Subscribe to Breaking News
Loading ...Afternoon update: Prop 8 witness says gay rights 2nd to het marriage
01.27.2010 1:42pm EST
(San Francisco) The founder of a family values think-tank testified Wednesday that the rights of same-sex couples should come second to preserving the cherished social institution of marriage.
David Blankenhorn, president of the New York-based Institute for American Values, said under cross-examination there are many valid reasons for allowing gays to wed, but the considerations are outweighed by the likely damage it would cause the already weakened state of heterosexual unions.He acknowledged, however, that allowing gays to wed would have positive consequences for same-sex couples and society, such as scoring “a victory for the worthy ideas of tolerance and inclusion,” reducing anti-gay prejudice and hate crimes, and creating a higher standard of living for same-sex couples.
“I do believe it is almost certainly true that gay and lesbian couples and their children would benefit from having gay marriage,” he said.
Blankenhorn was expected to be the last witness to testify in the federal trial exploring whether states violate the U.S. Constitution by denying gays and lesbians the right to marry.
Chief U.S. District Judge Vaughn R. Walker has said he wants to take several weeks to review all the evidence before hearing closing arguments.
Blankenhorn’s testimony was almost certain to be cited by lawyers for the two gay couples suing to overturn the ban prompted by Proposition 8 in California.
They have contended that limiting marriage to a man and a woman hurts gay couples – a key point in their argument against Proposition 8.
At one point in his cross-examination, Blankenhorn was admonished by Judge Walker to answer lawyer David Boise’ questions instead of arguing.
Walker said Blankenhorn was at risk of having his testimony disregarded by the judge for being argumentative.
Based on what I’ve seen so far, I’m sure that our lawyers went much deeper than this story. I would like to know how Blankenhorn backed up his claim that my marriage will harm already weakened straight unions. That continues to make no sense. How is my marriage going to affect anyone but myself and my family?
I really hope in a court of law you’d have to back that up for a judge to believe it.
Its like saying if I paint my house yellow it will change the color of everyone else’s white house.
Can someone please point out what about my marriage affects straight ones? Even if a bad argument with no merit, I would like to hear it. They just say it does…but how??????????
So because the hetero’s can’t seem to keep their marriages together we have to suffer? Even when the bigots can’t cite one single example as to how LGBT marriage will actuality hurt their’s?
This one is a slam dunk win at this level. Problem is when it gets to the Supreme’s they will ignore the law and shoot it down. Especially Clarance “American’s have no right to privacy” Thomas.(lawrence v. texas)
Hey Dave…
…………./’¯/)……………….
…………/….//………………
………../….//……………….
…../’¯/…./’¯\………………..
.././…/…./…./.|_……………
(.(….(….(…./.)..)…………..
.\…………….\/…/………….
..\…………….. /……………
….\…………..(……………..
……\………….\…………….
“the rights of same-sex couples should come second to preserving the cherished social institution of marriage”
In other words, gays are second class citizens, their families should have no legal right to exist and heterosexuals have a special right to deny gays access to the over 1000 federal rights and obligations of marriage.
Bullshit!
It really has boiled down to proving how and why str8 marriages will suffer. When even the defense admits everything we have said is true, they will have to prove that one thing. That is where the judge could decide that gay marriage is still a “social experiment” and without proof of what damage could be caused, we will get kicked down again.
If we lose, it will be our burden to prove in SCOTUS.
And just how cherished is the social institution of marriage: well let’s see, we have Ted Haggard screwing around on his wife with a guy (he told Oprah yesterday that he has been cured of being gay), we have John Edwards making babies with another woman other than his cancer stricken wife, we have Governor Sanford off to South America with a little seniorita other than his wife, of course, and who can forget our Bill Clinton actually doing it in the White House. All this of course is irrelevant, they still hold to the sanctity of marriage!
Lets not forget some of the married hets of the deep south who more often than not find themselves on the wrong side of their fence.
Don’t forget Tiger Woods, Ginelle…Tiger Woods, Britney Spears, Jessica Simpson, Elizabeth Taylor, Donald Trump, Brad Pitt…geez I could go on all day how the institution of marriage is so strong in the American Christian household…give me a break…
Dear Facebook User: thank you for adding Tiger Woods and all of the others. Certainly there must be enough names of couples who hold true to the sanctity of marriage to fill volumes. And they say that Gays will destroy marriage, yeah right!
Dave, to comment on our lawyers, I sometimes get the feeling that there is something else behind the opposition. I think they are brining these half baked witnesses to court on purpose. Do you think that with all of the money that the Mormon machine is throwing at the opposition they’d have a better argument than, our union is more important than yours. This is going to get nasty real fast I have money on it. If the supreme court isn’t changed soon, we are up a creek. Just saying.
Back are you for real? Back do you mean the Sanctity of Contract, thats what it is, or maybe I can translate that to your language “Sanctity of Covenant”. The UK does guarantee the right to for homosexual marriage as does Spain, the Netherlands, just to name a few. And look… they haven’t been annihilated by some fire brimstone scenario. Ted Haggard has to be cured of the demon of sexual oppression, caused by dim wits like you, but I have to admit having a mega church is a good business model… HMMMM….
I am somewhat worried that the lawyers are not taking apart the opposition. *IF* they want to appear above the zealots its a no win so you have to take the low road. This is almost the last possibility as probably the Supreme Court will take 25+ years to decided.
Go for the jugular and get blood!
American Foundation for Equal Rights,
Prop8TrialTracker, and
firedoglake all have the transcripts of the testimony.
P.S. Troll lets just wait and see how long it will be until Ted falls off the wagon and back on some Mens….LOL…
Idiot!
Note sure who the ASCII finger was for, but I commend the old-school artistry.
“but the considerations are outweighed by the likely damage it would cause the already weakened state of heterosexual unions.”
What must the crazy logic behind this statement be?
The only people who can cause damage to the already weakened institution of heterosexual marriage is HETEROSEXUALS! They’ve been weakening it for years with their excessive divorces!