a US Senate bill seeks to lift the ban on HIV-positive visitors. The bill, introduced in the Senate in December 2007 proposes an amendment to the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA) to allow admission into the U.S. by HIV-positive foreign visitors. Currently, all HIV-positive individuals must apply for a special waiver if they wish to travel to the U.S. The U.S. is one of only 13 countries with laws restricting entry by people with HIV. The other countries are Armenia, Brunei, China, Iraq, Libya, Moldova, Oman, Qatar, the Russian Federation, Saudi Arabia, South Korea, and Sudan. China recently announced plans to reform its immigration law. According to current U.S. policy, travelers and immigrants may be denied admission if they are found to have a “communicable disease of public health significance.” Ordinarily, the secretary of health and human services is authorized to determine the composition of this list of diseases, which includes HIV, tuberculosis, and syphilis, among others. In 1991, the secretary recommended removing HIV from the list, but that proposal was dropped due to opposition from Congress. In the 1993 INA, Congress specified that HIV infection was grounds for inadmissibility, thereby revoking the secretary’s ability to make a public health determination about this disease. Under current U.S. procedures, individual HIV waivers are granted at the discretion of the secretary of homeland security. The secretary also has the authority to grant a blanket waiver allowing HIV-positive individuals to attend particular events, such as the United Nations General Assembly Special Session on HIV/AIDS, without being questioned about their status. In December 2007, the U.S. Department of Homeland Security proposed a new regulation intended to streamline the waiver application process by allowing the determination of admissibility to be made at the consular level in the applicant’s country of origin, rather than by the secretary of homeland security. While a streamlined process for HIV-positive travelers would be welcome, the proposed rule contains new criteria, some of which appear to be more restrictive than current immigration procedures. The proposed regulation, which has not yet been enacted, applies only to non-immigrant visa applicants and does not amend the INA. In addition to striking language in the INA that refers specifically to HIV as grounds for inadmissibility, the recently introduced bill would also require a review of the ongoing classification of HIV as a communicable disease of public health significance within the INA. The bill, the HIV Nondiscrimination in Travel and Immigration Act of 2007 (S. 2486), was introduced by Senators John Kerry (D-MA), Gordon Smith (R-OR), and Richard Durbin (D-IL). This bill is a Senate version of the House bill (H.R. 3337) introduced earlier this year by Representative Barbara Lee (D-CA) and several co-sponsors. yep, I really do love the USA,

just not the religious fanatics, republicans and homeland security staff!
oh yes, other versions of this Juvet dance classic are at nr 126 in the delft queer 200 and and at nr. 35 in the queer dance listcomment?

'Just Different' is the challenging title of an art exhibition about sexual desire, gender and identity construction in the visual arts at the turn of the 21st century. Disregarding for the moment the heterosexual dominance of much of our daily life, it reveals instead alternative lifestyles such as homosexuality and transsexuality. In over 100 artworks by 47 national and international artists, the exhibition gives an impression of the sheer wealth of images yielded by the exploration of sexual identity.

The reasons for organising the exhibition Just Different are twofold. Firstly, for some time the museum has been wanting to look at sexual desire, gender and identity construction as important themes in art during the late 20th and early 21st centuries. In recent decades, visual art has more than once focused on these themes and on developments taking place. Often it was the artists – men and women alike – who were at the forefront of the liberation campaign.

A second reason for programming this exhibition is that it fits in with a debate on sexuality and sexual nature that is currently taking place in the Netherlands. As before, with exhibitions such as Brave New World and China Now in 2007, and the solo shows of Rachid Ben Ali and Dolores Zorreguita in 2005, the museum is keen to present itself as a beacon of freedom and tolerance.
MinisterPlasterk,alstublieft . . .


protectourartistsfromChristianJustice!
At the same time when a museum uses a gay kiss as promo for its new exhibition, just a few km away an Amsterdam D.A. decides to jail and interrogate a gay artist and his husband for 3 days for alledged child porn. I cannot but show an example of his work and question why this D.A. does not go on a "beeldenstorm" around Bavaria and Austria and close down all their baroque churches, filled with similar angels. A top piece by Raphael, of similar subject matter I saw just 2 months ago at the Staatliche Kunstsamlung Dresden in the 'alte meister galerie' and is one of the most treasured art pieces of the BRD. Why do we not send our D.A's on an obligatory course of art/cultural history instead of creating havock?

beeldenstorm ?