“The China Center for Adoption Affairs shall not identify prospective adoptive referrals for homosexuals. Legally, the Marriage Law of the People’s Republic of China recognizes only families formed by marriage of opposite sex and does not recognize the legality of homosexual families, and the homosexual families are, therefore, not protected by laws. From the Chinese medical point of view, the China Mental Disorder Classification and Diagnosis Standard classifies homosexuality as sexual obstruction, belonging to psychiatric disease of the kind of sexual psychological barrier. In terms of the Chinese traditional ethics and customs and habits, homosexuality is an act violating public morality and therefore not recognized by the society. In accordance with the principle that adoption shall not violate social ethics as set forth in the Adoption Law, foreign homosexuals are not allowed to adopt children in China.” This is the official Beijing statement regarding the ability of gay couples to adopt Chinese infants. Say what you like about those godless Commies, they sure know how to put homosexuals in their place. Why doesn’t the Family Research Council honor and support this stand for traditional morality?
STREISAND AWARD NOMINEE:
“How do you approach the project of being a human on the planet?
That’s an excellent question. I think I have an idea of the life that I should live, but don’t have the courage to live it. During the years that I have been alive, the country that I happen to come from has been a cruel force in the world, in my view. I don’t believe in holding on to my U.S. passport, and yet I haven’t given it up. I have a terrible fear of prison. I’m very claustrophobic. And so I don’t do the things I really believe in doing, chaining myself to this or that and getting arrested. So I’m very aware of the absurdity of my life that is caused by cowardice and fear.”
– playwright Wallace Shawn, blathering on about nothing in the <a HREF = http://www.nytimes.com/2001/08/12/magazine/12QUESTIONS.html?searchpv=day01 TARGET = NEW>New York Times.
NEW LETTERS: St Augustine on Al Gore’s beard, no limbo for stem cells, etc.
FREUDIAN SLIP OF THE TIMES: I’m grateful to a reader for pointing out the following sentence in the New York Times’ profile of Leon Kass, the man picked by president Bush to keep an eye on stem cell issues. Here it is: “Critics of Dr. Kass’s views call him a neoconservative thinker, citing his opposition to cloning and in-vitro fertilization.” This sentence simply assumes that being a neoconservative is something somehow damning. It’s not a big deal, and the slant is pretty subtle. But can you imagine a sentence in the Times saying, “Critics of Michael Kinsley call him a neoliberal, citing his support for tax reform and free market economics.” It wouldn’t happen. Sometimes the bias is so internalized and subtle the writer and editor don’t even know they’re practicing it.
The Dish 