Hallelujah!  A higher court ruling in Virginia bodes well for a Vermont lesbian whose former partner fled to Virginia rather than allow the former partner to visit their daughter.  Its been a long tangled case, but essentially the Virginia courts recognize that Vermont has jurisdiction in the case.  Vermont has ordered shared custody.  Here's more from Lambda Legal:

?The Virginia Court of Appeals rightly recognized that federal law protects parents against the very thing Lisa Miller did ? parents can ?t shop around looking for a court to give them sole custody.?

(Richmond, VA, November 28, 2006) ? Today, the Virginia Court of Appeals unanimously ruled that the Commonwealth of Virginia has no say in a custody dispute that began in Vermont between Janet Jenkins and her former partner Lisa Miller.

?This has been a long road for Janet and now she?s that much closer to seeing her daughter again,? said Greg Nevins, Senior Staff Attorney in Lambda Legal?s Southern Regional Office in Atlanta. ?The Virginia Court of Appeals rightly recognized that federal law protects parents against the very thing Lisa Miller did?parents cannot shop around looking for a court to give them sole custody.?

Janet Jenkins (formerly Janet Miller-Jenkins) filed an appeal with the Virginia Court of Appeals seeking to enforce a Vermont court order saying she must have regular visitation with the now four-year-old daughter she and her former partner, Lisa Miller (formerly Miller-Jenkins), had when the two women were joined in a Vermont civil union. After the women ended their relationship, Miller moved to Virginia with the women?s daughter, and she asked a Vermont court to dissolve the couple?s civil union and sort out custody of the child. When the Vermont court ordered visitation for Jenkins, Miller filed a new lawsuit in Virginia court, successfully using that state?s antigay marriage law to have herself declared the child?s sole legal parent. The conflicting court orders - one from Vermont ordering regular visitation for Jenkins, and the other from a lower court in Virginia naming Miller the sole parent - led to today?s decision from Virginia?s intermediate court. Earlier this month the Vermont court found Miller in contempt for violation of its order for shared custody.

The 14-page decision by Senior Judges Willis and Annunziata and Judge Clements says, ?We hold that the trial court erred in failing to recognize that the PKPA [Parental Kidnapping Prevention Act] barred its exercise of jurisdiction. Accordingly we vacate the orders of the trial court and remand this case with instruction to grant full faith and credit to the custody and visitation orders of the Vermont court.?

Today?s decision was the result of Jenkins? appeal, which argued that the federal Parental Kidnapping Prevention Act and Virginia?s Uniform Child Custody Jurisdiction and Enforcement Act make it clear that the Vermont court alone has jurisdiction in the matter and cannot be interfered with. Furthermore, the federal kidnapping law (PKPA) requires that the Vermont order be enforced in Virginia.

I received this via email.   

Your presence is requested at an historic event..

The Post-Gazette has the story here.  

[Janet] said she is reminded of Mordecai's words to the biblical heroine Esther, who was chosen to be a queen of Persia at a time when Jews faced genocide.

"He said that perhaps it was for this very moment that you were brought to the position you are in. I very much feel that the circumstances of my life -- both my economic circumstances and the fact that my children are now grown -- have all configured to have me step forward at this moment," she said.

Peruse the Post-Gazettes Letters to the Editor page this morning, particularly the online edition which features more letters.  After I found the requisite gay bash amidst thousands of angry words, it dawned on me how that was a *good* thing --- deflecting attention from real issues with the homosexual threat ain't working.  People have written thoughtful letters about the war, Medicare, taxes, deficits, lobbyists, Social Security, safety nets and much more.  In Pittsburgh, at least this morning, it appears that what happens in my personal life is not high on the list of issues concerning my neighbors. 

Now for that gay bash. Our old friend Nancy Staible of Zelienople who had written in this past April (I have the link here) to defend marriage on the state level, takes a stab at it once again.  Nancy is not happy with the New Jersey Supreme Court's social experimentation.  She thinks Rick Santorum is the right man on this issue. 

But here's the interesting part.  Nancy makes repeated references to values.  As in multiple values.  But this is about one issue --- gay marriage.  Rick Santorum believes marriage should between a man and a woman and that's his value.  There's nothing more.  Nany doesn't go on to elocute on other related values that influence her vote for Rick Santorum.  So you have a traditional family -- then what?  What about that family's health insurance coverage and access to health care?  Or what about their safety net if Dad loses his job and Mom's been home with the kids?  How about ensuring the kids can afford to go to college one day?  Will programs be available to help them do well in elementary and high school - tutors, books, computers?  Is someone going to help them take care of Grandma as she ages so the kids can grow up knowing her?   And can we keep those kids in school and out of harm's way by avoiding unecessary wars? 

No, here's what Nancy thinks is important:

"I support same-sex unions that would give gay couples all the rights, privileges and protections of marriage," stated Bob Casey Jr. (October 2005, The Philadelphia Jewish Voice).

U.S. Sen. Rick Santorum, who has supported a federal and state amendment to protect marriage, believes in the sanctity of marriage and the sacred vows between one man and one woman.

Which candidate's values will you vote for?

Zelienople and Nancy -- bashing homos one letter at a time.