A Christian College has stopped a man from returning to finish his degree because he’s gay.
Gary Campbell hoped to resume his classes at Clarks Summit University in order to receive the final six credits for a Bachelor’s degree. Afterwards, he planned to start a job working with recovering addicts.
However, Gary says the school dismissed him because he’s gay.
The college, in Pennsylvania, prohibits students from engaging in same-sex relationships and ‘reserves the right to dismiss or deny the enrollment of those whose behavior or influence upon our community should prove to be contrary to the best interests of our students, the Clarks Summity University Community Commitment and to our Lord Jesus Christ,’ according to the school handbook.
No public affection
They originally accepted him into the college. But once informed of his sexuality they repealed the offer.
The prospective student wrote to the college: ‘One of my top goals being in recovery was to finish my bachelor’s degree. Having a degree is much more to me than a certificate, it’s a culmination of hard work, sweat and tears, and I owe it to myself and to my recovery to accomplish this goal.
‘I ask that you not view me only as a homosexual, but as a determined, compassionate, hard-working man who is of good moral character. My goal again is to assist my community and help those who are struggling in the grip of addiction.’
Originally, Campbell earned 109 college credits from 2001 to 2003, before dropping out. He planned to finish at community college. Instead, he enlisted in the Navy.
He struggled with alcoholism throughout and was discharged after driving drunk on base.
Gary is now 19 months sober and wants to use his degree to help other people. He even crowdfunded the $795 (£612/686.65EU) to finish it.
According to the handbook, students must attend chapel, cannot display physical affection (including holding hands) and cannot spend time alone with members of the opposite sex. They also can’t smoke, drink, or watch R rated movies, even if over 21-years-old.
A gay student is suing his school after teachers ignored him as he was being attacked by bullies.
Guadalupe Paredes, 19, has said the school were ‘deliberately indifferent’ to his daily torment.
One official even allegedly told his mother Parades brought it on himself by ‘acting gay and telling other students he was gay’.
The 19-year-old has named the Kenosha Unified School District, and five administrators as defendants.
In fifth grade, when he was around 10 years old, he was hospitalized for psychiatric treatment over the abuse he suffered at school.
The lawsuit says the assistant principal at Edward Bain School of Language and Art changed when Parades came out in fourth grade.
He says the principal told him to bring concerns to him because the assistant principal, Ron Sandoval, ‘did not feel comfortable with [Parades’] kind’.
The anxiety of returning to school each day got worse, vomiting on Sunday nights.
When his mother spoke to administrators, they suggested Parades just ‘avoid’ the harassers.
He then started hiding from and sometimes missing classes to avoid contact.
In sixth grade, he moved to a different school. Many of his harassers followed.
One told him in a restroom he should kill himself.
Despite his mother complaining to school officials, there is no written record of any investigation.
And that was when a school official told Parades that he brought the trouble onto himself by ‘acting gay and telling other students he was gay’.
Harborside school officials at one point decided the teen and his main bully should work together on a poster project or face a three-day suspension.
Parades couldn’t face spending time alone with the other student and chose to be suspended.
When he began Reuther Central High, he no longer reported bullying ‘because he believed it was hopeless’.
His grades declined. Later, he was hospitalized.
The lawsuit brings claims under Title IX which bans discrimination based on sex in schools that receive federal funding.
The suit claims the harassment prevented Parades from receiving the educational opportunities offered by the district.
A Kenosha Unified School District official has declined to comment.
Britain’s High Court today ruled to overturn pharmaceutical company Gilead Science’s patent extension on Truvada. The HIV medication is also used for PrEP (Pre-Exposure Prophylaxis). When taken as advised, this stops HIV negative people acquiring HIV.
PrEP is not yet available on the NHS in England and Wales. The NHS is currently conducting a trial to test its cost efficiency. It is still in the process of recruiting around 10,000 high-risk participants for the ongoing trial.
Opponents of the NHS supplying Truvda say the medication is expensive. They point to the fact branded Truvada could cost the NHS up to £350 per month per person.
Supporters of PrEP say this is a price worth paying given its effectiveness. They argue the NHS has to pay more to provide a lifetime of HIV treatment to someone with HIV.
Currently, the NHS is only allowed to supply branded Truvada from Gilead.
Truvada was due to come off patent in July 2017, but Gilead extended its exclusivity until 2020 by a supplementary protection certificate (SPC). This prohibited smaller pharma companies from selling generic versions of the drug in the UK.
Generic versions could cost from around 80-90% cheaper, depending on the manufacturer. The NHS is often able to negotiate cheap deals because it buys in bulk.
The High Court today ruled against Gilead Sciences. The court’s decision follows a similar ruling in Ireland last year. There, those with HIV and or seeking Post-Exposure Prophylaxis treatment can use Truvada. Ireland does not yet offer Pre-Exposure Prophylaxis.
‘This represents a huge cost saving’
Many HIV and sexual health advocates welcomed today’s decision.
Deborah Gold, chief executive of NAT (National AIDS Trust) said: ‘We welcome this court decision, which overturns the patent extension for Truvada.
‘The decision will mean that unbranded versions of the drug can be legally prescribed. This represents a huge cost saving to buying a drug that would save public money, even at full price.
‘We continue to urge the NHS in England to commission PrEP by April 2019, as the current trial is not reaching everyone at risk. Indeed some have acquired HIV after being turned away from clinics whose trial places are full.
‘With the generic, unbranded version of the drug available at a fraction of the cost, the pressure increases on NHS England to begin routine commissioning, and make PrEP available to all who need it, urgently.’
‘I would urge NHS England to seize this moment’
Matthew Hodson, Chief Executive of HIV information organization NAM, also welcomed the judgement.
‘PrEP was already cost effective for people at high risk of HIV at Gilead’s price. This ruling should mean that much cheaper generic versions can be purchased by the NHS, ultimately saving even more money.
‘I would urge NHS England to seize this moment and swiftly rollout PrEP to all those who need it. This can be done in parallel to the existing trial.
‘PrEP has contributed to the significant declines that we have recently seen in HIV diagnoses among gay and bisexual men.’
Dating app Grindr today launched its new ‘Kindr’ initiative. The project arrives in response to complaints from some users after experiencing racist, body-shaming or stigmatizing language.
Grindr announced Kindr a few weeks ago, but provided scant details as to what the project would entail.
Today, it released the first of a series of videos in which it addresses the debate around online behaviour. It also unveiled new user community guidelines. These state profiles face moderation if they list what they disliked based on racial group or gender expression
The first video features app users explaining why stating what you’re not looking for – in relation to racial groups – is problematic.
It starts by stating some blatantly racist language users have heard online (‘Go back to Mexico’, ‘People like you are the reason Ebola exist’), before moving on to the ‘covert racism’ of profile preferences.
One man explains how reading exclusionary messages online feels like walking down a street and seeing shop signs welcoming only one kind of customer.
‘Racism is you thinking I’m not going to be smarter than you when you first meet me,’ says one black contributor, Rakeem Cunningham.
Rakeem Cunningham (Photo: Grindr)
‘Or when black people are articulate and other people go, “Oh, you’re so well spoken!” Like, that’s the stuff that bothers me, and that’s the stuff I think needs to be addressed. I think the racism that’s not overt but that’s covert is the main problem.’
An Asian contributor, Joel Kim Booster, says that he began to wonder if there was something wrong with him, or if there was something he should be ashamed about when interacting with guys online. ‘It opened my eyes to a hierarchy that I wasn’t participating in before.’
Why not just stay quiet instead of needlessly offending someone?
‘If you don’t put “No Asians” in your profile, that doesn’t mean you have to fuck Asians now. It just means I don’t have to see it,’ he says.
‘It is not racist to not be attracted to me personally,’ he adds. ‘But for you to say “I know what every Asian guy looks like and I know for a fact that I would not be attracted to any of them…” Like that comes from a racist place because you don’t know what we all look like. That’s ugly.
‘We have only so much in our profiles to get across whatever the fuck we want to get across to all the other guys on this app, and you’re going to take space to narrow it by what you don’t want. Just tell me what you do like. If you tell me you like the fucking Jonas Brothers, I know I’m not for you.’
Former Queer Eye alum Jai Rodriguez also takes part. He points out, ‘You don’t know what the person on the other side of the phone is going through. You have no idea what they’re experience is or what else they have going on. Or what that comment might do to them.’
Many talk about the impact of language.
‘No matter what battle you’re going through, you don’t have to break other people in order to feel good,’ says contributor Jasmine Aksornkij. ‘You don’t have to hurt other people in order to make you feel uplifted.
The video ends with the campaign’s tagline: ‘It’s time to play nice.’
‘Responsibility to not only protect our users, but also to set the standard’
‘Sexual racism, transphobia, fat and femme shaming and further forms of othering such as stigmatization of HIV positive individuals are pervasive problems in the LGBTQ community,’ said Landen Zumwalt, head of communications at Grindr, in a press statement.
‘These community issues get brought onto our platform, and as a leader in the gay dating space, Grindr has a responsibility to not only protect our users, but also to set the standard for the broader community that we serve.
‘Online discrimination has reached epidemic proportions affecting not only Grindr but other social networks. Our ‘Kindr’ initiative is a rallying call for Grindr and our community to take a stand against sexual racism and all forms of othering.
‘Together, we will work to maintain a welcoming and inclusive environment and end the need for people to include exclusionary statements on profiles.’
New community guidelines and moderation
Grindr says it will be rolling out more videos over the next five weeks. It has also updated its community guidelines. In these, it says that moderators will act if they see people making statements such as ‘No Asians’ in their profile descriptions.
‘We have a zero-tolerance policy for discrimination, harassment, and abusive behavior. We want you to be yourself, but not at the expense of someone else. Anyone found bullying, threatening, or defaming another user will be banned.
‘We will also remove any discriminatory statements displayed on profiles. You’re free to express your preferences, but we’d rather hear about what you’re into, not what you aren’t.
‘Profile language that is used to openly discriminate against other users’ traits and characteristics (“No fats, no fems, no Asians”) will no longer be tolerated and will be subject to review by our moderation team.’
Other apps take action
Grindr is not the only dating app acting to moderate racist language and stigmatizing behavior. Last week, Chappy launched its own ‘zero tolerance for abuse’ campaign. Scruff also announced earlier this month that it would make its ‘ethnicity’ field optional.
Grindr was launched in 2009 and now claims to have 3.8million daily active users. It was sold in its entirety to Chinese gaming company Beijing Kunlun Tech last year. Grindr remains headquartered in Hollywood, California, but The company is considering an initial public offering.
Hong Kong has made spousal visas available to same-sex couples for the first time in the wake of a court ruling—but the government has firmly ruled out permitting same-sex marriage.
Hong Kong only recognises marriage as between a man and a woman, but the international business hub has come under pressure from employers and LGBT+ activists to respect the rights of same-sex couples.
A security guard stands at an entrance to the Court of Final Appeal in Hong Kong on July 4, 2018. (VIVEK PRAKASH/AFP/Getty)
In the wake of the ruling, the government has announced a revised policy that goes into effect this week. The new policy allows the recognition of same-sex unions for visa applications, but no other element of law.
The Hong Kong government confirmed: “From September 19, 2018, a person who has entered into a same-sex civil partnership, same-sex civil union, ‘same-sex marriage’, opposite-sex civil partnership or opposite-sex civil union outside Hong Kong with an eligible sponsor in accordance with the local law in force of the place of celebration and with such status being legally and officially recognised by the local authorities of the place of celebration will become eligible to apply for a dependant visa/entry permit for entry into Hong Kong.”
LGBT activists in Hong Kong (Isaac Lawrence/AFP/Getty)A spokesman added: “As the [court] recognised in its judgment, a valid marriage under Hong Kong law is heterosexual and monogamous and is not a status open to couples of the same sex.
“The revision has nothing to do with legal recognition of same-sex civil partnership, same-sex civil union, ‘same-sex marriage’, opposite-sex civil partnership or opposite-sex civil union in Hong Kong. Nor should there be any expectation of such plan by the Government.
“The revision does not compromise the Government’s position in any legal proceedings.”
The government stressed: “The revision concerns the immigration policy on applications for entry of non-local dependants only and it does not affect the meaning of ‘spouse’ under this Policy. It does not affect any other policies of the Government or any other rights under the existing law in Hong Kong.”
Integrase inhibitors—potent antiretrovirals that quickly and powerfully suppress HIV—have allowed HIV researchers and clinicians to explore dosing regimens that involve fewer than three or four drugs. Proponents of dual therapy say that effective regimens involving fewer drugs will lower costs, decrease pill burden and reduce the potential for drug-drug interactions and side effects. But is it that simple?
Monica Gandhi, MD, MPH
“Two-drug regimens are exciting,” said Monica Gandhi, MD, MPH, medical director of the Ward 86 HIV clinic at San Francisco General Hospital and associate division chief of the Division of HIV, Infectious Diseases, and Global Medicine at UCSF. “But there are many clinicians who have been treating HIV for a long time that are a little bit alarmed over the two-drug fanfare. We’re not quite ready to jump on board with two-drug regimens for everybody.”
“On principal, fewer drugs is better,” said Keith Henry, MD, from Hennepin County Medical Center. “I like the philosophy of using fewer drugs, but I’m still not convinced that it’s going to be hugely beneficial. There may be only nuanced or subtle clinical advantages of a two- versus three-drug strategy evident over time—that we haven’t fully studied—especially if the drug you’re jettisoning is relatively non-toxic. In the U.S., most people that are on standard three-drug regimens are increasingly on one of the simplest, safest regimens currently available.”
Currently, there is only one recommended two-drug regimen option for people living with HIV, but the future may well bring more. Here’s a summary of challenges with the current option, and an overview of two other combinations currently being tested.
Dolutegravir plus rilpivirine
Juluca tablet (Photo: ViiV Healthcare)
Dolutegravir (integrase inhibitor) plus rilpivirine (NNRTI) is the only two-drug regimen currently recommended by the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (DHHS). These medications can be purchased separately (no generic versions are available in the U.S.), so some people on this regimen take two pills once per day. This combination is also formulated as a single-tablet under the brand name Juluca, which is one tablet taken once per day.
This two-drug combination is not recommended for people just beginning antiretroviral therapy—it’s only a switch option for people who have been virally suppressed for at least six months.
Gandhi said that at Ward 86, the HIV clinic at San Francisco General Hospital, very few people are taking Juluca or dolutegravir and rilpivirine. The combination has been studied only in patients without a history of virologic failure, which is not common among people treated for HIV at Ward 86. Moreover, the risk of drug resistance, and need for food security, makes this regimen only a good choice for people who are highly adherent to their medications—and Ward 86 sees many patients who are unstably housed, struggling economically or otherwise experiencing life challenges that can stand in the way of perfect adherence.
“The concern about a two-drug regimen and starting patients on this regimen is that if you lose something like dolutegravir [to drug resistance], that would make it really difficult in the future in terms of treatment options,” said Gandhi. “I think Juluca is very exciting, but it may be more so for people who haven’t had any failure to previous regimens and who are highly adherent. It’s not for everybody,” she said.
Another issue is that Juluca—a new drug approved in November 2017—is expensive, and the ease of a complete one-tablet regimen may be offset by its high price tag. Henry from Hennepin County Medical Center said that at his hospital’s pharmacy, Juluca can cost more than $38,000 for one person’s year-long supply. (The wholesale acquisition cost is nearly $31,000/year.)
“If we purchase the tablets separately, it’s hundreds of dollars per month cheaper than that. If you look at what’s happening in society in healthcare in general, we still have to be good stewards of resources,” he said. “If you have individual small pills that are well-tolerated, I am not convinced that you always have to go with the single-tablet.”
Dolutegravir plus lamivudine
Dolutegravir plus lamivudine (3TC) is a promising two-drug regimen that is currently being studied. (It is not yet approved or recommended for use by the U.S. DHHS.) A generic version of lamivudine is available in the U.S.
At the AIDS 2018 conference in July, Pedro Cahn, MD presented results from the GEMINI-1 and GEMINI-2 studies comparing dolutegravir/lamivudine to a standard three-drug regimen of dolutegravir/tenofovir disoproxil fumarate (TDF)/emtricitabine (FTC). The study enrolled treatment naïve people who had not yet started antiretrovirals, with no evidence of drug resistance.
The researchers compared the percent of people who achieved viral suppression after 48 weeks between the two treatment groups, in addition to differences in CD4 count gains, adverse events and other safety and tolerability data.
Overall, the studies demonstrated that the two-drug regimen was non-inferior to the three-drug regimen: 93% of participants in the two-drug regimen and 94% of participants in the three-drug regimen achieved virological suppression at 48 weeks.
There were fewer drug-related adverse events with the two-drug regimen, and the two-drug regimen was also associated with better kidney and bone outcomes.
“As you well know, today ART means lifelong treatment,” said Cahn. “So as much as we can do to reduce drug burden for our patients is very welcome in terms of less long-term drug toxicity.”
Henry said that it will be interesting to see, as more efficacy data becomes available, what the differences might be between dolutegravir paired with lamivudine versus rilpivirine. He also plans to keep an eye on cost, and says this will continue to be a concern for patients and providers.
“This is part of the confusion of our health care system right now—and we’ll continue to have more of these dilemmas as time goes on and as we have more two-drug options and more generic drugs available. What is the real benefit of a single-tablet integrase regimen versus two or three small pills that are generic and much cheaper? If the single-tablet is 5% or 10% better tolerated or effective, but 45% to 50% more expensive, would a cost analysis support the use of the branded drug? We haven’t gotten into this as much as we should, but the overall state of healthcare financing means that we need to be more cost-benefit conscious.”
Cabotegravir plus rilpivirine
Cabotegravir LA vial and syringe (Photo courtesy of David Margolis)
Perhaps the most exciting two-drug regimen currently being tested is the long-acting formulation of rilpivirine and cabotegravir (which is an experimental integrase inhibitor). The dosing regimen now being tested frees people from taking oral antiretrovirals every day. Instead, people receive a long-acting injection once every four weeks or once every eight weeks.
So far, results of the LATTE-2 study, which is testing this formulation, are very promising. The injected cabotegravir and rilpivirine medications kept viral loads suppressed in 94% of people receiving injections every eight weeks and in 87% of people receiving injections every four weeks, when measured at the 96-week time point. People receiving the injections report high levels of satisfaction and convenience with the regimen, and also express willingness and desire to continue with this drug regimen.
If the long-acting injectable comes to market, Gandhi said she believes it could benefit people who struggle to take medication every day—in addition to people who are highly adherent (a bimodal population).
“We have many patients at Ward 86 who simply cannot fit taking a medication every day into their lifestyle, but, who actually show up to the clinic fairly often. People who are homeless may not come in for their primary care visits, but they show up for acute care visits. They’re engaging with the clinic a lot, which gives us hope that this will be an opportunity for treatment.”
A man from North Carolina in the US could be at risk of having to leave the UK and return to the States, despite the fact that he is married to a UK citizen.
Brian Page had his latest appeal to the UK Home Office for an extension of his visa refused earlier this month, and was told that he must either leave the UK within 14 days, or apply for permission to appeal to the Upper Tribunal, the next stage of the process.
However, he has told PinkNews that he and his husband have been “cleaned out” by the legal fees up until now, having already spent over £16,000 on the application. They are now appealing to the public for help to cover the legal costs of their appeal to the Upper Tribunal.
Brian and Ben Page
Their GoFundMe page is here. If they are granted permission to appeal to the Upper Tribunal, they expect the legal fees to cost in the region of £1,500-£3,000.
Speaking to PinkNews, Brian said that they had considered returning to the US – however, they were horrified to discover that when they lived there previously, Ben had inadvertently overstayed his visa by a year and a half.
They had misunderstood the terms of his visa at the time, thinking he was allowed to stay in the country for two years. They later discovered that he was actually only granted permission to stay for six months, meaning he lived in the US illegally for a year and a half.
This means that he could be subject to a 10 year ban from the US if they attempted to return there.
With Brian facing deportation and Ben not allowed to enter the United States, the couple could end up being separated by immigration laws of the UK and the US.
“We would be split up. I would be heartbroken,” Brian told PinkNews.
“When Ben’s mother passed away, he went into a deep, deep depression and it really scared me. We are both suffering from mental health issues and are both on anti-depressants, because our lives are on hold.
“We don’t know where we’re going to be in a few months time. I’m afraid to leave Ben because I don’t know what’s going to happen.”
Brian and Ben’s story began in 2012 when they met on a train in London when Brian was visiting the UK. They ended up talking and decided to stay in touch.
They got married two years later in New York after spending a period of time living together in the US.
However, tragedy hit the couple when, shortly after they got married, they found out that Ben’s mother – who was still living in the UK – was terminally ill.
They returned to the UK, with Brian on a six month visa, to spend her final months with her.
As his six-month visa came to a close, Brian’s mother-in-law’s condition was continuing to deteriorate. He then applied for an extension to the visa, which was ultimately rejected.
They now say they have been fighting the UK government to allow Brian to stay in the UK for a number of years.
They have now applied for permission to appeal their case to the Upper Tribunal, however if they are granted permission, they do not have the money to pay for legal representation.
Brian and Ben holding hands on their wedding day in 2014
They also estimate that, if they were to attempt to return to the US, legal fees there could cost up to $15,000 in order to get Ben’s potential 10 year ban overturned.
The couple now say that they are in a bind – they cannot return to the US together, as Ben is not allowed in the country. They cannot stay in the UK together, as Brian’s applications to remain have been rejected.
In the most recent rejection letter, which was seen by PinkNews, the judge suggested the couple could relocate to a third country, and gave Canada as an example, while trying to settle their immigration dispute.
The rejection letter also says that during the case, it was put to Brian that he could “return to the USA to apply for entry clearance to re-enter the UK as a spouse.”
Brian says that if he were to do this, the process could take up to two years.
Brian said that he was worried about leaving Ben alone in the UK as he suffers from depression and anxiety.
“It really scares me. I’m really scared right now about what the next couple of months are going to be like,” he added.
Japanese-American professional golfer Tadd Fujikawa has come out as gay.
In 2006, Fujikawa became the youngest player every to qualify for the US Open at the age of 15. He is one of the first pro golfers to come out, and the first US Open player to do so.
On Tuesday (11 September), Fujikawa made an Instagram post to announce his coming out.
‘So… I’m gay,’ he begins the post simply. ‘My hope is this post will inspire each and every one of you to be more empathetic and loving towards one another.’
https://www.instagram.com/p/BnkdY3TlalW/
He reveals later in the post he wasn’t sure about whether or not he wanted to come out publicly.
‘I thought that I didn’t need to come out because it doesn’t matter if anyone knows,’ he explains. ‘But I remember how much other’s stories have helped me in my darkest times to have hope.
Fujikawa writes he used to hide and hate who he was because of what people would think or say, and it led to mental health problems.
‘Now I’m standing up for myself and the rest of the LGBTQ community in hopes of being an inspiration and making a difference in someone’s life,’ he continues. ‘Although it’s a lot more accepted in our society today, we still see children, teens, and adults being ridiculed and discriminated against for being the way we are. Some have even taken their lives because of it.’
While this continues to happen, he wants to do his best ‘bring more awareness to this issue and to fight for equality’.
The post ends:
‘I can’t wait for the day we all can live without feeling like we’re different and excluded. A time where we don’t have to come out, we can love the way we want to love and not be ashamed. We are all human and equal after all. So I dare you…spread love. Let’s do our part to make this world a better place.’
Chilean deputies for the Frente Amplio party, celebrate as they hold a giant fake Chilean Identity card reading “My identity, my right”, after voting a gender identity law, during a session at the Deputies Charmber, of the National Congress in Valparaiso, Chile, on September 12, 2018. (Francesco Degasperi/AFP/Getty)
Chile has passed a new gender identity law that will allow transgender people aged 14 years and above to change their name and gender in official documents.
The process will take place at a civil registry and will not require surgical or medical intervention, although minors will have to obtain permission from a parent or guardian and from a family court.
The law was first approved by a large majority of 26 in favour and 14 against in the Senate last week and landed in the country’s Congress on Wednesday (September 11), where it passed a 95-46 vote marking the end of a five-year-long fight by transgender rights activists.Chilean president Sebastián Piñera now has 30 days to sign the law.
“We celebrate! The Chamber of Deputies voted and dispatched the gender identity law, which we sponsored more than five years ago. A great victory for TRANS people!” the Chilean non-governmental organisation Fundación Iguales, which champions LGBT+ rights, tweeted following the vote.
One of the law’s most controversial elements was the inclusion of minors, with LGBT+ activists lamenting the age limit of 14 in the bill. The legislation originally included children younger than 14 years of age, but a vote on this provision failed to reach the necessary majority.
“Today is bittersweet since the discrimination against those under 14 will translate into more suicides,” Rolando Jimenez, one of the founders of the Movement for Homosexual Integration and Liberation, was quoted as saying in the Associated Press (AP).
Two conservative lawmakers who voted against the law have instead vowed to challenge the inclusion of any person below 18 years of age in the bill.
Sergio Bobadilla and Juan Antonio Coloma claimed the project “undermines the right of the biological identity of minors” and have said they will present that argument in front of the country’s Constitutional Court, AP reported.
Daniela Vega, delivers a press conference after a meeting with Chilean President Michelle Bachelet on March 6, 2018. (Pablo Vera/AFP/Getty)
Chilean transgender actor and singer Daniela Vega, the star of the 2018 Oscar-winning film A Fantastic Woman, celebrated news of the vote writing a poetic post on Instagram on Thursday, in which she remembered those who have died without seeing the law becoming reality, as well as celebrating a more hopeful future.
She wrote: “The testimony and the body as a declaration of rebellion. But you cannot be rebellious without first being worthy and dignity is not a faith, it is a right. Do not fear children, there will be arms that contain your beautiful nature.
“To wall in the door is not going to darken the horizon, because it will be you, children who will govern your biography. The art, infinite key of immovable locks. The will, motor of the future that appears more hopeful today.
“There are those who did not see this day, this dawn, their bodies, dignified by the memory of rebellion, of dignity. Love, motor of experience. Love, endorsement of infinite space.
“To live, to resist, to move in the calendar. The time and objectivity of feeling it happen. To have today, the right to live in, to belong. Future body, white canvas of new struggles, new utopias, new spaces, of movement, of dignity.”
