I got an email this morning from the anti-gay nutters at Concerned Women for American—you know, Tim Burgess’ old pals—about how desperately Lisa Miller, a resident of Virginia, needs our prayers (and CWfA needs our money). From the CWfA’s press release:

We’re asking for your pledge to pray for Virginia residents Lisa Miller and her 6-year-old daughter Isabella. Miller, who is now a born again Christian, and little Isabella are living examples of what happens when God’s definition of marriage and family is twisted and mocked. The Vermont Supreme Court recently granted Janet Jenkins, Miller’s former lesbian partner, parental rights over Isabella even though Jenkins has no relationship to the little girl and is neither an adoptive nor a biological parent. The Virginia Supreme Court is now scheduled to hear oral arguments on Thursday, April 17, 2008, to determine whether Lisa and Isabella will be bound by the Vermont decision.

Here’s what Lambda Legal, which is representing Jenkins, has to say:

Janet Jenkins (formerly Janet Miller-Jenkins) filed an appeal with the Virginia Court of Appeals seeking to ensure respect for a Vermont court order saying she must have regular visitation with the daughter she and her former partner, Lisa Miller (formerly Miller-Jenkins), had when the two women were joined in a Vermont civil union…. In this case, the Virginia Court of Appeals rightly recognized that federal law protects parents against the very thing Lisa Miller did—shopping around for a court to give them sole custody. The message is clear: lesbian and gay parents must be treated like other couples when courts evaluate the best interest of the child in custody cases.

And here’s a long Washington Post story on the case from February 2007.

But here’s what interests me: When CWfA argues that Jenkins has “no relationship to the little girl,” they mean that Jenkins was neither the biological parent nor had she taken the time, or shouldered the considerable expense, of doing a second-parent adoption. So it’s just too bad for the God-mocking dyke, right? There have been lots of lesbian custody disputes that hinged on the failure of the non-biological mother to do a second-parent adoption, which, again, are quite expensive. (And the expense can seem like an unnecessary one when your child is young, money is tight, and your partner is, um, still a lesbian.) Numerous courts have recognized the rights of non-biological lesbian mothers in cases like this—cases where some scummy ex-lesbian like Miller leans on anti-gay laws to deny her lesbian ex-partner access to a child she helped raise from birth.

Anyway, the good men at CWfA and Ms. Miller are shitbags of the highest order—that’s quite clear. What I want to know is this: Where would CWfA come down in this gay custody dispute out of Ireland? A gay male donor sued for guardianship over a child created with sperm he donated to a lesbian couple—and the donor lost.

Rejecting his claim yesterday, Mr Justice John Hedigan said the child’s welfare was best served by remaining with the couple, and by the man in his forties having no guardianship or access to the infant.

There was nothing in Irish law to suggest that a family of two women and a child had “any lesser right to be recognised as a de facto family than a family composed of a man and woman unmarried to each other and a child.” ….

The child’s welfare was the paramount consideration. Where there were factors negative to the child’s welfare, the blood link was of little weight, he said. Where there were positive factors beneficial to the child, there might be rights inherent to the sperm donor.

The Irish kid is almost two, a court-appointed psychiatrist described the women as “excellent parents,” and the judge declared the women and their son a, “loving, secure, de facto family,” which is supposed to be a compliment, I’m guessing.

I’m thinking this custody dispute would present a real brain teaser for the men at CWfA. Do you leave the baby—or toddler—with his “excellent” lesbian parents, one of whom has “no biological relationship” to the child? Or do you take him out of the only home he’s ever known and place him with this gay dude, the kid’s biological father? It’s hard to know how CWfA would come down on this case—I mean, besides subjecting all gays and lesbians everywhere to forced sterilization to prevent anything like this from every happening again, of course. They’d be for that.

But what outcome, I wonder, would CWfA have us pray for in this case?

UPDATE: Here’s a follow-up article about the gay dad…

PRESSURE is growing on the Government to bring in laws on “assisted reproduction” after a gay sperm donor was denied access to his biological son in the High Court.

Lobby groups said the decision was a major setback for fathers’ rights and called for legislation that would eradicate the “inequality” in Irish family life. Opposition parties accused the Government of being “paralysed” by fear of controversy in bringing in laws on same sex couples.

Gay rights groups also acknowledged that updated family laws are “badly needed”.

I agree with those gay rights groups—family laws, in Ireland and everywhere else, badly need updating. I also believe that this kid has a right to know his biological father—and the father has a right to visitation, if not custody—and I’m not sure if, under Irish law, “guardianship” and “custody” are the same thing.