Here’s a bit of oddness. Yvonne Moore, a southern Baptist in Washington, D.C. sued her church for performing a same-sex union ceremony back in 2007.

Moore, who is clearly not down with gay rights, attended the ceremony for some reason, found it “totally disgusting,” and then sought $250,000 in compensation—the amount she estimated she had donated to the church over her 40 years as a parishioner. She later dropped the lawsuit after talking to her pastor (and presumably her lawyer).

While the whole thing is pretty amusing in its sheer craziness, it does a pretty good job at illustrating how fearful and misinformed some people are about gay relationships; to actually turn her back on her parish of 40 years and file the paperwork to sue it for $250,000 shows an irrational and deeply emotional reaction to what’s ultimately not a very big deal. After all, this ceremony had nothing to do with Ms. Moore in the first place, but years of casual—and societally supported—homophobia results in exactly these sorts of actions. Unless people stand up to casual homophobia, otherwise kind people are capable of astonishingly crass bigotry.

• Woman attempted to sue church for performing same-sex ceremony [Pink News]

Clay Greene and Harold Scull, an elderly gay couple in Sonoma County, California, thought they had all their inheritance and legal paperwork sorted out. They couldn’t legally marry, but they had named each other in their wills, giving each other powers of attorney, and granted themselves control over medical decisions should something happen.

According to a lawsuit filed by Clay and the NCLR, things couldn’t have gone more wrong.

Tragically, Harold, aged 88, was hospitalized after falling on the front steps of the couple’s home. Not only was Clay (age 77) barred from seeing his partner of 20 years in the hospital because they weren’t legally family, but health workers forcibly placed the two in separate nursing homes. The County of Sonoma, deeming Harold incapable to care for himself and dismissing his relationship to Clay as “roommates,” seized and auctioned off the couple’s property and possessions.  Harold died three months later, without Clay by his side. Clay is now without his partner, home, or any of the possessions that they had accumulated over their lifetime together.

Same-sex marriage is very, very important.

The case goes to court on July 16th.

• Greene v. County of Sonoma et al. [NCLR]
• Meet Harold and Clay [NCLR]
• Justice for Clay Greene and Harold of Sonoma County, CA [Facebook Group]

eHarmony, a popular online matchmaking service, has settled a lawsuit regarding their refusal to match same-sex couples. The California-based company was taken to court two years ago over its heterosexual-only policy, with the company steadfastly refusing to have any part in matching gay couples throughout most of the suit.

Neil Clark Warren, an evangelical Christian and eHarmony’s founder, said that the company was not discriminating against gays, but that their patented compatibility formulae were based exclusively on heterosexual married couples and therefore not applicable to same-sex partners. (Apparently, we gays prefer that our partners dislike all our goals, hobbies, and personal tastes; life’s more difficult that way!)

Despite the mysteriousness of us gay couples, the company ultimately agreed to open a second website, called Compatible Partners, which offers same-sex matchmaking. Under the terms of the settlement, the eHarmony website will now automatically direct gay singles to their separate, but equivalent site and state that it’s “brought to you by eHarmony.”

Well, that’s great news for everyone seeking a same-sex partner! Now you too can be begrudgingly accepted by a service that thinks your pursuit for love is so different from heterosexuals that they probably shouldn’t bother at all.

• eHarmony settles same-sex class action lawsuit [Examiner]

An amusingly bizarre rift over same-sex blessings in the Anglican Church has felt its latest tremor after a court decision late last month.

Harnessing the healing power of embittered legal conflict, four Anglican parishes sued the Diocese in May over a property battle stemming from a disagreement about same-sex blessings and other differences of very, very little significance. (The lawsuit was heartily endorsed by Jesus himself, purportedly.)

Well, now the court has reached its verdict. The land and buildings claimed by St. John’s Shaughnessy, St. Matthew’s, St. Matthias, and St. Luke’s parishes are rightfully the property of the Diocese, and the breakaway parishes can not seize them for themselves.

Having settled the property dispute, all sides have now decided to put their disagreements behind them and rejoin, strengthened by a renewed commitment to sheltering the homeless, feeding the hungry, and offering comfort to the less fortunate…

Hahaha! Ah, I’m just pulling your leg. They’re totally still exchanging petty insults and stuff.

• Court rules on same-sex church battle [BC Local News]
• Court denies breakaway parishioners [Canada.com]

Canadian Blood Services is suing Kyle Freeman, a perfectly healthy gay man, for donating blood against CBS policy. Freeman had admitted to lying on the donation forms, which asks all men to reveal their sexual orientation, because he had been recently tested as clean for blood-borne diseases. While the admission was made in an anonymous email, CBS launched an investigation, eventually linking the email to its sender.

Canada permanently bans all gay men from donating blood, even if they practice safe sex or are in monogamous relationships. Interestingly, this does not apply to women who have had unprotected sex with bisexual men, despite them being at the same risk.

The ban, of course, has its share of critics, including none other than the American Red Cross, which called gay blood bans “medically and scientifically unwarranted” in 2007—and statistics support them. Nevertheless, Canadian Blood Services has repeatedly refused to lift the policy and replace it with one involving temporary deferrals based on unsafe sexual behaviours instead of permanent bans over sexual orientation.

CBS says it bans donors which they deem to be high-risk, because their extensive blood screening process cannot yet detect malaria and the human version of mad cow disease. (Both of which, I guess, are rampant throughout the gay community… Moo.)

Kyle Freeman is counter-suing for pain, humiliation, and degradation suffered over being banned for being gay.

• Blood services sues gay donor [Canoe.ca]
• Ontario man makes charter challenge against blood-donation screening [Ottawa Citizen]

Claire L’Heureux-Dube, a former Supreme Court judge, has predicted that the courts will toss out any arguments linking same-sex marriage to a polygamist sect in Canada.

Two men currently facing charges related to a religious cult in Bountiful, British Columbia have already indicated that they will invoke gay marriage as an argument defending their dozens of wives.

“It is contrary to the equality of the sexes,” L’Heureux-Dube said to the press, noting that in the United States these men would be charged with sexual exploitation rather than simply having multiple spouses. Indeed, the polygamy charges in Bountiful appear to be a blanket charge for greater accusations of incest and exploitation.

So where do the gays come in all of this? Beats me! I’ve only heard the argument from those wacky anti-gay lobbyists, not the actual connection.

• Former top court judge doesn’t buy polygamy argument [Canada.com]