Thursday, October 15, 2009
Homo / News No Harm, No Foul
Posted by Dan Savage on Thu, Oct 15, 2009 at 9:18 AM
Marriage equality opponents insist that same-sex marriage harms the institution of marriage, the family, children, la la la. Prove it, says the judge who's hearing the federal case against Prop 8 in California.
The ongoing battle over gay marriage in California—legalized by the courts then overturned by voters who supported Proposition 8 in November—has prompted some intriguing new questions. Can anyone prove gay marriage harms traditional marriage? What's "harm" and what would "proof" be?U.S. District Chief Judge Vaughn Walker brought these up during a hearing on a lawsuit, brought by gay Californians and supported by the state's attorney general, claiming that Prop. 8 is unconstitutionally discriminatory.
According to an Associated Press story, Charles Cooper, lawyer for the group that sponsored Prop. 8 argued that it is "constitutionally valid because it furthers the states' goal of fostering 'naturally procreative relationships.'"
But Cooper was flummoxed when the judge asked him where's the harm.
Thanks to Slog tipper Jason.
Share via
1
The litigation tactic, whose advocates were originally accused of outrageous arrogance for risking blahblahblah, could turn out pretty damn helpful after all. Fingers crossed.
2
This is the real money quote for me:
From the Associated Press story quoted in the post.
Walker made clear that he wants to examine other issues that are part of the political rhetoric surrounding same-sex marriage but rarely surface in courtrooms. Among the questions he plans to entertain at the trial are whether sexual orientation is a fixed or immutable characteristic, whether gays are a politically powerful group, and if same-sex marriage bans such as Proposition 8 were motivated by anti-gay bias.
From the Associated Press story quoted in the post.
3
"...furthers the states' goal of fostering 'naturally procreative relationships'"
gay marriage doesn't have to harm traditional marriage, merely by being something else it detracts from the state's goal of 'fostering'.
there can only be one 'best'.
if traditional marriage is the ideal you are promoting and fostering you compete against yourself if you allow other marriage models.
gay marriage doesn't have to harm traditional marriage, merely by being something else it detracts from the state's goal of 'fostering'.
there can only be one 'best'.
if traditional marriage is the ideal you are promoting and fostering you compete against yourself if you allow other marriage models.
4
@2 - It would be interesting to see what the appellate courts, especially the supreme court, would do with a finding of fact from a lower court that sexual orientation was an immutable characteristic.
Also, what the hell is up with the picture of Tinky-Winky? Really? That's all USA Today has for gay imagery?
Also, what the hell is up with the picture of Tinky-Winky? Really? That's all USA Today has for gay imagery?
5
@3 There is only competition if people denied gay marriage would then choose straight marriage. That's not the case. Legalization of gay marriage does not affect the number or quality of straight marriages in the least. Nor will it change the number of "naturally procreative relationships." Which, by the way, happen outside of marriage all the time. Banning fornication would be a much more effective policy, if harder to enforce.
6
How do I contact this Judge Walker? I have another question that, we all know, needs asked. If the state has some interest in promoting "naturally procreative relationships," then why aren't marriages banned for people who can't "naturally procreate?" Why allow legally-recognized relationships to continue once "natural procreation" is no longer possible, either by choice or nature?
7
@4 I thought the Teletubby picture was appropriate. It invoked the idea that a gay character on a kids show could somehow harm children and how fucking ridiculous that is 10 years later.
8
3, So if there can only be one best for everyone, which car is the best for everyone?
Which movie is the best?
Which race is the best?
Which religion is the best? And which denomination of that religion is the best?
Which movie is the best?
Which race is the best?
Which religion is the best? And which denomination of that religion is the best?
9
@6 The Judge commented that the last marriage he officiated was for a very elderly couple. He explained that he never asked their procreative plans.
@ 3 Great! Kids do best in families headed by rich, white people too. I think we should go all the way and stop "fostering" marriage for poor, brown people. That'll learn 'em.
@ 3 Great! Kids do best in families headed by rich, white people too. I think we should go all the way and stop "fostering" marriage for poor, brown people. That'll learn 'em.
11
If promoting the best model is the method we all must comply with, then we better start creating "marriage panels" to determine who can and cannot be married.
Because there is only one "best" right?
So that means no more marriage for convicts, I assume. And then there are those states that allow first or second cousin marriage...that can't be good for a number of reasons.
Who else gets to be discounted from the "best" model - or is it just same-sex couples?
Because if it's just same-sex couples then there is a strong odor of discrimination in the air. You can deny it all you want...but we have been down this stupid fucking road before, American history idiots.
Because there is only one "best" right?
So that means no more marriage for convicts, I assume. And then there are those states that allow first or second cousin marriage...that can't be good for a number of reasons.
Who else gets to be discounted from the "best" model - or is it just same-sex couples?
Because if it's just same-sex couples then there is a strong odor of discrimination in the air. You can deny it all you want...but we have been down this stupid fucking road before, American history idiots.
12
I'll admit it, I'm really interested in the answer. I've never heard it answered concretely. I sometimes wonder if "traditional marriage" is a code for "barefoot, perpetually pregnant, stay at home mom" ?
14
How does it harm marriage, it harms it by destroying thousands of years of human history pffft gone in an instant. How does it harm marriage, it harms marriage because kids will be taught about Dick and Tim, and Jane and June and then eventually Tim, Dick, Harry, June, and Jane. There will be no end. The shelves of school libraries will be full of disgusting books. They rot the mind. And then again it will harm marriage by putting same gender marriages on the same level as opposite gender marriages and then whose back will Religious bigots have to step on to get up to reach the serving bowl on the top shelf? HUH? I can prove all this too. Just look at Spain! They don't have the decency to speak English (King James Bible) they don't have the civilized brain to work all day everyday from sun up to about 8pm, but instead have a hedonistic Siesta where they sleep (Slothfulness sin in the Bible). And what really shows how allowing same gender couples to marry has harmed marriage is Spain pulled out of the Iraq war. What further proof do you people need that Marriage is only between a Man and a Woman? Really people, it's all so easy. Amen.
(The above is for advertisement purposes only and is not intended for real world use. But in an election cycle it can be used to defeat marriage equality.)
(The above is for advertisement purposes only and is not intended for real world use. But in an election cycle it can be used to defeat marriage equality.)
15
@3,
Actually, under parity law regulating advertisements, there can be many -- an infinite number, actually! -- of "bests". What there can't be is a single "better"... unless you've got scientific evidence to demonstrate that your product, whether toothpaste, cat litter, or civil marriage pairing, produces superior results.
Also, I'm not sure what you mean by competing. Are you suggesting that people who otherwise would have gotten het-married are more likely to opt for homo-marriage if the option is available? Because, uh, that doesn't seem especially likely. Are you looking at the trend of couples in Massachusetts to opt for domestic partnerships over marriage? Because you have to think that a lot of that is a response to the claim that marriage is a religious ceremony, and not a civil one. I know that I'll never get married now -- any partnering I'll do will be domestic, purely because I'm not religious.
Actually, under parity law regulating advertisements, there can be many -- an infinite number, actually! -- of "bests". What there can't be is a single "better"... unless you've got scientific evidence to demonstrate that your product, whether toothpaste, cat litter, or civil marriage pairing, produces superior results.
Also, I'm not sure what you mean by competing. Are you suggesting that people who otherwise would have gotten het-married are more likely to opt for homo-marriage if the option is available? Because, uh, that doesn't seem especially likely. Are you looking at the trend of couples in Massachusetts to opt for domestic partnerships over marriage? Because you have to think that a lot of that is a response to the claim that marriage is a religious ceremony, and not a civil one. I know that I'll never get married now -- any partnering I'll do will be domestic, purely because I'm not religious.
18
The notion that any governmental body in the modern world has the goal of fostering "naturally procreative relationships" is revolting on multiple levels. Ugh.
In other news, these are the same intriguing questions that reasonable people have been asking pretty much forever, and certainly with increased intensity in the last few years. There is no answer that can be presented before a court of law, because the only answer opponents have is "Homos piss God off."
In other news, these are the same intriguing questions that reasonable people have been asking pretty much forever, and certainly with increased intensity in the last few years. There is no answer that can be presented before a court of law, because the only answer opponents have is "Homos piss God off."
19
It harms marriage by making me think about two men having sex while I'm trying to make love to my wife!
How can I settle for just fucking my wife... I mean, how can I manage to get it up if those horrible thoughts keep popping up in my head?
How can I settle for just fucking my wife... I mean, how can I manage to get it up if those horrible thoughts keep popping up in my head?
22
Thread jack: Dan, is the post below your mom? Has it been a year already? My condolences...it's been 12 years for me, and she's still not forgotten.
23
The same argument that gay marriage will undermine traditional marriage was made here in Canada too. Well gay marriage is now legal and still the divorce rate of straight couples is still hovering at 50%. The people who argue... "of fostering 'naturally procreative relationships.'" should really be trying to outlaw divorce.
24
It is quite amusing that the lawyer for the group that sponsored Prop 8 cannot articulate how gay marriage will harm marriage. One would think that he would have a carefully constructed argument ready.....
And Kim @ 12: I too think tha "traditional marriage" is a code for "barefoot, perpetually pregnant, stay at home mom."
And Kim @ 12: I too think tha "traditional marriage" is a code for "barefoot, perpetually pregnant, stay at home mom."
25
Every time some guy tells me same-sex marriage "threatens" heterosexual marriages, I can't help wondering if what he's really saying is, "I'm married to a woman, but I've been secretly carrying on an affair with another guy, and if same-sex marriage is legal he's really going to start pressuring me to leave my wife."
26
When gay marriage was declared legal in this state I was on my way to file for a divorce from my wife so I could marry the man of my dreams. Its was at that time when crossing the street to the courthouse I was struck by a speeding unicyclist and went into a coma. I didn't awaken until after November when Prop. 8 passed. Curses!!
27
I just want to say, as a married heterosexual, that gay marriage does not harm my "traditional" marriage in any way, shape or form. I mean, I know that's obvious to any rational person, but I still think it needs to be said more often.
28
If gay people are doing it, straight men will tear knee ligaments trying to get away from it. Straight men don't go see The Music Man, figure skate competitively, or allow their nipples to be played with, either. Marriage is as good as dead.
29
My heterosexual marriage, is fine, too. And, so are my religious freedoms, that also needs to be said more often as well.
Hernandez @ 27,
Congratulations!
Hernandez @ 27,
Congratulations!
31
How about this, people who belong to religions which make their members NOT use medicine should not be allowed to marry. They as-good-as kill their own children. Now that's way worse than what gay people do to their children.
32
I would argue that if heterosexual marriage fosters naturally procreative relationships, We ought to ban it. I really don't think we need to encourage people to have more kids than they're having now.
33
Interesting that the questions concerning the meaning of marriage will finally be considered in court. Many have addressed these arguments in writing ( including me on my blog) but it's strange that they haven't been brought up in court before now.
This is the best approach to dealing with the pro and con of same sex marriage. Courts require proof, you know evidence, when settling a case. So far The arguments against same sex marriage are based on heresay not fact.
This is the best approach to dealing with the pro and con of same sex marriage. Courts require proof, you know evidence, when settling a case. So far The arguments against same sex marriage are based on heresay not fact.
35
I'll have to break the news to my husband that our marriage does not foster the constitutionally-protected goal of fostering naturally procreative relationships, since we were both fixed before we got married. But that makes it sound like it's anti-gay bigots harming my otherwise-traditional marriage, not my gay friends.
36
To say that we are evolved creatures is a myth. This proves it. Whenever you have someone or a group of people say something as ridiculous as these bigots do, and WE NEVER ASK THIS VERY OBVIOUS QUESTION ON DAY ONE?
Epic fail on our part. All these people do is talk out of their ass and no one ever challenges them to prove it.
I can't give you a single example of a straight marriage/family being ruined by gay marriage/family.
I can, however, give you plenty of examples of hetero marriages utterly destroying everyone and everything in their path: Dad ask daughter for sex on facebook, the Dugard girl is kidnapped and serially raped by a creepy ass dude while his wife stands proudly by his actions, the Smart girl is kidnapped and serially raped by another creepy dude whose wife stands proudly by his actions, man meets woman + they fall in love + They get married = man and woman have sixteen kids that they exploit happily on several nauseating TLC programs for money, school teacher murders her boyfriend's fiance so he won't leave her, etc, etc, etc.
Epic fail on our part. All these people do is talk out of their ass and no one ever challenges them to prove it.
I can't give you a single example of a straight marriage/family being ruined by gay marriage/family.
I can, however, give you plenty of examples of hetero marriages utterly destroying everyone and everything in their path: Dad ask daughter for sex on facebook, the Dugard girl is kidnapped and serially raped by a creepy ass dude while his wife stands proudly by his actions, the Smart girl is kidnapped and serially raped by another creepy dude whose wife stands proudly by his actions, man meets woman + they fall in love + They get married = man and woman have sixteen kids that they exploit happily on several nauseating TLC programs for money, school teacher murders her boyfriend's fiance so he won't leave her, etc, etc, etc.
37
No, THIS is the best quote:
The AP quotes Andy Pugno, general counsel to the coalition of religious and social conservative groups behind Prop. 8, who says the real impact is that the voters who overturned gay marriage "continue to be accused of being irrational and bigoted for restoring the traditional definition of marriage."
See, the harm in gay marriage is that, if you try to ban it, but then the ban is overturned, then, see, people will say you're a bigot.
The AP quotes Andy Pugno, general counsel to the coalition of religious and social conservative groups behind Prop. 8, who says the real impact is that the voters who overturned gay marriage "continue to be accused of being irrational and bigoted for restoring the traditional definition of marriage."
See, the harm in gay marriage is that, if you try to ban it, but then the ban is overturned, then, see, people will say you're a bigot.
38
Ok then, but if the reason prop 8 is constitutionally valid is "because it furthers the states' goal of fostering 'naturally procreative relationships.'" then infertile heterosexuals should LOSE THEIR RIGHT TO MARRY RIGHT NOW. Which, of course, won´t happen, so just fucking give homosexuals their civil rights already!
Most Commented on Slog
-
Stephen Fry v. the Catholic Church by Dan Savage
-
Straight Up by Dan Savage
-
Neologism Needed by Dan Savage
-
Palin's Cheat Sheet by Dan Savage
-
SL Letter of the Day: The Toilet Brush Off by Dan Savage
-
Every Child Deserves a Mother and a Father by Dan Savage
-
Tea Party Crowd Believes That Only Good Spellers Should Vote by Dan Savage
-
How's That Hopey, Changey Stuff Working Out For Childhood Obesity? by Dan Savage
-
Every Child Deserves a Mother and a Father by Dan Savage
-
The Green Police Super Bowl Commercial by Charles Mudede
RSS
Facebook
Twitter
Comments (38) RSS