- Lisa Miller
A hearing has been scheduled for Jan. 22 in Rutland, Vermont, to have Lisa Miller held in contempt of court, according to the Burlington Free Press.
Miller and Janet Jenkins were civil union partners who had a child together. Miller was the birth mother. The couple split up a year after the child was born and Miller moved to Virginia.
A family court in Vermont gave the couple joint custody of the child, but Miller refused to comply. A Virginia court ruled that the Vermont court did have jurisdiction in the case. The Vermont court transferred custody to Jenkins and the child was supposed to be turned over on Jan. 1. Miller has not been seen since the beginning of December.
When Miller moved to Virginia, she announced she was no longer a lesbian and she joined Jerry Falwell’s church.
In November, after Miller was ordered to tranfer custody, she told Newsweek, “There is a homosexual agenda at work here, and Isabella is a pawn in their game. It has nothing to do with the law. Isabella was saved at age 4, loves God, and knows what’s right and what’s wrong. We don’t hate Janet. We pray for her soul and salvation.”
Jenkins said, “My goal has never been to separate Isabella from Lisa. I just want Isabella to know and love both of her parents. I just want to be with her, like any parent.”
It is sad that Lisa is harming her child like this. Hopefully Lisa will find God and break away from the cult she is associated with for Isabella’s sake. And then Jenkins can finally have a relationship with her daughter that she has been denied.
Jeff, just what “cult” are you referring to? I don’t see any mention of her belonging to one in the article above. Or are you just a religious right wing nut job that frequently reads gay newspapers? Come out of the closet Jeff.
Scott – I am out of the closet thank you very much. The cult I was talking about was Miller being a member of the church of Jerry Farwell. I guess you would call me a left winged nut.
At what point does the law of god supercede civil law?
At no point does “the law of god” supercede civil law, and Jesus thought so too (Matthew 22:15-22)
It should go without saying that a person should be allowed to marry whomever they choose. Until the right-wing, religious fanatics in this country stop trying to control everybody else and force their “morals” down the throat of the country, there can be no real freedom in the United States. Civil rights cannot simply be “voted away,” that is the purpose of the Bill of Rights. Religious activists should be left out of these decisions completely. I invite you to my web pages devoted to raising awareness on this puritan attack on our freedom: https://freethegods.blogspot.com/2009/06/san-franciscos-gay-pride-parade.html
“Freedom” is the liberty to do what is right, not what makes someone feel good. GLBT, among others, have taken the Bill of Rights out of context and will continue to, unfortunately.
It is GLBT, rather, that is shoving their agenda down the throats of others, which infringe on the “freedom” of others.
@Clear: And who will decide what is right? You? Get real!
You are just trying to force your own subjective “morals” onto the rest of society. The gay and lesbians getting married isn’t going to hurt you in any way.
Why shouldn’t they have the right to be as miserable as the rest of the married world?
Clear – you are clearly an idiot.
Our civil rights do not infringe on your rights. You are still free to hate us. You just can’t deny us our freedom.
All politics aside and modern sensibilities,
There is a mother with her daughter out there. And she is taking care of her. She doesn’t want to share with someone else who is not related. Thats the bare bones.
This would not have been a problem 1000 years ago, 100 years ago, maybe even 10. Some things are true forever and are timeless fact, some things are true for only a time and to a certain people. I think the forever things supercede the “for a time” things. No matter how much people yell at it and cry about it.
I am a mother. Can’t say I’d do any different. I have no time to think of other people when my daughter’s well being is at stake. Well being as I pecieve it that is. No one has a right to remove my child just because I have a different opinion on how to raise her. Other people come second. A distant second.
I´m a journalist in Mexico following the Miller-Jenkins case. Reading this note and the so far 10 rsponses ahead, I can say David Taffet who wrote on the subject first, simply stated some of the facts. The 2 or 3 pro-gay commentators after him end up insulting or being rude as many others who share their opinion, and those who seem to be pronouncing themselves closer to traditional morals (except Scott, there is always an exception, right?), are trying to state a point of view… which side sounds more civilized, or in your terms: pro-freedom of speech or thoughts?
disagree – the moralist are certainly not more civilized. Spend a month as a gay person and see what kind of hate and vitriol that is thrown at us on a daily basis from the supposed traditional moralist. You would certainly be shocked.
@Corona: I didn’t say anything rude.