Even More Proposition 8 Trial Coverage

Maura Dolan of the Los Angeles Times has a blog entry and a print article covering the testimony of Columbia University Professor Ilan H. Meyer, “an expert in mental health issues among gays, lesbians and bisexuals”. As usual, the website is taking comments – so click through to do that.

In an effort to show that Proposition 8 caused harm, lawyers for two same-sex couples presented expert testimony today that the ballot measure represented the kind of prejudice that has made gays and lesbians twice as likely as heterosexuals to suffer mood disorders and substance abuse.

It is a basic principle in that correlation does not prove causation, let alone which causes which. How are we do determine that it is "prejudice" (which is the wrong word to apply, especially in this case) that causes increases in mood disorders and substance abuse in homosexual people?

Proposition 8, which resurrected a California ban on same-sex marriage, "sends a message that gay relationships are not respected, that they are of secondary value if they are of any value at all," testified Columbia University Professor Ilan H. Meyer, an expert in mental health issues among gays, lesbians and bisexuals.

It isn't about respect - how can that be FORCED by a court anyway? But the fact is that same-sex pairings do not contribute to society in the same way as both-sex pairings, as both-sex pairings INTEGRATE (aren't we "pro-integration"?) both basic elements of society, can naturally produce children, and provides those children with a role model and bonding partner from BOTH sexes. All children, gay or straight, will grow up to have to deal with both males and females, after all. While gays and lesbians have contributed much to society, that has NOTHING to do with their sexual behavior - they could make those contributions whether they are sexually partnered or not, and regardless of legal designation applied to those pairings. Same-sex sodomy does not contribute to society the way heterosexual coitus does. And without coitus, marriages have been declared invalid or annulled.

Laws treat different kinds of voluntary relationships differently all of the time. Business partners are treated differently than roommates. Nonprofits are treated differently than businesses.

Even something as minor as having to fill out a form that asks if someone is single or married causes stress for gays and lesbians because the absence of a category for their relationships evokes "social disapproval," Meyer said.

Were to start?

1. Then change the forms.

2. There is a designation in California – domestic partnerships.

3. Social disapproval would still exist without the marriage amendment.

4. We all have to deal with stress. It is called life.

You know, left-handed people have to deal with a right-handed world. We don’t make everything ambidextrous. There are left-handed options, but they aren't the same.

[Much, much more after the jump.]

He noted that Kristin M. Perry, one of the plaintiffs, had described in her testimony trying to decide every day whether to conceal her sexual orientation at soccer games, parent-teacher association meetings, stores and elsewhere.

So what? Other people with a wide variety sexual proclivities and behaviors make the same decisions. They try to keep their fornication private, or their adultery, or their attraction to feet.

Meyer said concealment of one's sexual orientation for fear of rejection was "damaging and stressful."

Any heterosexual teen boy will say the same thing about approaching a girl. Rejection is part of life, in romances and friendships, in employment, in education, in any number of things.

He also testified about a federal government report that said gay male adolescents are two to three times more likely to attempt suicide and that gays and lesbian are more vulnerable than heterosexuals to depression and substance abuse.

"Most gay men and lesbians are not disordered, but there is an excess in that population as compared to heterosexuals," he said.

If Rick Warren said the same thing, people would trash the statement as bigoted.

Under cross-examination, Meyer acknowledged that he had contributed to the campaign against Proposition 8.

Surprise, surprise.

Therese M. Stewart, who represents the city of San Francisco in the case, said Meyer's testimony was designed to "put discrimination on trial and show the impact on real people."

Discrimination is necessary and is perfectly legal, depending on the basis.

Proposition 8 "hurt people," Stewart said in a brief interview following Meyer's testimony.

How exactly? Can she point to a single shred of evidence directly linked to this amendment? Seems to me the people who got hurt were the supporters of the amendment who got attacked because of their support.

Proposition 8 doesn't mention gays or lesbians or bisexuals or anyone else. By the way, bisexuals would still be prevented from being able to marry both a man and a woman at the same time if the amendment is struck down.

What are the rates of mental illness in the Castro district, where homosexuality has long been celebrated? How about in same-sex couples in Mass. - where same-sex partners have been getting marriage licenses for five years now? The "expert" doesn't know, according to the article.

With or without the amendment, people are going to see same-sex pairings as different from bride+groom pairings. What are we going to do to "correct" that - have thought police? Actually, the plan does seem to be to use the force of a court decision to undermine the distinctions.

Found this in in-the-middle-of-being-updated Associated Press coverage:

"People in our society have goals that are cherished by all people, that are part of the social convention," Meyer said. "We are all raised to think there are certain things we want to achieve in life, and this Proposition 8 says if you are gay or lesbian, you cannot achieve this particular goal."

Some would argue that some of the social convention is heterosexual behavior. Again, if he is talking about having a ceremony and sharing a life, same-sex couples can already do this. What girl grows up dreaming of getting a marriage license?

During Thursday's session, Howard Nielson Jr., a lawyer for the measure's sponsors, mounted an exhaustive cross-examination, using Meyer's own research showing that black and Latino gays had fewer mental health problems than white gays to try to undercut the professor's assertion. Meyer had hypothesized in his study that black and Latino gays would have more mental health issues because of their dual minority identities.

Don’t we hear that "black and Latino" communities are much less accepting of homosexual people or behaviors? So “prejudice” apparently isn't the cause of the mental illness disparity for homosexual people.

Nielson also challenged Meyer on his statement that California's domestic partnership law, which grants same-sex couples the same legal benefits and responsibilities as married spouses, was itself a source of stigma and emotional distress. Equality California, the state's largest gay rights group, sponsored the 2003 law.

"Do you believe Equality California would sponsor legislation that would stigmatize (gay) individuals," Nielson asked.

Bingo! "Equality California" is bigoted and harms gays and lesbians!

Barry Friedman, a constitutional litigator and law professor at New York University School of Law, has a commentary in the paper that expresses disappointment in SCOTUS blocking the broadcasting of the trial.

Meanwhile, in the wake of SCOTUS blocking the broadcast...

Chief U.S. District Judge Vaughn R. Walker said Thursday he's withdrawing his application to have the landmark case video-recorded under a pilot program approved last month by the governing body for federal courts in the West.