Defending Prop 8: The Feeling Thermometer

After two weeks of testimony from witnesses supporting the challenge to the constitutionality of Proposition 8, the plaintiffs are on the verge of resting their case today. Their attorneys say they want to introduce snippets of deposition testimony from various people, and then put a variety of other exhibits into the record before they rest their case.

From the trial’s start, it has been the responsibility of the plaintiffs to prove their case. But rather than address the initial complaint – a very weak argument of “equal protection” based on a very creative interpretation of the 14th Amendment to the US Constitution – the trial has been about feelings. The plaintiffs’ case seems to boil down to one recurring theme: limiting marriage to only a man and a woman hurts the feelings of homosexuals. One of their expert witnesses even explained how he measures things on a “feeling thermometer.”

Here is an article from San Francisco Chronicle columnist Debra Saunders titled, “Federal court has become the new feelings forum.” Saunders notes, “Forget the law…feelings rule.”

Plaintiffs’ attorneys have brought witness after witness to the stand, from institutions such as Harvard, Yale, Columbia and Stanford. Without exception, each witness admitted a very strong bias toward same-sex marriage. And without exception, each “expert” referred to the subjective feelings of homosexuals; forget about legal precedent, social science, religious freedom or the rights of voters.

Time after time, the Proposition 8 legal defense team skewered the plaintiff witnesses on cross-examination (although you won’t know this by reading accounts in the mainstream media). Not a single expert witness for the plaintiffs has been able to maintain their primary contention without having to make major concessions as to its validity. For example, one witness professorially lectured the courtroom on the premise that homosexual relationships are the same as heterosexual relationships and that allowing gays and lesbians to marry would have no impact on society’s understanding of marriage. On cross, the witness had to admit that sexual fidelity and monogamy is the exception rather than the rule among male homosexuals. Less than 10% of those relationships feature sexual exclusivity.

Yet we are supposed to believe that there will be no impact on society’s understanding of marriage if we redefine marriage to include relationships that are utterly bereft of a prime social normative of marriage – sexual exclusiveness. In the words of Andy Pugno, ProtectMarriage.com’s general counsel, the audacity of the arguments is “astonishing.”
Pugno’s excellent blog has covered a lot of the daily work of our outstanding defense attorneys. You can read his summary of Week 2 of the trial here.

Later today our attorneys will begin to present our case defending Proposition 8. Long before the actual trial began, the “playing field” was decidedly tilted against us. Chief Judge Vaughan Walker’s pre-trial rulings and those made during the trial have consistently gone against us. One of those rulings – to televise the trial – cost us a number of our expert witnesses, because although the US Supreme Court overturned Walker’s illegal order, it didn’t come soon enough to stop witnesses from withdrawing who feared their testimony would subject them to harassment.

The loss of expert witnesses is one of the reasons our attorneys spent so much time cross- examining the plaintiff witnesses. Without access to experts who can counteract the plaintiff witnesses, the legal team worked diligently to bring out contradictions in the testimonies of opposing witnesses.

The Prop 8 legal defense team is doing a magnificent job under extremely adverse circumstances created by this court’s rulings. As they head into what may be the final week of trial, they have been working nonstop for many weeks – literally sleeping less than two hours a night – to defend the people’s vote for Prop 8 and to uphold the proven definition of marriage. Please pray for their strength and wisdom during the balance of this trial.

Please also pray that the people of California and the nation will respond with their financial gifts to sustain our defense of the institution of marriage. This is costing us many millions of dollars – money that we don’t have. We are acting in faith that you and other believers will give generously. Please make a contribution today to help sustain this epic legal battle. Even though this judge has made things very difficult for our side and many believe he will ultimately rule against us, we remain supremely confident that we will win this case in the courts of appeal. We’ve already received the attention of the US Supreme Court, and we are looking forward to bringing the merits of the issue before them in due course.

This case could ultimately be the Roe v Wade for marriage, and we fervently believe the rule of law will win. Please help us continue the fight.

Sincerely,

Ron Prentice, Executive Director

The Effects of Pornography on Individuals, Marriage, Family, and Community

by Patrick F. Fagan, Ph.D. and Ruth Institute Academic Advisory Board Member

This article originally appeared at FamilyResearchCouncil.org. Readers may also be interested in Fagan's article, "Domestic Disturbances: The Rising Polyamorous Culture Is Out to Get Your Children" from TouchstoneMag.com. Discerning Ruth Institute readers will recognize this as an earlier version of a speech given by Fagan, and featured in our newsletter! Tell your friends to subscribe to get the latest news soonest!

Pornography is a visual representation of sexuality which distorts an individual’s concept of the nature of conjugal relations. This, in turn, alters both sexual attitudes and behavior. It is a major threat to marriage, to family, to children and to individual happiness. In undermining marriage it is one of the factors in undermining social stability.

Social scientists, clinical psychologists, and biologists have begun to clarify some of the social and psychological effects, and neurologists are beginning to delineate the biological mechanisms through which pornography produces its powerful negative effects.

KEY FINDINGS ON THE EFFECTS OF PORNOGRAPHY

The Family and Pornography

• Married men who are involved in pornography feel less
satisfied with their conjugal relations and less emotionally attached to their wives. Wives notice and are upset by the difference.
• Pornography use is a pathway to infidelity and divorce, and is frequently a major factor in these family disasters.
• Among couples affected by one spouse’s addiction, two- thirds experience a loss of interest in sexual intercourse.
• Both spouses perceive pornography viewing as tantamount to infidelity.
• Pornography viewing leads to a loss of interest in good family relations.

The Individual and Pornography
• Pornography is addictive, and neuroscientists are beginning to map the biological substrate of this addiction.
• Users tend to become desensitized to the type of pornorgraphy they use, become bored with it, and then seek more perverse forms of pornography.
• Men who view pornography regularly have a higher tolerance for abnormal sexuality, including rape, sexual aggression, and sexual promiscuity.
• Prolonged consumption of pornography by men produces stronger notions of women as commodities or as “sex objects.”
• Pornography engenders greater sexual permissiveness, which in turn leads to a greater risk of out-of-wedlock births and STDs. These, in turn, lead to still more weaknesses and debilities.
• Child-sex offenders are more likely to view pornography regularly or to be involved in its distribution.

Other Effects of Pornography
• Many adolescents who view pornography initially feel shame, diminished self-confidence, and sexual uncertainty, but these feelings quickly shift to unadulterated enjoyment with regular viewing.
• The presence of sexually oriented businesses significantly harms the surrounding community, leading to increases in crime and decreases in property values.
• The main defenses against pornography are close family life, a good marriage and good relations between parents and children, coupled with deliberate parental monitoring of Internet use. Traditionally, government has kept a tight lid on sexual traffic and businesses, but in matters of pornography that has waned almost completely, except where child pornography is concerned. Given the massive, deleterious individual, marital, family, and social effects of pornography, it is time for citizens, communities, and government to reconsider their laissez-faire approach.