
Super Bowl
Valentine's Day (Feb. 14)
Women's History Month (March)
Irish-American Heritage Month (March)/
      St. Patrick's Day (March 17)
Earth Day (April 22)
Asian/Pacific American Heritage Month (May)
Older Americans Month (May)
Mother's Day
Hurricane Season Begins (June 1)
Father's Day
The Fourth of July (July 4)
Anniversary of Americans With Disabilities Act (July 26)
Back to School (August)
Labor Day
Grandparents Day
Hispanic Heritage Month (Sept. 15-Oct. 15)
Unmarried and Single Americans Week
Halloween (Oct. 31)
American Indian/Alaska Native Heritage Month (November)
Veterans Day (Nov. 11)
Thanksgiving Day
The Holiday Season (December)
Editor’s note: The preceding data were collected from a variety of sources and may be subject to sampling variability and other sources of error. Facts for Features are customarily released about two months before an observance in order to accommodate magazine production timelines. Questions or comments should be directed to the Census Bureau’s Public Information Office: telephone: 301-763-3030; fax: 301-763-3762; or e-mail: <PIO@census.gov>.

Last Revised: May 8, 2015
Some content on this site is available in several different electronic formats. Some of the files may require a plug-in or additional software to view. Please visit theDownload Plug-In page for a full list.
FFF: Mother’s Day: May 10, 2015




 If 39 Percent of the Elderly want to die because they’re lonely. 

If 39 Percent of the Elderly Want to Die Because They’re Lonely, Should the State Pay for their Suicide?
Written by Bethany Blankley
Feb 24, 2016
The Oregon Public Health Division recently released its annual report, “Death with Dignity Act 2015 Data,” which details the number of people who requested physician-assisted suicide last year, and why. The report states its data is derived from the required reporting forms and death certificates that the Oregon Public Health Division receives (as of January 27, 2016).
Oregon’s Death with Dignity Act (DWDA) was enacted in 1997, which legally permits terminallyill adult Oregonians to obtain and use prescriptions from their physicians to selfadminister lethal doses of medications.
But the statistics the Department reports reveal that the greatest number of people dying are elderly, low income, isolated, unmarried/divorced/widowed women– who are not terminally ill.
Michael Burgess, a spokesman for the New York Alliance Against Assisted Suicideand former director of the New York State Office for the Aging (who is lobbying New York not to pass an assisted suicide bill) attests that Oregon’s findings are “disturbing.” He points out that those most likely to seek physician-assisted suicide “are vulnerable seniors who rely on government health insurance and are alone and dependent.”
Is being alone and dependent on the government “a good enough reason” for the government to help someone commit suicide?
The majority of people asking to die in Oregon did not have cancer.
They didn’t ask to die because they were in chronic, physical pain.
Nor did they have some incurable illness.
According to the statistics, “similar to previous years, the three most frequently mentioned endoflife concerns were:
·         decreasing ability to participate in activities that made life enjoyable (96.2%),
·         loss of autonomy (92.4%), and
·         loss of dignity (75.4%).”
Why were physicians assisting suicides for people who were not terminally ill, as the law specifies?
Shouldn’t these doctors be prosecuted for murder?
Some liken physician-assisted suicide to elder abuse. And Oregon’s assisted suicide statistics do support that concern.
According to the most recent study of elder abuse published by the New England Journal of Medicine, the most vulnerable person in society is a poor, elderly woman. Seniors who are women, isolated, have functional impairment, and little to no resources are most vulnerable to be subject to state/physician-assisted suicide.
If elderly women are lonely, isolated, and depressed they can get a pill to die in Oregon.
Is being lonely and isolated a reason to die? And to have the state pay for suicide?
Diane Coleman, President and CEO of Not Dead Yet, a national disability rights organization, argues that Oregon’s data also evidences that the disabled are very much threatened by legalized assisted suicide. She says, “The Oregon data shows that unaddressed disability-related concerns underlie assisted suicide requests. A state policy of assisted suicide targeting this population sends the message that a life with a disability is not worth living, and society would rather help end your life early than address your concerns.”
Burgess argues, instead of funding physician-assisted suicide, taxpayers should support its most vulnerable through funding that would “provide them with better access to palliative care, mental health counseling and social support, rather than life-taking options.”
If Oregon is a benchmark for the rest of America, more death, in greater numbers, lie ahead.
Since the law was passed in 1997, prescriptions were written for 1,545 people under the DWDA; of these 991 patients died from taking the medicine. From 1998 through 2013, the number of prescriptions written annually increased by 12 percent. During 2014 and 2015, the number of prescriptions written increased by an average of 24 percent. During 2015, the rate of DWDA deaths was 38.6 per 10,000 total deaths.
Death with Dignity, a 501(c)3 non-profit organization, is lobbying to implement “Death with Dignity laws around the United States based on the groundbreaking Oregon model.” It suggests that assisted suicide laws will “expand the freedom of all qualified terminally ill Americans to make their own end-of-life decisions, including how they die.”
But if Oregon is any model, people aren’t receiving assisted suicide because they are terminally ill.
They are asking to die because they don’t enjoy life. Not enjoying life isn’t a reason for the state to pay for suicide. Rather, the state, non-profits, churches, and community organizations can become more involved with the elderly. Numerous programs exist:
·         Active Minds
·         The Jed Foundation
·         Man Therapy
·         Mental Health America
·         The Trevor Project

There are many options other than death. Or murder. If anything, Oregon is the example not to follow. Unless Americans want their government to kill off the elderly.
The views expressed in this opinion article are solely those of their author and are not necessarily either shared or endorsed by Constitution.com.


Single Americans now more than half of U.S. population
Rich MillerBloomberg
Think you're all alone? Over 1/2 Americans now single
September 10, 2014 Washington
 Single Americans make up more than half of the adult population for the first time since the government began compiling such statistics in 1976.
Some 124.6 million Americans were single in August, 50.2 percent of those who were 16 years or older, according to data used by the Bureau of Labor Statistics in its monthly job-market report. That percentage had been hovering just below 50 percent since about the beginning of 2013 before edging above it in July and August. In 1976, it was 37.4 percent and has been trending upward since.
In a report to clients entitled "Selfies," economist Edward Yardeni flagged the increase in the proportion of singles to more than 50 percent, calling it "remarkable." The president of Yardeni Research in New York said the rise has "implications for our economy, society and politics."
Singles, particularly younger ones, are more likely to rent than to own their dwellings. Never-married young singles are less likely to have children and previously married older ones, many of whom have adult children, are unlikely to have young kids, Yardeni wrote. That will influence how much money they spend and what they buy.
He argued the increase in single-person households also is exaggerating income inequality in the U.S.
"While they have less household earnings than married people, they also have fewer expenses, especially if there are no children in their households," Yardeni wrote.
The percentage of adult Americans who have never married has risen to 30.4 percent from 22.1 percent in 1976, while the proportion that are divorced, separated or widowed increased to 19.8 percent from 15.3 percent, according to the economist. 


Home » Poll: Americans Think Homosexuals Make Up a Quarter of the Population
Poll: Americans Think Homosexuals Make Up a Quarter of the Population
Posted on May 23, 2015 by Philip Hodges
If a quarter of the population were homosexual, we’d have quite a dwindling population. Liberals wouldn’t be complaining about how we’re overpopulated. And maybe they wouldn’t be pushing girls and women to get abortions.
You can thank a couple of things for this complete misperception by Americans that homosexuals take up nearly 25% of the population. For one, homosexuals have one of the most powerful lobbies. In addition, homosexuality has completely saturated the media and academic systems, from elementary education all the way up to universities. It’s everywhere, and people are taught from their earliest days that homosexuality is completely normal, beautiful and natural, that it makes perfect biological sense, and that everyone should voice his utmost support for it. Not publicly endorsing it is a hate crime. From the Daily Caller:
Americans think 23 percent of their fellow citizens are gay, according to a new poll by Gallup. That’s an exaggeration so strong, it’s close to ten times as high as the actual figure.
The 23 percent estimate is down slightly from a 25 percent estimate in 2011, but still much, much higher than current research indicates the actual rate to be, which, according toresearch by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, is about 3 percent of Americans. Gallup’s own daily polling finds that 3.8 percent of Americans identify as gay, lesbian, bisexual, or transgender.
However, only 9 percent of those polled by Gallup even believed the gay population to be less than five percent. Thirty-three percent of respondents believed the figure to be above25 percent.
The exaggeration of America’s gay population is apparent across many different demographics. Those with more education were less off with their estimates, but even those with postgraduate degrees placed the gay population at 15 percent, four to five times its actual figure.
Overall, those from groups more sympathetic to gays exaggerated their population to a greater degree. Social liberals thought 24 percent of the population was gay, compared to just 19 percent of social conservatives, and supporters of gay marriage believe that 25 percent of their fellow Americans are gay, compared to a 21 percent estimate from gay marriage opponents.
Wildly off-the-mark beliefs about the makeup of America’s population are nothing new.Earlier polls by Gallup have found that Americans believe the country is one-third black (blacks are about 14 percent of the country) and 30 percent Hispanic (they are a little over half that).
Because of how much homosexuality’s saturated our everyday lives, it seems as if it homosexuals make up a substantial amount of the populace. That’s what we’re led to believe anyway. They might have the loudest voices, but in reality, they’re a tiny minority, screaming at everyone not just to tolerate them, but to openly and publicly endorse them and their behavior and to excoriate those who don’t.



Washington Post 
                                                  Friday, January 7, 2011; 11:47 PM
Parent One, Parent Two to replace references to mother, father on passport forms
Goodbye, Mom and Dad. Hello, Parent One and Parent Two.
The State Department has decided to make U.S. passport application forms "gender neutral" by removing references to mother and father, officials said, in favor of language that describes one's parentage somewhat less tenderly.
The change is "in recognition of different types of families," according to a statement issued just before Christmas that drew widespread attention Friday after a Fox News report.
The announcement of the change was buried at the end of a Dec. 22 news release, titled "Consular Report of Birth Abroad Certificate Improvements," that highlighted unrelated security changes.
The new policy is a win for gay rights groups, a vocal and financially generous Democratic voting bloc that has pushed for the change since Barack Obama began his presidential transition in late 2008. The decision follows last month's vote to end the military's "don't ask, don't tell" policy, which gay leaders consider one of their biggest victories in years.
Fred Sainz, vice president of the Human Rights Campaign, a gay rights advocacy group, called the news "a positive step forward for all American families. It was time that the federal government acknowledged the reality that hundreds of thousands of kids in this country are being raised by same-sex parents."
Tony Perkins, president of the Family Research Council, blasted it as reflecting the "topsy-turvy world of left-wing political correctness."
"This is clearly designed," he said in a statement, "to advance the causes of same-sex 'marriage' and homosexual parenting without statutory authority, and violates the spirit if not the letter of the Defense of Marriage Act," the federal law that defines marriage as between one man and one woman.
He called on Congress to take action.
It was not immediately clear whether a similar change would be made to all federal documents. But after Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton announced in 2009 that partners of gay American diplomats would be eligible for benefits accorded to spouses, the rest of the U.S. government followed suit.
In 2000, Clinton was the first wife of a president to march in a gay-pride parade, and as secretary of state she has advocated on behalf of gay rights. In a speech in June she said the United States "was elevating our rights dialogues with other governments and conducting public diplomacy to protect the rights of lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender persons."
Rosemary Macray of the State Department Bureau of Consular Affairs shrugged off complaints of political correctness and described the switch as an unremarkable bureaucratic tweak.
"Really, there have been so many changes in the last 10 or 15 years with reproductive technology and the like, and so this is why it is important for us to accurately reflect families in these applications," she said.
The DS-11 form is required of first-time passport applicants and children younger than 16. The change will go into effect Feb. 1 and will be part of an already-scheduled revision of passport forms, Macray said.
"It's not going to really involve any expense to taxpayers," she said.
sheridanm@washpost.com ed.okeefe@washingtonpost.com

6 A
France is set to ban the words 'mother' and 'father' from all official documents under controversial plans to legalise gay marriage
PUBLISHED: 14:31 GMT, 24 September 2012 | UPDATED: 14:31 GMT, 24 September 2012
France is set to ban the words 'mother' and 'father' from all official documents under controversial plans to legalise gay marriage.The move which has outraged Catholics means only the word 'parents' would be used in identical marriage ceremonies for all heterosexual and same-sex couples. The draft law states that 'marriage is a union of two people, of different or the same gender'.And it says all references to 'mothers and fathers' in the civil code - which enshrines French law - will be swapped for simply 'parents'.The law would also give equal adoption rights to homosexual and heterosexual couples.
Justice Minister Christiane Taubira told France's Catholic newspaper La Croix: 'Who is to say that a heterosexual couple will bring a child up better than a homosexual couple, that they will guarantee the best conditions for the child's development?'What is certain is that the interest of the child is a major preoccupation for the government.'The head of the French Catholic Church Cardinal Philippe Barbarin warned followers last week that gay marriage could lead to legalised incest and polygamy in society.He told the Christian's RFC radio station: 'Gay marriage would herald a complete breakdown in society.'This could have innumerable consequences. Afterward they will want to create couples with three or four members. And after that, perhaps one day the taboo of incest will fall.'
Leading French Catholics have also published a 'Prayer for France', which says: 'Children should not be subjected to adults' desires and conflicts, so they can fully benefit from the love of their mother and father.'And Pope Benidict invited 30 French bishops to Italy to urge them to fight against the new law.He told them: 'We have there a true challenge to take on.'The family that is the foundation of social life is threatened in many places, following a concept of human nature that has proven defective.'
And leading French bishop Dominique Rey has called on the government to hold a referendum on gay marriage.He said: 'A referendum must be held to allow a real debate and to make sure the government is not in the grip of the lobbies.'A majority of the population agrees with the traditional view of marriage.'
President Francois Hollande pledged in his manifesto to legalise gay marriage.The draft law will be presented to his cabinet for approval on October 31.


California Governor Bans the Words ‘Husband’ and ‘Wife’ In Marriage

Posted on July 14, 2014  V2A

In the state of California, heterosexual married couples can no longer be referred to as husbands and wives. Democrat Governor Jerry Brown has signed a bill into law that not only redefines marriage, but eliminates any reference to husband and wife, replacing each with the generic term of spouse.
SB 1306 was sponsored by Democrat Mark Leno from San Francisco. Christian News Network reports on the content of said bill.
“Under existing law, a reference to ‘husband’ and ‘wife,’ ‘spouses,’ or ‘married persons,’ or a comparable term, includes persons who are lawfully married to each other and persons who were previously lawfully married to each other, as is appropriate under the circumstances of the particular case,” it reads. “The bill would delete references to ‘husband’ or ‘wife’ in the Family Code and would instead refer to a ‘spouse,’ and would make other related changes.”


School Told to Call Kids ‘Purple Penguins’ Because ‘Boys and Girls’ Is Not Inclusive to Transgender

by  KATHERINE TIMPF    October 8, 2014 1:50 PM @KATTIMPF

Nebraska teachers are instructed to ask students what their preferred pronouns are.

 A Nebraska school district has instructed its teachers to stop referring to students by “gendered expressions” such as “boys and girls,” and use “gender inclusive” ones such as “purple penguins” instead. “Don’t use phrases such as ‘boys and girls,’ ‘you guys,’ ‘ladies and gentlemen,’ and similarly gendered expressions to get kids’ attention,” instructs a training document given to middle-school teachers at the Lincoln Public Schools. “Create classroom names and then ask all of the ‘purple penguins’ to meet on the rug,” it advises. The document also warns against asking students to “line up as boys or girls,” and suggests asking them to line up by whether they prefer “skateboards or bikes/milk or juice/dogs or cats/summer or winter/talking or listening.” “Always ask yourself . . . ‘Will this configuration create a gendered space?’” the document says. The instructions were part of a list called “12 steps on the way to gender inclusiveness” developed by Gender Spectrum, an organization that “provides education, training and support to help create a gender sensitive and inclusive environment for children of all ages.” Other items on the list include asking all students about their preferred pronouns and decorating the classroom with “all genders welcome” door hangers. If teachers still find it “necessary” to mention that genders exist at all, the document states, they must list them as “boy, girl, both or neither.” Furthermore, it instructs teachers to interfere and interrupt if they ever hear a student talking about gender in terms of “boys and girls” so the student can learn that this is wrong. “Point out and inquire when you hear others referencing gender in a binary manner,” it states. “Ask things like . . . ‘What makes you say that? I think of it a little differently.’ Provide counter-narratives that challenge students to think more expansively about their notions of gender.” The teachers were also given a handout created by the Center for Gender Sanity, which explains to them that “Gender identity . . . can’t be observed or measured, only reported by the individual,” and an infographic called “The Genderbred Person,” which was produced by www.ItsPronouncedMetroSexual.com. Despite controversy, Lincoln Superintendent Steve Joel has declared that he is “happy” and “pleased” with the training documents. “We don’t get involved with politics,” he told KLIN Radio’s Drive Time Lincoln radio show. “We don’t get involved with gender preferences. We’re educating all kids . . . and we can’t be judgmental,” he said.


Nearly 40% say marriage is becoming obsolete


Nearly 40% say marriage is becoming obsolete – USATODAY.com: Marriage is increasingly optional and could be on its way to obsolescence,according to a survey of more than 2,600 Americans that examines changing attitudes about relationships today. Among the 2,691 adults surveyed by the Pew Research Center last month, 39% say marriage is becoming obsolete, up from 28% who responded to the same question posed by Time magazine in 1978.
‘If four in 10 are saying it’s becoming obsolete, they’re registering an awareness of a very important social change,’ says Paul Taylor of Pew.
Family Research Council President Tony Perkins responded :
“According to the study, only five percent of Americans under age 30 do not plan on marrying. This doesn’t sound like ‘the end of marriage,’ as some are claiming the survey indicates.
“There’s certainly reason for concern about some trends – such as the increase in the percentage of births that occur out of wedlock from five percent in 1960 to 41 percent in 2008. At the same time, some interpretations of the data expressed in the media are distorted. A decline in the percentage of adults who are married is largely because people delay marriage, not because young men and women are foregoing marriage completely.
“Two-thirds of Americans are ‘optimistic’ about the institutions of marriage and the family. Far fewer say that about schools, the economy, or ‘morals and ethics.’ It’s not surprising that most people consider single parents or cohabiting couples who are raising their own children to be ‘families.’ The question is whether they are the kind of families we should seek or, as a society, should foster and encourage. If a couple is not raising children, Americans are still five times more likely to declare them not to be a family if they are a same-sex or cohabiting couple than if they are married.
The research is still clear – married husbands and wives, and their children, are happier, healthier, and more prosperous than people in any other household setting. TimeMagazine’s Belinda Luscombe gets it right in the end when she says that ‘marriage is still the best avenue most people have for making their dreams come true.


Lawyer: 68 Million Americans Have Criminal Records – More Than Population of France
By Melanie Arter | July 15, 2014 | 10:32 AM EDT

 (CNSNews.com) – A trial lawyer who testified last month before the House Committee on the Judiciary Over-Criminalization Task Force said the U.S. is “in danger of becoming a nation of criminals,” estimating that over 68 million Americans have criminal records – more than the population of France.
Rick Jones, executive director of Neighborhood Defender Service of Harlem, testified on June 26 on behalf of the National Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers, that “68 million people living with convictions – more than the entire population of France. We are in danger of becoming a nation of criminals, because we are policing from a place of fear.”

In written testimony, Jones estimated that “some 65 million people have a criminal record, citing a report from the National Employment Law Project, titled, “65 Million Need Not Apply: The Case for Reforming Criminal Background Checks for Employment” – a product of NELP’s Second Chance Labor Project, “which promotes the employment rights of people with criminal records and fairer and more accurate criminal background checks for employment.”
The report’s findings were based on information from the 2008 “Survey of State Criminal History Information Systems” by the U.S. Bureau of Justice Statistics.
According to the Bureau of Justice Statistics Strategic Plan 2005-2008, under the heading “Criminal History Records,” 68 million people had criminal records at the close of 2003. “At the close of 2003, States and the FBI maintained criminal history records on approximately 68 million individuals. Of these, over 50 million records were available for interstate background checks.”
“Since the initiation of the BJS National Criminal History Record Improvement Program (NCHIP) in 1995, the number of criminal records has increased 35%, and the number of records which are now shareable among the States increased 97%,” BJS said.
According to the latest World Bank data, France has a population of 66 million as of 2013.
“68 million people in this country are living with a criminal record. That’s one in every four adults – 20 million people with felony convictions, 14 million new arrests every year, 2.2 million people residing in jail or prison. That’s more than anywhere else in the world,” Jones told the task force.
He proposed that the U.S. “move from penalty, prosecution and endless punishment to forgiveness, redemption and restoration,” specifically calling for a “national restoration of rights day.”
A once-a-year national restoration of rights day would consist of: “educational programs for employers, skills training workshops for the affected community, jobs fairs, certificate of relief programs at no-cost and … no-cost opportunities to clean up your rap sheet.”


Census: More Americans 18-to-34 Now Live With Parents Than With Spouse
By Terence P. Jeffrey | April 19, 2017 | 4:36 PM EDT
(Wikimedia Commons/Framartin)
(CNSNews.com) - Four decades ago, in the mid-1970s, young American adults--in the 18-to-34 age bracket--were far more likely to be married and living with a spouse than living in their parents’ home.
But that is no longer the case, according to a new study by the U.S. Census Bureau.
“There are now more young people living with their parents than in any other arrangement,” says the Census Bureau study.
“What is more,” says the study, “almost 9 in 10 young people who were living in their parents’ home a year ago are still living there today, making it the most stable living arrangement.”
The Number 1 living arrangement today for Americans in the 18-to-34 age bracket, according to the Census Bureau, is to reside without a spouse in their parents’ home.
That is where you can now find 22.9 million 18-to-34 year olds—compared to the 19.9 million who are married and live with their spouse.
In 1975, according to Census Bureau data, 31.9 million Americans in the 18-to-34 age bracket were married and lived with their spouse.
Back then, this was the most common living arrangement for that age bracket.
Also in 1975, 14.7 million in the 18-to-34 age bracket lived in their parents’ home; 6.1 million lived in an “other” arrangement (including with siblings, grandparents, other relatives, or unrelated roommates); 3.1 million lived alone, and 0.7 million cohabitated with an unmarried partner.
In 2016, according to the Census Bureau, only 19.9 million were married and lived with a spouse—while 22.9 million lived in their parents’ home.
Also in 2016, 15.6 million lived in an “other” arrangement. 9.2 million cohabitated with an unmarried partner, and 5.9 million lived alone.
The Census Bureau counted college students living in a dormitory as living in their parents' home. By contrast, it counted someone as living with a spouse even if they and their spouse still lived with a parent.  The category of living with a spouse, the study said, included any “young adult who lives with a spouse, regardless of whether anyone else is present in the household (e.g., parents, roommates, other family members).”
In 1975, when calculated as percentages according to the Census numbers, 57 percent of 18-to-34 year olds lived with a spouse, 26 percent lived in their parents’ home, 11 percent lived in an “other” arrangement, 5 percent lived alone, and 1 percent lived with an unmarried partner.
In 2016, 31 percent lived in their parents’ home, 27 percent lived with their spouse, 21 percent lived in an “other” arrangement, 12 percent lived with an unmarried partner, and 8 percent lived alone.
The rise in young adults living at home coincided with a decline in the economic status of young men.
“More young men are falling to the bottom of the income ladder,”says the Census Bureau study. “In 1975, only 25 percent of men, aged 25 to 34, had incomes of less than $30,000 per year. By 2016, that share rose to 41 percent of young men (incomes for both years are in 2015 dollars).”
“There are now more young women than young men with a college degree, whereas in 1975 educational attainment among young men outpaced that of women,” says the study.
In the last decade, says the study, the pace of change in the living arrangements of young Americans has been rapid--but has not been uniform across the states and regions of the country.
“Within the last 10 years, the breadth and speed of change in living arrangements have been tremendous,” it says. “In 2005, the majority of young people lived independently in their own household (either alone, with a spouse, or an unmarried partner), which was the predominant living arrangement in 35 states. By 2015—just a decade later—only six states had a majority of young people living independently.”
With the exceptions of California and Mississippi, the Top Ten states with the highest percentages of 18-to-34 year olds living with their parents were concentrated along the Atlantic coast. (See chart below). They included: New Jersey (46.9%), Connecticut (41.6%), New York (40.6%) Maryland (38.5%), Florida (38.3%), California (38.1%), Rhode Island (37.1%), Pennsylvania (37.1%), Massachusetts (37.0%) and Mississippi (36.8%).
With the exceptions of Washington and Oregon, the ten states with the lowest percentages of 18-to-34 year olds living with their parents were concentrated in the Midwest and Mountain states.
These included North Dakota (14.1%), South Dakota (19.9%), Wyoming (20.9%), Nebraska (22.7%), Iowa (22.8%), Montana (24.1%), Colorado (24.6%), Kansas (26.0%), Washington (26.6%) and Oklahoma (26.7%), which tied with Oregon (26.7%).
“Why are there geographical differences in young adult living arrangements?” the Census study asks. “For one, local labor and housing markets shape the ability of young people to find good jobs and affordable housing, which in turn affects whether and when they form their own households.”


'First Time in Human History': People 65 and Older Will Outnumber Children Under 5
By Terence P. Jeffrey | March 31, 2016 | 3:20 PM EDT
People in line at an ATM machine in Athens, Greece, on July 10, 2015. (AP Photo/Spyros Tsakiris)
(CNSNews.com) - Sometime in the next four years the global population of human beings who are 65 and older will surpass those under 5 for the first time, according to a new report from the U.S. Census Bureau.
“For the first time in human history, people aged 65 and older will outnumber children under age 5,” says the report, entitled “An Aging World: 2015.”
“This crossing is just around the corner, before 2020,” says the report.
“These two age groups will then continue to grow in opposite directions,” it says. “By 2050, the proportion of the population 65 and older (15.6 percent) will be more than double that of children under age 5 (7.2 percent).
“This unique demographic phenomenon of the ‘crossing’ is unprecedented,” says the Census Bureau.
(Screen capture of chart in Census Bureau report.)
The Census Bureau report included a ranking of “The World’s 25 Oldest Countries and Areas” in 2015 based on the percentage of the country’s population that was 65 or older.
While Japan ranked as the oldest country, the other 24 in the top 25 included 22 European countries, plus Canada and the U.S. territory of Puerto Rico.
The world’s youngest countries were in the Persian Gulf.
“The percentage of the population aged 65 and over in 2015 ranked from a high of 26.6 percent for Japan to a low of around 1 percent for Qatar and the United Arab Emirates,” said the report.
“Of the world’s 25 oldest countries and areas in 2015, 22 are in Europe, with Germany or Italy leading the ranks of European countries for many years, including currently.”
After Japan, with 26.6 percent of its population 65 or older, Germany ranked No. 2 with 21.5 percent of its population 65 or older. Italy ranked No. 3 with 21.2 percent of its population 65 or older; and Greece ranked No. 4 with 20.5 percent of its population 25 or older.
The Census Bureau report estimates that between now and 2050, the population that is 65 and older will more than double while the population under 20 years of age see almost no growth.
At the same time, those in what the report calls “the working age population”—people who are 20 to 64 years of age—will increase by only 25.6 percent.
“Among the 7.3 billion people worldwide in 2015, an estimated 8.5 percent, or 617.1 million, are aged 65 and older,” says the report. “The number of older people is projected to increase more than 60 percent in just 15 years—in 2030, there will be about 1 billion older people globally, equivalent to 12.0 percent of the total population.
“The share of older population will continue to grow in the following 20 years—by 2050, there will be 1.6 billion older people worldwide, representing 16.7 percent of the total world population of 9.4 billion,” says the report. “This is equivalent to an average annual increase of 27.1 million older people from 2015 to 2050.
“In contrast to the 150 percent expansion of the population aged 65 and over in the next 35 years, the youth population (under age 20) is projected to remain almost flat, 2.5 billion in 2015 and 2.6 billion in 2050,” the report says.
“Over the same period, the working-age population (aged 20 to 64) will increase only moderately, 25.6 percent,” the Census Bureau says. “The working-age popula­tion share of total population will shrink slightly in the decades to come, largely due to the impact of low fertility and increasing life expectancy.”
While there has been a global increase in human longevity, it is not the primary force driving the global population toward a demographic where the elderly will outnumber young children.
“The main demographic force behind population aging is declining fertility rates,” says the Census Bureau report. “Populations with high fertility tend to have a young age distribution with a high proportion of children and a low proportion of older people, while those with low fertility have the opposite, resulting in an older society.”
“In many countries today, the total fertility rate (TFR) has fallen below the 2.1 children that a couple needs to replace themselves,” says the report. “In 2015, the TFR is near or below replacement levels in all world regions except Africa.”
Europe has a particularly low fertility rate.
“The more developed countries in Europe, where fertility reduction started more than 100 years ago, have had TFR levels below replacement rate since the 1970s,” says the Census Bureau report. “Currently, the average TFR for Europe is a very low 1.6.”
In the United States in 2015, according to the report, 14.9 percent of the population is 65 or older. In 2050, the report estimates, 22.1 percent of the U.S. population will be 65 or older.
The Census Bureau report includes a sidebar on “Support of Childless Older People in an Aging Europe.”
“Traditionally, children are the mainstay of old age support, espe­cially when only one parent is still living,” says this sidebar authored by researcher Martina Brandt at Dortmund University and Christian Deindl at University of Cologne. “However, people are not only living longer but also having fewer children, with rising childlessness among the older people.”
“Thus new challenges arise: Who will provide help and care to the childless older people?” they write. “On what support networks can they rely? And, what role does the state play in care provision?”

Polyamorists set up lobby group
Posted February 7, 2013 by Jason Marshall & filed under City Hub.
With increasing attention brought to polyamorous relationships by members of of the Liberal Party, a formalised Polyamory Action Lobby (PAL) has been founded to combat the image of poly people as relationship bogeymen.
A spokesperson for the Sydney-based PAL said fear of differently structured relationships should not be used as a weapon to deny monogamous same-sex couples legal recognition.
The PAL are united in opposition to the Australian Christian Lobby’s (ACL) plan to deny same-sex marriage.
“We’re sick of being treated like the bottom of a slippery slope, the fat end of the wedge and the scary inevitable consequence of legalizing same-sex marriage,” the spokesperson said.
“Our lives and our experiences are not toys for power brokers, politicians and lobby groups to play games with.”
The lobby was set up not only to fight for legal rights, but also to challenge cultural misconceptions about polyamorous relationships.
According to the lobby, polyamory is not the same as polygamy, although the two terms are often taken to mean the same thing.
“When people hear ‘polygamy’ they think of a man with multiple wives, [which is] often taken in a creepy religious way. But polyamory can be between many people of differing genders and is always consensual,” the spokesperson said.
“We’re against those traditional polygamous relationships that are oppressive in nature. We also think that it’s disingenuous of politicians, especially those on the left who know better, to conflate that sort of polygamy with consensual polyamory.”
The lobby contends there is no reason adults should not be able to form committed relationships with more than one person, and there is no evidence that smaller families are any better off.
“Polyamory often isn’t a choice; if people love more than one person, they can’t help it,” the spokesperson said. “Even if they could [choose], why would it matter?”
As far as the law is concerned, the lobby said the government should not have the right to restrict consenting adult relationships based on love and respect.
“The legal, health and financial protections enjoyed by a spouse in a monogamous relationship must be extended to all partners in a family,” the spokesperson said. “A family should be about security, stability and love; not about its structure.”
A spokesperson for the Australian Christian Lobby said it is a legitimate concern legalising same-sex marriage would lead to a claim for polyamorist marriage. They believe this is already happening.
“Although referred to in the Bible and practiced by some people in the ancient world, polygamy is not condoned by God and has never been accepted in Christian orthodoxy,” the spokesperson said.
“The ACL would not support any move to add to the plurality of relationships already in Australia with the nonsense put forward about polyamorous relationships.”


About the American Association for Nude Recreation
Our Mission: Simply put, we exist "To advocate nudity and nude recreation in appropriate settings while educating and informing society of their value and enjoyment."
The American Association for Nude Recreation is the largest, most long-established organization of its kind in North America. With roots dating to 1931, we have grown from our humble beginnings to an organization that has served 213,000 individuals throughout the United States, Canada, Mexico and beyond. These members enjoy their own backyards and pools with family and friends, as well as over 200 nudist resorts and affiliates.
For over 80 years AANR has espoused the benefits of wholesome nude family recreation. Since our inception it has remained a primary mission to protect the rights of nudists in appropriate settings regardless of age, gender, race or economic status. We continue to proudly endorse the benefits and rights of families to enjoy a skinny dip and other nude recreation pastimes.
Although society has become more tolerant and accepting of nude recreation, we still have a long way to go in educating the public regarding the wholesomeness of our choice of nudity, AANR strives to distinguish between attire and behavior. Nudity, as we espouse it, is the enjoyment of the freedom of being without clothes. As such, it should not be confused with behavior, which may or may not involve nudity. It is imperative that this be understood so that the perpetuated stereotypes disappear and that tolerance for family social nudism is commonly accepted by the generations to come.
It is also the mission of AANR to be an advocate of our rights. As stated in the Nudists’ Bill of Rights, we have the right to hold our values and beliefs; to responsibly enjoy nudity in the company of our family and friends. Nudists are law-abiding citizens and have the right to be treated as such.
Many who did not grow up in a nudist environment find it difficult to fully grasp the concept that regardless of age, nudists are comfortable in their own skin. The human body is merely the vessel that carries us through life, and the transition from child to teen to adult for a nudist is comfortably free of much angst that textiles experience. And yet nudist and textile alike experience the same changes that come to our body’s agility in the autumn years.
Though we members of AANR are all accepting of those who enjoy wholesome nude recreation, we are a collection of individuals who have varying interests and levels of tolerance on a variety of subjects. However, the one constant that must remain among AANR members for us to survive as a viable organization that protects and promotes the right of nude recreation, is that we communicate and work through the challenges that each decade brings to our family in this ever evolving world.
During the past eight decades we have collectively weathered many storms. Recessions. Societal unrest. Global conflict. Reactionary assaults. Media coverage good and bad. Yet our members are resilient and committed, and we have become a stronger organization throughout these changes. Members and club owners are active contributors within their local communities; conscientious stewards of their environment; and most importantly accepting of their neighbors based upon who they are on the inside, not the exterior package or the financial or political clout they may wield.
The growing interest in, and acceptance of, the positive aspects of social nudity has caused many sociology professors to contact AANR looking for more information on the history of nudism, while business professors are often interested in the nude recreation industry. We are a relevant and significant segment of society. So be proud to be a naturist.
AANR’s promise to you is that we will continue to work towards protecting those places where persons have the right to enjoy nudity and privacy. These include sanctioned nude beaches and public lands set aside for that use; certainly it also includes our homes, private backyards, and AANR clubs, campgrounds and resorts as well.
AANR is committed to educating the public regarding the benefits of social family nude recreation, with the emphasis on family. Stories regarding families running nudist clubs, three-generation nudist families, and AANR youth have appeared in scores of mainstream media and helped make great strides toward public education and understanding that nude recreation is a wholesome, family activity.
AANR and its many loyal volunteers advocate, educate and work hard to enhance opportunities for enjoyment of wholesome clothes-free experiences. In the years ahead we seek to grow our ranks by increasing membership and chartering clubs that commit to upholding our principles and standards. We recognize that nude recreation is not for everyone. However, it is a basic ethic of our laws and our culture that we respect the rights of each other to choose, or not choose, nudity as a way of enhancing life. So we urge all members to respect boundaries and communicate openly with one another. Then enjoy a well-deserved Nakation®.
AANR Principles and Standards. While the quality of our facilities may have changed over the years, our commitment to fostering wholesome, nurturing environments that promote body acceptance and respect for all persons has not changed. Members subscribe to the following principles, which you’ll find repeated on every membership card:
We recognize the essential wholesomeness of the human body and that life is enhanced by the naturalness of social nudity. From exercise to relaxation, physical health and mental well being are enriched through social nude recreation. We have the right to practice social nudity in appropriate settings, provided we do not infringe on the rights of others.
AANR's standards state:
AANR welcomes all people willing to conform to its principles and standards, regardless of age, gender, marital status, religious beliefs, ethnic origin or sexual orientation.
*Any agreement to be photographed or to permit any public use of name, address or occupation shall not be a requirement of membership
We reject categorically any attempt to associate the good name and reputation of family social nudism, of any AANR-chartered club, or of the American Association for Nude Recreation, with the sexual exploitation of the human body. We further reject any use of the terms nudist, nudism, family social nudism, or American Association for Nude Recreation, as a cover for sexually-exploitive purposes, commercial or otherwise.
The misuse, abuse or misrepresentation of any member's relationship with an AANR- chartered club, or with AANR, in violation of these Principles and Standards, shall be grounds for termination of membership.
Serving Members and Clubs Through Advocacy and Education. AANR and its regions are not-for-profit organizations. We believe there is a strong symbiotic relationship between people who want an ever increasing array of choices to enjoy clothes free and the clubs and businesses that grow by serving them. Since 1931 we have worked earnestly to promote the interests of both. Both members and clubs help elect a volunteer President, Vice President, Secretary, and the fourteen members of our Board of Trustees. Together, they provide guidance, oversight, their time, and expertise to advancing our mission.
For more information about how AANR helps it members and clubs, go to AANR Making a Difference.
Headquarters and Staff. Day to day operations, providing membership services and assistance to clubs, work in public relations and government affairs are handled by a dedicated staff working from AANR’s headquarters in Kissimmee, Florida. Members and visitors who drop into our office---located just minutes from Walt Disney World---can obtain brochures about various clubs. A lobby store offers the chance to buy much of the merchandise we offer in our on-line shop.
In addition to AANR’s staff, the Association utilizes a number of professionals in the field ranging from legal counsel, government relations and public relations personnel, and more. Wherever, and in whatever capacity, the goal is the same: Promote, Enhance, and Protect nude recreation and nude living.
Our Regions. To aid in carrying out AANR’s mission at local levels, the association is organized into seven geographical regions. Operating as individual corporations, they include:
  • American Association for Nude Recreation Eastern Region
  • American Association for Nude Recreation Midwest Region
  • American Association for Nude Recreation Northwest Region
  • American Association for Nude Recreation Southwestern Region
  • American Association for Nude Recreation Western Region
  • American Association for Nude Recreation Florida Region
  • American Association for Nude Recreation Western Canadian Region
For a map explaining the states, provinces, and territories served by each region, and links to region homepages, please visit AANR Regions.
Our Friends. There are many others who help spread the word about the benefits of going clothes free and help to advance nude recreation. Tour our link library of these Friends of Nude Recreation.


California Allows Children to Have More Than Two Legal Parents

15 OCT 2013 

California Governor Jerry Brown recently signed into law a measure that allows a child, in an appropriate case, to have more than two legal parents.  This is a truly novel development, as states have otherwise uniformly taken the view that three parents is a crowd that cannot be tolerated.  Ever.
The California bill was passed in reaction to a 2011 case, In re M.C., in which two women and a man each seemed to meet the criteria to be a legal parent of the same child.  But the state appellate court held that, given many prior pronouncements from the state’s highest court on the subject, it could not award that status to all three. However, it invited the legislature to reconsider the so-called “rule of two,” an invitation that was accepted.
In this column, I’ll discuss the ruling that brought this question into focus—a disturbing case of a child who had not a single stable parent, despite having three adults potentially holding parental rights with regard to the child—and the potential implications of the legislature’s change to the parentage code.
In re M.C.: A Mess From Beginning to End
M.C. was born into a complicated situation.  Her mother, Melissa, was involved, prior to her pregnancy, with another woman, Irene.  The two women had lived together, although not happily, in a relationship marked by mutual physical abuse, mental illness, and drug use.  Nonetheless, they became registered domestic partners in 2008 (which, at the time was the only status available for same-sex couples in California).  They separated within a few months, and Melissa shortly thereafter became involved with a man, Jesus, with whom she conceived a child.
From the outset, Jesus knew he was the child’s biological father, and he was supportive of Melissa during the pregnancy.  For a few months of the pregnancy, Melissa lived with him and his family and accepted his support.  While still pregnant, she filed the paperwork to dissolve her domestic partnership with Irene—as a domestic partnership status could then be unilaterally dissolved.  Melissa also sought and obtained a temporary restraining order (TRO) based on Irene’s alleged physical abuse of her.
But within two months, and still during Melissa’s pregnancy, Melissa and Irene reconciled.  Melissa left Jesus and said that she was going back to Irene, who had promised to care for her and the baby.  The two women at least briefly lived together in a car and without a cellphone.  Melissa did not provide Jesus with any contact information.  Melissa and Irene then were married in California in October 2008, during the six-month window between court rulings when same-sex marriage was legal in California.  (It became legal again in 2013 after the U.S. Supreme Court’s ruling in Hollingsworth v. Perry, briefly discussed here.)
When M.C. was born in March 2009, only Melissa was listed on the birth certificate.  Melissa, Irene, and M.C. lived together after the birth for three to four weeks, until Melissa and M.C. moved out.  Jesus did not know their whereabouts and had no contact with Melissa or the child.  A series of conflicts followed, including Irene’s filing for custody and visitation, Melissa’s obtaining a restraining order against her, and Melissa’s re-establishing contact with Jesus and sending some modest support payments.
But what was merely a complicated situation became a devastatingly complicated one in September 2009.  Melissa’s new boyfriend attacked Irene with a knife, causing severe stabbing injuries.  He fled, but Melissa was apprehended and charged as an accessory to attempted murder.  Melissa admitted later that she and her new boyfriend had followed Irene, and that her boyfriend had befriended Irene with the intent to use violence to “scare her” into dropping her pursuit of custody of, or visitation with, M.C.  With Melissa in jail, M.C. was removed from Melissa’s custody and placed in foster care.
Presumed Parents Under California Law
The question of parentage—that is, the question whether a person is the legal parent of a child—can arise in any number of circumstances.  For M.C., it became most pressing when she was placed in foster care, because only legal parents have the right to be notified of, and to participate in, child welfare proceedings and to petition for custody or visitation.  In M.C.’s case, who had these rights?
As the genetic mother who gave birth to M.C., Melissa was clearly entitled to legal-parent status.  But she was incarcerated and, in addition, was dealing with a range of issues including bipolar disorder and a lengthy history of substance abuse.
What about Jesus or Irene? This is where the law gets as complicated as the facts.  Beyond the biological mother, whose parentage is obvious in the absence of an enforceable surrogacy arrangement, California law sorts out competing parentage claims by relying on a series of presumptions.
Under the Uniform Parentage Act, which California has adopted by statute, biological mothers and “presumed parents” have parental rights.  (These rights are fiercely protected by the U.S. Constitution and include the right of “care, custody, and control” and a virtually unfettered right to exclude non-parents from the child’s life.)
Among the ways a man can gain presumed parent status is by marriage to the mother on a date that is near in time to the child’s birth, or by receiving the child into his home and openly holding out the child as his own; if his paternity has been adjudicated or acknowledged.  The adjudication or acknowledgment of paternity are additional ways to gain presumed parent status.  Even without meeting one of the specified statutory criteria, an unwed, biological father may also have the constitutional right to be treated as a legal father if he has grasped the opportunity to assert parental rights but has been thwarted by the unilateral conduct of the mother or that of a third party.
Can a woman other than the biological mother of a child be a presumed parent? The statute provides that the parentage laws should be applied in a gender-neutral fashion to the extent practicable.  This provision has been interpreted to mean that, for example, the female spouse of a biological mother is entitled to a presumption of parentage, despite the clear lack of a biological connection.  And, in several cases, California courts have recognized that lesbian co-parents, who were not able to marry until recently, could nonetheless acquire presumed parent status by openly holding out a child as their own and receiving the child into their homes.
To Whom Does M.C. Belong?
For Jesus, his claim to legal fatherhood was based on the constitutional claim.  Although he always admitted that he was the father of M.C., and provided at least modest financial support for her, he never physically received the child into his home (primarily because he lived in Oklahoma and the child lived in California).  He was thus unable to meet the statutory criteria for presumed father status.  However, he sought to establish a relationship with the child, but was thwarted at several turns by Melissa, who moved without providing contact information and did not maintain a phone line.
For Irene, her claim of presumed parenthood was rooted in the statutory presumptions.  As the spouse of Melissa at the time of M.C.’s birth, Irene was entitled to a presumption of parentage.
The juvenile court, which had jurisdiction because M.C. had been removed and placed in foster care, saw no reason to pick two from among M.C.’s three possible parents.  Thus, it held that (1)Melissa was a legal mother because of biology; that (2) Irene was a presumed mother because she was married to Melissa at the time of M.C.’s birth; and that (3) Jesus was a presumed father because he was the biological father and he had attempted to establish a relationship with the child.  In that court’s view, all three persons were thus entitled to the rights and obligations of parenthood.
Can a Child Have More Than Two Legal Parents?
A fundamental problem with the juvenile court’s ruling was the existence of longstanding precedent in California (and everywhere else) that a child can have no more than two legal parents.  The state’s highest court reached that conclusion in cases involving surrogacy, lesbian co-parentage, and competing paternity claims over a child conceived in adultery.  (Some of these cases are discussed here andhere.)
Yet, the statutory scheme for determining parentage makes it possible for more than two people to have so-called “presumed parent” status.  If a woman is married to one person and impregnated by another who then establishes a relationship with the child, there may be two other people—as there were in this case—who are entitled to presumed parent status.  When this happens, the statute provides that the “presumption which on the facts is founded on the weightier considerations of policy and logic controls.”
In this case, M.C. argued for recognition of all three parents (despite the fact that none of them seem obviously equipped to raise a child).  And while the appellate court was sympathetic to the need for parentage law to adapt to “novel parenting relationships,” it concluded that the legislature would have to make the first move.  The court wrote:
We agree these issues are critical, and California’s existing statutory framework is ill equipped to resolve them.  But even if the extremely unusual factual circumstances of this unfortunate case made it an appropriate action in which to take on such complex practical, political and social matters, we would not be free to do so.  Such important policy determinations, which will profoundly impact families, children and society, are best left to the Legislature.
Stuck with the two-parent cap, the court in M.C. remanded the case for a determination as to whether Jesus or Irene had the stronger claim to parentage.  For Jesus, a favorable ruling would mean that the child could be placed with him immediately.  For Irene, who was deemed not immediately capable of custodial parenting, a favorable decision would entitle her to reunification services with a goal of eventually placing M.C. with her.  For Melissa, her legal parent status was secure and, whether Jesus or Irene gained the legal right to be her parental counterpart, she still retained rights to supervised visitation.
The Legislature’s Response
In a bill that was signed into law recently, the California legislature lifted the judicially-imposed two-parent cap.  The legislative findings state specifically that the purpose of the bill is to abrogate the ruling in In re M.C. to the extent that it held that no more than two people could be deemed legal parents of the same child.  And while most children will have no more than two legal parents, the bill opens up the possibility of more than two when a court deems that limiting the number of adults with legal ties to the child would be detrimental to the child.
In its technical respects, the bill amends provisions regarding custody and child support to explain how existing rules would apply in cases of more than two parents.  With respect to child support, for example, a child would be presumptively entitled to the same dollar amount of support, with allocation among all legal parents, but the sheer number of parents may justify deviating from the guideline amount.  For custody, the bill makes clear that the presumption of joint custody does not apply to cases of three or more parents.
The bill then gets to its main purpose and amends the parentage provisions to state explicitly that a court may find a child to have more than two legal parents.  But the court does not have to reach that conclusion just because more than two are entitled to a presumption of parentage.  In most cases, courts will still weigh the relative strength of presumptions, and choose one parent over others.  But when this process is harmful to the child, the court can elect to treat them equally and grant legal parent status more broadly.
In the legislature’s words, “Most children have two parents, but in rare cases, children have more than two people who are that child’s parent in every way.  Separating a child from a parent has a devastating psychological and emotional impact on the child, and courts must have the power to protect children from this harm.”
Can Bad Facts Make Good Law?
There’s an old adage that says “Bad facts make bad law,” a reference to the sometimes tortured precedents that result when courts apply law to very unusual situations.  But could this be a case in which bad facts have actually led to goodlaw?  It’s hard to imagine that the situation that is described above animated a legislature that is concerned about children who “have more than two people who are that child’s parent in every way” and who would be devastated by separation from any one of them.  From a distance, it’s impossible to know what attachments M.C. does or does not have.  Surely, the attachments cannot be that strong to the three adults who claim her, given that she’s spent most of her life in foster care with only limited visitation with her three putative parents. But there may well be other children whose lives fit the legislature’s image—who are conceived and raised in situations in which a two-parent cap is the source of harm and deprivation.  While the very existence of such families may seem novel, or even scary to the traditionalists, they are a reality of modern life.  And children should not suffer due to the law’s desire to cling to the past.
One caution for courts as they navigate these uncharted waters: Do not recognize additional parents lightly.  There are costs to the rights of existing parents that are incurred by recognizing additional ones. Indeed the very notion that parentage brings the right to exclude is challenged by the notion of three (and even more) parents.  There are also potentially costs to children, whose attachments to adults may be stretched too thin by the legal recognition of additional ones.  But with careful application of the new standard, which is correctly focused on the child’s well being, courts should be able to prevent harm to some children without creating harm for others.

           MAY  GOD  BLESS  YOU