Hawaii Passes Veto Proof Civil Unions Bill - So What's Next?

I put this out on Twitter earlier today because I didn't have time to put up a post, but for those who don't follow UTF on Twitter, here's the great news from the Honolulu Advertiser:

"The Senate voted 18 to 7 to pass a civil-unions bill. The bill now moves to the House for consideration with a veto-proof majority. The bill would give same-sex and heterosexual couples the ability to enter into civil unions and receive the same state rights as marriage. The Senate gallery was overflowing with people as the Senate prepared to vote. Sen. Kidani offered a floor amendment to change the effective date of the civil-unions bill from Jan. 1, 2010 to Jan. 1, 2011. Kidani said the amendment is to correct a technical flaw and would give the Department of Health more time to implement civil unions. A retroactive date would not make the bill legally invalid, but could invite a veto by Gov. Lingle on technical grounds. Amending the bill could also delay its passage and allow opponents to put more pressure on Democrat senators who appeared ready to pass the bill today. Sen. Ihara, who supports civil unions, said he felt compelled to correct the technical flaw to remove a reason for a veto."

Read HRC's Backstory on how the vote went down. All this, even after the major anti-LGBT protest against the civil unions bill.

The pressure is on the House now to pass the bill. They actually passed a similar bill last year, so hopefully we can get a repeat performance. A decision will be made next week whether they will take up the measure.

Go to Equality Hawaii to get involved.

VIDEO: Olbermann Reacts to Supreme Court Ruling - "Be Prepared for the Ban on Same-Sex Marriage"

Part 1



Part 2

Prop 8 Trial Coverage Day 9: Being Gay Is Bad For My Health, But Not For the Reasons You Think

Guest blogger Davina Kotulski of DavinaKotulski.com reports on the Prop 8 trial, day 9. Oh, and happy birthday, Davina!

I have not been to the gym since the Prop 8 trial started two weeks ago. I can’t even think of going to the gym in the morning when I have to race to San Francisco, go through the security obstacle course at the Federal building which includes taking off my shoes, jacket, turning my lap top on, going through a metal detector, surrendering my camera, bending over and coughing - okay it’s not that bad, but close.

Then I take the elevator to the 19th floor, slam my coffee, compliments of Billy the Rockstar, turn on my computer, connect to the network, bring up Twitter, Facebook, AOL, my website, and word and stake out my territory.

At lunch, I stuff my face with carbs, since the salad bar line is way too long, and then extra carbs to numb out the pain of the tortuous cross-examination. Girlfriend, I’m putting on the pounds!

TODAY STINKS-LITERALLY!

Being in the court room today feels like sitting in a college statistics class. It’s just hella boring, maybe because it’s my 40th birthday today and I came to the courtroom instead of getting a massage and doing something even mildly more fun than this today, like getting a root canal for example.

Maybe it’s because there is something way too human transpiring in this room today. The overflow room is filled with people and for whatever reason there are terrible odors!! Who the hell keeps farting? What’s with the severe body odor and the hacking coughs?

We gay people need some self-care. If you are sick, get into bed and drink plenty of liquids. Bathe-it does a body good. Wash your clothes. Leave the room if you need to pass gas.

Oh shoot, now I’m sneezing.

This may be my last blog for the day, especially since Yeson8 counsel is now talking about a lesbian who was married to a man and must have enjoyed having sex with him. I don’t think I can take listening to argument the Yeson8 counsel is trying to make.

Just because gay people may have had str8 sex, that doesn’t mean they are str8. It means that we were straight-curious or hadn’t come out yet.

The case will continue Monday and Tuesday and Judge Walker indicated today that the closing arguments will likely be scheduled in February. Marriage Equality USA plans to hold a vigil on the last day of closing arguments. There will also be a rally day of decision which will likely be within 90 days of closing arguments.

In the meantime, send thoughts of equality to Hawaii, Indiana, and New Hampshire where opponents of equality are trying to move us backwards.

Prop 8 Trial Coverage Day 9: All Major Psychological and Psychiatric Associations State Conversion Therapy Is Ineffective and Harms Gay People

Guest blogger Davina Kotulski of DavinaKotulski.com reports on the Prop 8 trial, day 9.

Witness called today is Gregory M. Herek, Ph.D. a Professor of Psychology at the University of California at Davis. He will testify about the nature of sexual orientation; how mainstream mental health professionals and behavioral scientists regard homosexuality; the benefits conferred by marriage; stereotypes relating to lesbians and gay men; stigma and prejudice directed at lesbians and gay men; the harm to lesbians and gay men and their families as a consequence of being denied the right to marry; and how the institution of domestic partnerships differs from that of marriage and is linked with antigay stigma.

I started the morning with gulping down my latte. While I was doing this and admiring the historic photos of San Francisco on the 19th floor in the federal building, I struck up a conversation with the other person in the hallway. It turned out that I was talking to Brian Woodward from the California Family Council. We talked about how we could find our commonalities and exchanged business cards.

I then tossed my cup in the trash and found that the trial was already in full swing with psychologist Dr. Gregory Herek from the University of Davis. As a psychologist myself, I’ve been following Dr. Herek’s work for decades and even had the opportunity back in 2005 to be on a panel for marriage equality with him.

Dr. Herek has an impressive record of publications on sexual orientation and hate crimes.

Dr. Herek discusses the American Psychiatric Association’s removal of homosexuality from the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual (DSM) in 1973.

Dr. Evelyn Hooker, a psychologist who published "The Adjustment of the Male Overt Homosexual" about her research on psychological testing of gay men and heterosexual men, helped create a body of psychological research that led to homosexuality being removed from the DSM.

Hooker assessed both gay and straight men and then had experts review the tests and select who was gay . The experiment, which was repeated by other researchers, demonstrated that most gay men demonstrated the same level of social adjustment as heterosexual men in the general population.

Dr. Herek spoke about how most gay, lesbian, bisexual people do not believe that their sexual orientation is a choice. He referenced a study completed in Sacramento, California with 2,200 participants. Subjects were asked if they felt being LGB was a choice.

-87% gay men said they believed it was not a choice

-70% lesbians said they believed it was not a choice

-59% bi men said they believed it was not a choice

-45% bi women said they believed it was not a choice

Herek was asked if he believed if reparative therapy was effective. Reparative therapy, sometimes called conversion therapy, is intended to change a gay person’s sexual orientation to heterosexual.

Herek said “When we use the word effective with therapeutic intervention it means it consistently works, produces the outcome that we expect without causing harm to the individual…No, it is not effective.”

Herek notes that a taskforce was created to evaluate the effectiveness of these therapies. According to Herek, “the taskforce provided a report on their effectiveness and safety of reparative therapy. In their review of the literature, they found that there were not many high quality studies that had been done to speak to the effectiveness of these studies.”

Studies were then conducted and the APA Taskforce concluded that reparative therapy does not reduce same-sex attraction, has a limited effectiveness, and does some harm to individuals, including depression and anxiety.

Herek reported that the American Psychiatric Association, American Psychological Association, American Counselors Association, American Teachers Association, and the American Pediatric Society do not support reparative therapies, believe they are ineffective, and they believe that this harms youth.

Herek mentions a survey of married same-sex couples in Massachusetts released in May 2009 by the Massachusetts Department of Public Health entitled the Health and Marriage Equality in Massachusetts Survey.

According to an executive summary of the survey published by the Williams Institute (May 2009), the survey found that same-sex married couples reported that marriage had a positive impact on their lives. Seventy-two per cent (72 %) of the married individuals reported “feeling more committed” to their spouse and “70% felt more accepted by their communities.”

Individuals also reported other important benefits from marriage, including “feeling that they have to worry less about legal problems (48%),” being able to give their same-sex spouse health insurance (30%), coming out to co-workers (82%), and health care providers (82%), and for those raising children, feeling that their children are “happier and better off as a result of their marriage (93%).” Especially notable was the finding that 62% of individuals reported that being married increased their family’s acceptance of their partner.

1 IN 5 LGBT PEOPLE EXPERIENCE VIOLENCE IN THEIR LIFETIME

Herek discusses the stigma against LGBT people. He says that many heterosexuals experience “negative feelings towards lesbians and gay men, they even feel disgusted” by gay people. Herek mentions the violence against LGBT people and how the FBI and State of California track hate crimes against LGB people.

According to Herek, 1 in 5 LGBT people experienced some sort of violence in the course of their lifetimes. Others, he reports have had some experience of discrimination in employment.

Herek speaks about how if two men walked down the street holding hands that would attract violence and harassment.

FYI-January 30 is international same-sex hand holding day.

LGBT YOUTH ARE BULLIED IN SCHOOL AND HARMED BY THE NOTION THAT THEIR SEXUAL ORIENTATION CAN BE CHANGED THROUGH THERAPY

Herek also mentions harassment and bullying against youth in schools.

While not discussed by Herek, I present you with findings from GLSEN’s 2007 National School Climate Survey which I found shocking.

• 91% of LGBT middle school students said they experienced harassment at school because of their sexual orientation.

• 59% reported physical harassment

• 39% reported physical assault, compared to 20% of high school students

• 82% heard names like “faggot” and “dyke”

• 63% heard staff make homophobic remarks

• 50% of LGBT middle school students surveyed reported missing at least one day of school in the past month because they felt unsafe.

• LGBT students who missed school because of safety had lower GPAs than other LGBT students (2.4 to 2.9)

• 57% of students who experience harassment never report it because they fear the teachers won’t help or it will only make things worse.

• School safety influences academic success.

• LGBT youth who feel unsafe, miss school more frequently, and have lower GPAs than youth who are not threatened, this leads LGBTIQ students to drop out.

• Approx. 28% of gay and lesbian youth drop out of high school because of discomfort (due to verbal and physical abuse) in the school environment. Remafedi, Gary. (1987). "Male Homosexuality: The Adolescent's Perspective." Pediatrics, Issue 79. pp. 326-337.

• Bullying and violence is even higher for gender non-conforming kids.

On a side note, the movie Prayers for Bobby is a great resource on illustrating the harm done to LGBT youth when they are pressured to change something they cannot change.

KINSEY’S CONTINUUM

During the cross-examination, Herek is asked about sexual orientation and how it is defined. He mentions Kinsey’s continuum of sexual orientation, which I’ve provided for you below. Herek says that as a culture we’ve shortened Kinsey’s continuum to 3 categories.

1. Heterosexual

2. Homosexual (gay/lesbian)

3. Bisexual

However, Kinsey’s continuum is more exact and people's behaviors, attractions, and identity are not always consistent. For example, someone’s sexual experience/behavior might be a 0-exclusively heterosexual, but their attraction is to members of the same-sex. Additionally, someone might have the experience of a 3, below, but identity as heterosexual.

• 0- Exclusively heterosexual experience

• 1- Predominately het exp. only incidental homosexual exp.

• 2- Predominately het exp. but more than incidental homosexual exp.

• 3- Equally het & homosexual experiences

• 4- Predominately homosexual exp. but more than incidental het exp.

• 5- Predominately homosexual exp. only incidental het exp.

• 6- Exclusively homosexual experience

And with that, it’s time for a break!

Prop 8 Trial Coverage Day 8: Roundup

UPDATE 1/22/10: A summary from the American Foundation for Equal Rights, the group behind the challenge to Prop 8 (read full transcript of hearing here):

As an Official Proponent of Prop. 8, Tam is responsible for putting the initiative on the ballot and taking over its defense in court by intervening in Perry v. Schwarzenegger. On the stand today, he confirmed that he “supervised the preparation of the appropriate language of Proposition 8.”

Boies questioned Tam about several statements against marriage equality, including a pro-Prop. 8 email that stated: “They lose no time in pushing the gay agenda — after legalizing same-sex marriage, they want to legalize prostitution. What will be next? On their agenda list is: legalize having sex with children;" that "The San Francisco City Government is under the rule of homosexuals” and that gay men were twelve times more likely to molest children.

The court has previously viewed Yes on Prop. 8 ads urging voters to “protect our children.” Now it’s apparent that this message was working in concert with the type of discriminatory communications we heard today from an Official Proponent of Prop. 8.

"That [Same-sex marriage] would lead to incest. That would lead to polygamy. If this is a civil right, what would prevent other groups form asking for the same right,” Tam testified in court today.

"It is very important our children won't grow up to fantasize or think about ‘should I marry Jane or John when I grow up,'” Tam testified in court today.

Tam was also questioned in court about a media interview he gave regarding his work to pass Prop. 8 in which he said: “We hope to convince Asian-Americans that gay marriage will encourage more children to experiment with the gay lifestyle and that the lifestyle comes with all kinds of disease.”

Tam also testified to working with ProtectMarriage.com, the lead pro-Prop. 8 campaign committee, on signature gathering, messaging, rallies, debates, weekly grassroots conferences and in signing a "statement of unity" between himself and the campaign, which laid out a formal campaign structure including him and his organization, the Traditional Family Coalition. He also noted that he spent the majority of his working hours on passing Prop. 8 from January to November 2008.

Today also continued the cross-examination of plaintiff expert Dr. Gary Segura, who testified yesterday about the relative political power of gays and lesbians as a class of citizens, and their level of political vulnerability.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Original Post 1/21/10 9:00 PM PST

Guest blogger Davina Kotulski will be back blogging tomorrow from the court room - due to a last minute scheduling change of the trial, she wasn't able to cover it today. So here's a good roundup of blogs and articles about today's hearing. (See day 8 preview post.)

• Prop 8 Trial Liveblogging Day 8: Daily Summary
• LA Times: Gays vulnerable at ballot, professor argues at Prop 8 trial
• LA Times: Prop 8 proponent says he argued that gay marriage could lead to legalizing pedophilia
• Lisa Leff for AP: Prop 8 backer stands by views on pedophilia
• Mercury News Living Coverage Day 8
• Fire Dog Lake coverage
• Shannon Minter: Perry v. Schwarzenegger Proceedings, Day 8

Prop 8 Trial Coverage Day 7: Video of Witness Depositions

CORRECTION: Numerous blogs yesterday, including UTF, reported that the following quote came from an LDS document submitted as evidence:

With respect to Prop. 8 campaign, key talking points will come from campaign, but cautious, strategic, not to take the lead so as to provide plausible deniability or respectable distance so as not to show that church is directly involved.

In actuality, court transcripts (PDF pgs 1628-1637) indicate that the above quote was plaintiff witness Professor Gary Seguara's characterization of the document, but he was not quoting the text itself.

Q. As a political scientist, what is it about this document and these statements that is relevant to analyzing the balance of political power between gay men and lesbians and religious organizations to the extent they're involved in political activities in California?

A. Well, with respect to the Proposition 8 campaign, it makes it clear that there was a sort of two-way flow of information, where strategic talking points were being provided to religious leaders by the campaign. And, in turn, the religious leaders were providing volunteers to the campaign. But there was this cautious strategic not-to-take-the-lead notion so as to provide a -- I don't know, plausible deniability or respectable distance between the church organization per se and the actual campaign.

The actual document that Segura read and referred to stated:

"He has also been hired by the coalition to do polling work for Prop 8. The main California grass roots leaders are in the process of being called as, quote, area directors, end quote, with the responsibility for areas that generally correspond to each of the 17 LDS coordinating councils for the LDS mission boundaries. Thereafter, priesthood leaders will call local prop coordinators over each stake and leaders by zip code within each ward - potentially working not only with LDS, but also LDS volunteers."

UPDATE 1/20/09 8:25PM : Articles for Day 7.

Prop 8 Trial Tracker: "An Explosive Afternoon: LDS Church":

This is perhaps the most explosive bit of all, from a document between the LDS Church and the campaign:

With respect to Prop. 8 campaign, key talking points will come from campaign, but cautious, strategic, not to take the lead so as to provide plausible deniability or respectable distance so as not to show that church is directly involved.

Get that? The LDS Church intentionally worked to hide behind the scenes to disguise their involvement in the public realm. The LDS Church is well aware that the general public does not have the most favorable opinion of them. Attention on their involvement could have hurt their cause, namely passing Prop 8.

Also from Prop 8 Trial Tracker: "Your Right Hand is My Left Hand: The LDS Church and the Prop 8 Campaign":

For about half an hour, Boutrous and Pugno were arguing about the admissibility, and then the names of people, in a document from a Mr. Jansson The interesting part of this is just how these two organizations became two sides of the same coin for about six months in 2008.

Going over all these documents, we learned that over 20,000 Mormons were out door-knocking on the final few weekends. We learned that Mr. Jansson was playing a dual role, both as a leader within the Mormon hierarchy as well as in the protectmarriage.com executive board. We learned that Mormon/LDS Church leaders were powerful in the structure throughout the campaign. Of course, that was no real surprise.

More great reporting on Courage Campaign (CC)'s Prop 8 Trial Tracker. (Oh, and check this out: Prop 8 people trying to sue them over CC's parody of ProtectMarriage.com logo. CC won the first round, but it isn't over.)

Check out Prop 8 Trial Tracker Day 7 summary, and Mercury News also has a full roundup of day 7 live blogging.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Original post 1/20/10 at 12:25pm PST

Unfortunately, guest blogger Davina Kotulski has to work today so will not be able to cover day 7 of the Prop 8 trial. I also have to work today (which is why I'm delayed in posting), but I will try my best to round up today's coverage. Check back to this post for further updates.

American Foundation for Equal Rights (AFER) Summarizes Day 6

AFER, the group behind the challenge to Prop 8, released this summary of day 6 of the Prop 8 trial which was Tuesday, December 19.

The court has so far been presented with compelling testimony from gay men and lesbians about the discrimination they have experienced first-hand, in addition to eminent experts from Yale, Cambridge, Harvard, UCLA and other prestigious institutions who have testified to the harm caused by Prop. 8 and the lack of a justification for its denial of fundamental rights, creating a powerful, fact-based record of evidence pointing to the unconstitutionality of Prop. 8.

Testifying today under the direct examination of City Attorney Dennis Herrera was Jerry Sanders, the current Republican Mayor and former Police Chief of the City of San Diego. He spoke about his decision, as Mayor, to support the City of San Diego’s participation in an amicus brief advocating against the exclusion of same-sex couples from marriage and why he concluded supporting marriage equality was and is in the best interest of local government and the larger community (powerful video of that announcement can be found here: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VAOkwjQdm6Q).

"If government tolerates discrimination against anyone it is very easy for citizens to do the same thing," Sanders testified in court.

"I had been prejudiced,” Sanders testified in reference to his previous opposition to marriage equality. “I was saying one group of people did not deserve the same respect, did not deserve the same symbolism of marriage, and I was saying their marriages were less important than those of heterosexuals."

“I think denying marriage equality is just as wrong as telling blacks that they couldn’t use white-only drinking fountains. It’s government action that’s founded in prejudice,” Sanders said to reporters at the courthouse. “The first step towards equality in society is equality under the law.”

Testifying after Sanders was M.V. Lee Badgett, Ph.D., a professor of economics at the University of Massachusetts, Amherst, who spoke about the harm caused by Prop. 8.

"Prop. 8 has inflicted substantial economic harm on same-sex couples and their children who live here in California,” Badgett testified. “I have the opinion that letting same-sex couples marry would not have any adverse effect on the institution of marriage or on different sex couples.”

After testifying, Mayor Jerry Sanders and his lesbian daughter Lisa spoke to reporters. Journalist Rex Wockner has coverage of the press conference on his website.

Witnesses for Day 7, January 29

From AFER:

- Ryan Kendall, a gay man who will testify about the “conversation therapy” he underwent in his youth and how he has been affected by discrimination

-Gary M. Segura, Ph.D,Professor of American Politics in the Department of Political Science at Stanford University. He will testify about the relative political power of gays and lesbians as a class of citizens, and their level of political vulnerability.

Video of Witness Depositions

Again, the amazing AFER comes through. I'll just quote them directly. Again.

The Olson/Boies legal team today introduced into evidence videos of the depositions of Paul Nathanson, Ph.D. and Katherine Young, Ph.D., who are among the experts dropped by the defendants from their witness list. In the videos, Nathanson and Young make several statements that are harmful to the defendants' case and that support the plaintiffs' position.

Both are professors at McGill University. They were questioned by David Boies.

AFER provided video of the depositions. Here they are below. First, Katherine Young, Ph.D.



Paul Nathanson, Ph.D.

Nathanson and Young both state that equal marriage would increase family stability, improve the lives of children, and that gay men and lesbians have faced a long history of discrimination including violence. They also acknowledge broad scientific and professional consensus in favor of equal marriage.

The backers of Prop. 8 told the court this week that they were dropping four witnesses from their witness list, leaving only two. They claimed this was due to a reluctance to testify because of cameras in the courtroom. The trial, however, is not being broadcast. We have now seen three depositions of the withdrawn experts, which would form the basis for their cross-examinations, that resulted in the experts making admissions that disagreed with the backers of Prop. 8's case, which is what actually led to the last-minute witness list reduction.

Plaintiffs’ attorneys last week introduced video of the deposition of Loren Marks of Louisiana State University, who had been expected to testify for the defendants that the ideal family structure is for children to be raised by two married "biological" parents, which Marks said meant the genetic parents.

Marks admitted that he only read parts of the studies he relied upon in making his conclusion. It was then pointed out that those studies actually defined "biological" parents in a way that included adoptive parents -- not just genetic parents. Marks then stated that the word "biological" should be deleted from the report he prepared for this case, and also admitted he considered no research on gay and lesbian parents, effectively revealing his research as fatally flawed.

Live Blogging

Live blogging of the trial can be found at Courage Campaign's Prop 8 Trial Tracker. (One a side note: Prop 8 proponents are suing Courage Campaign for Prop 8 parody logo they're using for their site. Interesting development. Read about it here.)

You can find more blogging at Fire Dog Lake and Mercury News.

For a great Twitter list of Prop 8 trial tweets, check out No Back Seats' list.

I will post more today's hearing later tonight. Be sure to check back!

Prop 8 Trial Coverage Day 8: Hostile Witness Dr. Tam to Take the Stand

Today should prove even more interesting in the court room of the Prop 8 trial. Dr. William Tam, who claimed during the Prop campaign that if the initiative did not pass that gays and lesbians would next try to legalize sex with children, will be taking the stand as a hostile witness.

An excerpt from his deposition:

Question: “And it is your understanding that part of the gay agenda is legalizing underage sex?”
Answer: “Right.” (Page 43 of deposition)

“They lose no time in pushing the gay agenda — after legalizing same-sex marriage, they want to legalize prostitution. What will be next? On their agenda list is: legalize having sex with children.” (Pro-Prop. 8 email by Tam, page 78 of deposition)

“We hope to convince Asian-Americans that gay marriage will encourage more children to experiment with the gay lifestyle and that the lifestyle comes with all kinds of disease.” (Pro-Prop. 8 media interview by Tam, page 77 of deposition)

The taped deposition was played in court last week by the plaintiffs last week. Though Tam dropped out as a witness for the defendants (and they were probably grateful given that they want to hide this element of the Prop 8 campaign from the court), the Olson/Boies team as called him to the stand anyway.

The American Foundation for Equal Rights sent this bio on another witness to take the stand today.

- Gregory M. Herek, Ph.D. a Professor of Psychology at the University of California at Davis. He will testify about the nature of sexual orientation, how mainstream mental health professionals and behavioral scientists regard homosexuality, benefits conferred by marriage, stereotypes relating to lesbians and gay men, stigma and prejudice directed at lesbians and gay men, the harm to lesbians and gay men and their families as a consequence of being denied the right to marry, and how the institution of domestic partnerships differs from that of marriage and is linked with antigay stigma.