180 Days

Thursday 13 April 2017.
 

180 Days

The information presented in this document is relevant and important in the discussion of same-sex marriage. To legally sanction same-sex relationships would continue to normalize and legitimatize relationships, which may include same-sex physical sex acts, that are detrimental to the individuals involved and to our society at large. What has been written here is to share information that should be a part of an open and honest discussion of homosexuality in light of the majority opinion written in the legal case, Goodridge versus Department of Public Health. Including this information, it could be logically argued that the marriage ban does meet the rational basis test for either due process or equal protection. It is being presented to reveal a larger picture of homosexual relationships and homosexuality. The scope of this document will cover, but is not limited to the two reasons in the following quote by Chief Justice Marshall written in the majority opinion in Goodridge versus Department of Public Health. It advances the two legitimate State interests the department has identified: providing a stable setting for child rearing and conserving State resources.

Context for this quote may be found in the following two paragraphs that have been taken from the majority opinion written by Chief Justice Marshall in Goodridge versus Department of Public. The source is from the following web page, www.state.ma.us/courts/courtsandjudges/courts/supremejudicialcourt/goodridge.html.

We construe civil marriage to mean the voluntary union of two persons as spouses, to the exclusion of all others. This reformulation redresses the plaintiffs’ constitutional injury and furthers the aim of marriage to promote stable, exclusive relationships. It advances the two legitimate State interests the department has identified: providing a stable setting for child rearing and conserving State resources. It leaves intact the Legislature’s broad discretion to regulate marriage. See Commonwealth v. Stowell, 389 Mass. 171, 175 (1983).

In their complaint the plaintiffs request only a declaration that their exclusion and the exclusion of other qualified same-sex couples from access to civil marriage violates Massachusetts law. We declare that barring an individual from the protections, benefits, and obligations of civil marriage solely because that person would marry a person of the same sex violates the Massachusetts Constitution. We vacate the summary judgment for the department. We remand this case to the Superior Court for entry of judgment consistent with this opinion. Entry of judgment shall be stayed for 180 days to permit the Legislature to take such action as it may deem appropriate in light of this opinion. See, e.g., Michaud v. Sheriff of Essex County, 390 Mass. 523, 535-536 (1983).

So ordered.

In addition to the information in this document, supporting attachments are being offered to bring further discussion and clarity to the points being raised. The first supporting attachment being offered is titled, due process and equal protection. It was written to provide information for helping lobby members of the Massachusetts state legislature.

Presented first in this document will be information in the form of questions and answers. These questions will have brief answers following them. Discussion will follow later that provides more detailed information.

Who is advocating for change?

Homosexuals/gays/lesbians.

Is the discussion one of legally sanctioning relationships or behavior?

The case for the latter is much stronger.

Who is a homosexual/gay/lesbian?

An individual who self-identifies by behavior or the things one does. A gay male and lesbian female identity has political connation.

How does one become a homosexual?

There are multiple pathways that may lead one into pursuing homosexual behavior. Homosexuals in their numerous articles and books acknowledge one is not born a homosexual. For this reason, it may be reasonably argued that it is not a rights issue. This is also why no court (state or federal) has granted homosexuals suspect class status. Likewise, for this reason it will be unlikely for courts to rule on the basis of equal protection and due process. Homosexuality is not an innate trait. A supporting attachment is being offered titled Suspect Class that provides additional information on suspect class.

What is homosexuality?

Homosexuality is a relationship issue. It is an illegitimate attempt to meet the legitimate need for same-sex intimacy. Physical sexual acts are often added to or substituted for those relational acts needed as a part of same-sex intimacy in relationships.

What about former homosexuals/ex-gays?

Six supporting attachment are being offered. These include articles written by me that discuss my struggle with homosexuality and what it means to me. There are also three Harvard Crimson newspaper articles that were written about the discrimination I faced for being a former homosexual at Harvard University. The articles I wrote are titled [Homosexuality: I can should I?>http://banap.net/article.php3?id_article=1] Larry’s Story, and Discrimination for being ex-gay. The three Harvard Crimson articles are titled Can This Man Make You Straight? College Investigates Annenberg Cook and University Officials Break Silence on Ex-Gay Employee

The following information is presented in respect to the issue addressed by Chief Justice Marshall in the majority opinion in Goodridge versus Department of public Health. A quote is given as a heading for the information presented.

"bear[ ] a real and substantial relation to the public health, safety, morals, or some other phase of the general welfare."

1. Number of homosexuals

The greatest hindering factor in determining the number of homosexuals is defining homosexuality itself. What does it mean to be a homosexual? There are many more people who commit homosexual behavior, homosexuality, than whom self-identify as a homosexual. The federal government’s Center for Disease Control and other government reporting public health agencies have a category for males, MSM, men who have sex with men. For statistical record keeping they no longer use the term male homosexual.
Likewise, those who self-identify as a homosexual continue to use various names to identify themselves. Gay, lesbian, queer are the most common terms and now sexual minority is being used by some in research literature. In the past terms used were fairy and faggot.
In the literature discussing homosexuality there has been three different terms used in the discussion of orientation. One term which is the most specific and perhaps applicable if homosexuality is viewed, as a behavior is erotic orientation. Homosexuals first used the term sexual preference to talk about themselves. But implied in this is idea of choice. So there was a change to using the term sexual orientation. All three of these terms are used in the context of what it means to be a homosexual, one who is sexually attracted to members of the same sex. Yet added to this discussion are those who may be homosexually orientated but never actually commit physical sexual acts for various reasons. A Washington Post article as a supporting attachment is being offered for the discussion of what means to be a homosexual. The article published on Sunday, January 4, 2004 authored by Laura Sessions Stepp is titled Partway Gay?

To help answer the question for the number of homosexuals, a number that continues to be cited is 10%. That is 10 percent of the population is homosexual. A supporting attachment is being offered titled, 10% Myth which discusses further details of a possible origin for this number being used.

So, as it has always been and will continue to be, until what it means to be a homosexual is defined, determining the number of homosexuals is not possible. This difficulty in knowing the number of homosexuals carries over into how many homosexuals will marry with the legalization of same-sex marriage. Also, effecting the number of homosexual couples marrying include those who will not marry for a multitude of reasons, including those who refuse to marry and those who are unable to meet the qualifications to marry. A New York Times article as a supporting attachment for the discussion of those homosexuals who may refuse to marry is being offered. The article published on November 26, 2003 authored by Pam Belluck is titled Gays Respond: I Do,’ I Might’ and I Won’t’. To become more aware of the division among homosexuals when it comes to homosexual marriage two additional supporting attachments are being offered. The first is in a column by Bruce Carroll from an online gay newspaper, www.sovo.com and is titled, A fine mess we’re in now. From an online journal the Independent Gay Forum, Dale Carpenter wrote an article titled Bad Arguments for Gay Marriage A discussion of the nature of homosexuality will provide insight to why some homosexuals may not meet the qualifications to marry.

2. Nature of Homosexuality

What does it mean to be a homosexual? A supporting attachment is being offered titled, Homosexual or Homosexuality that discusses a biological basis for homosexuality. Throughout history what it means to be homosexual has changed. Homosexual historians in numerous books and articles have attempted to document this historical change. A supporting attachment is being offered titled, Historical Perspective that discusses further details from the writings by those advocating for homosexuality. Also of strong interest in this discussion of homosexuality is the idea of a homosexual agenda that is sometimes talked about. This idea of a homosexual agenda is discussed in a supporting attachment being offered titled: Homosexual Agenda?
Though it is difficult to understand what it means to be a homosexual, there is little difficulty in understanding the consequences of homosexuality. Those best able to speak of these consequences many of which are detrimental and negative are those involved with homosexuality themselves. Supporting attachments are being offer that are newspaper articles and news briefs from homosexual media outlets. The Advocate proclaims itself as an award winning, leading national gay and lesbian news magazine. Its online version is www.advocate.com. Four commentaries/articles from The Advocate.com are being offered as supporting attachments with the titles being listed here.

1) [Is the badge of the sexual outlaw killing us?>http://www.advocate.com/html/stories/900/900_actup.asp] by Jordan Roth
2) [Never again>http://www.advocate.com/html/stories/840/840_aids_cohan.asp] by Gary R. Cohan, MD (AIDS commentary)
3) [A midlife HIV crisis>http://www.advocate.com/html/stories/852/852_midlifehiv.asp] by Matthew Schuerman (AIDS/HIV commentary)
4) [Outbreak>http://www.advocate.com/html/stories/812/812_outbreak.asp] by Lee Condon (Syphilis commentary)

Two newspaper articles relevant to the discussion at hand are being offered as supporting attachments. They are listed here and offered as supporting attachments.

1) Response to HIV divides gay community by Stuart Eskenazi in the Seattle Times on Tuesday, January 06, 2004.
2) The Beast in the Bathhouse” by Andrew Jacobs in the New York Times on January 12, 2004.

Numerous additional supporting attachments in the form of news briefs from The Advocate.com are being offered. The dates of these briefs date from October 30, 2001 to April 28, 2004. The subjects of these briefs are drug use among homosexuals, unsafe sex practices, drug-resistant staph infections, rising rates of syphilis and HIV/AIDS. The links for these numerous articles are listed at the end of this document.
Why are these numerous news articles being submitted as supporting attachments? They are relevant to the issue noted by Chief Justice Marshall in the majority opinion written in Goodridge versus Department of Public Health. Emphasis has been added.

Due Process claims: rational basis analysis requires that statutes "bear[ ] a real and substantial relation to the public health, safety, morals, or some other phase of the general welfare."

The following information is presented in respect to the issue addressed by Chief Justice Marshall in the majority opinion in Goodridge versus Department of public Health. A quote is given as a heading for the information presented.

Protecting the welfare of children is a paramount State policy

The information presented here is relevant and important in the discussion of same-sex marriage. To legally sanction same-sex relationships would continue to normalize and legitimatize relationships, which may include same-sex physical sex acts, that are detrimental to the individuals involved and to our society at large. What has been written here is to share information that should be a part of an open and honest discussion of homosexuality in light of the majority opinion written in Goodridge versus Department of Public Health. Including this information, it could be logically argued that the marriage ban does meet the rational basis test for either due process or equal protection for protecting the welfare of children and providing a stable setting for child rearing and conserving State resources.
First quotes have been taken from the following website that contains the opinions from Goodridge versus Department of Public Health. These quotes have been taken from the majority opinion written by Chief Justice Marshall. Emphasis has been added.
The source for these quotes is the following web site, www.state.ma.us/courts/courtsandjudges/courts/supremejudicialcourt/goodridge.html

Protecting the welfare of children is a paramount State policy. Restricting marriage to opposite-sex couples, however, cannot plausibly further this policy.

" This reformulation redresses the plaintiffs’ constitutional injury and furthers the aim of marriage to promote stable, exclusive relationships. It advances the two legitimate State interests the department has identified: providing a stable setting for child rearing and conserving State resources.

Those advocating for homosexuality have written the two books listed below that address homosexual parenting and the lives of children with homosexual parents. The titles are accurate descriptions of the books themselves. One of the many things that can be taken from these children’s stories of their lives is the length of the relationships their parents enter into and the number of these relationships. Often these relationships are short in duration of time and with numerous partners. These children lives ‘are also representative of homosexual families and how children become a part of a homosexual family. That is by previous heterosexual marriages that have been dissolved and by women who intentionally seek motherhood. This may be by having sexual relations with a male often a male who has adopted a homosexual identity; artificial insemination or self-insemination using donated semen. Also, many homosexuals are foster or adoptive parents.

Rafkin, Louise editor. Different mothers: sons and daughters of lesbians talk about their lives. Cleis Press. Pittsburgh, 1990.

Saffron, Lisa. What About the Children? Sons and Daughters of Lesbian and Gay Parents Talk about Their Lives. Cassell. London and New York, 1996.

One very important idea that differs in heterosexual marriage and homosexual relationships is that of fidelity and monogamy. The former accepts as normative the idea of fidelity and monogamy whereas for the latter normative is what is often termed serial monogamy and open relationships in sexual matters.
Even those advocating for legally sanctioning same-sex relationships acknowledge some problems inherent in such relationships. In many homosexual relationships, that are typically short in duration and have a host of other problems, they have sought a solution by redefining monogamy. It is now serial monogamy faithfulness with the current partner. Similarly, with an attempt to be faithful to the next partner, and however many partners that follow, whatever the length of the relationships may be. While some relationships are open that is built into the relationships are provisions for outside sexual activity with other individuals.
The book, The Male Couple by David P. McWhirter and Andrew M. Mattison was written to validate homosexual male couples. The authors write about a study of 156 male couples in homosexual relationships lasting on average less than 9 years.

Only seven couples have a totally exclusive sexual relationship, and these men all have been together for less than five years. Stated another way, all couples with a relationship lasting more than five years have incorporated some provision for outside sexual activity in their relationships. (McWhirter and Mattison, The Male Couple: How Relationships Develop, p.252)

Letita Anne Peplau and Hortensia Amaro cited four studies of lesbian relationships in a footnote on page 247 in Understanding Lesbian Relationships. The average length of the lesbians’ current relationships (note the word current, which was used by the authors of the article) varied across the studies. The relationships lasted on averaged 1-3 years, 22 months, 2.5 years, and 1-9 years. (Source: Paul, William Ed.D, James D. Weinrich Ph.D., John C. Consiorek Ph.D., and Mary E. Hotvedt Ph.D. Homosexuality Social, Psychological, and Biological Issues.

Most researchers conclude that the reasons for promiscuity and relationship failure are not primarily external (e.g. family or society persecution) but are found to be in the nature of homosexuality itself. One study found that of 2,500 American Psychiatrists surveyed, 70% held the above view (Donald L Faris, A Trojan Horse, p.20)

Two homosexuals themselves agree with these psychiatrists and expressed it this way.

In short, the gay lifestyle - if such a chaos can, after all, legitimately be called a lifestyle - it just doesn’t work: it doesn’t serve the two functions for which all social framework evolve: to constrain people’s natural impulses to behave badly and to meet their natural needs. While it’s impulse to provide an exhaustive analytic list of all the root causes and aggravants of this failure, we can asservative at least some of the major causes. Many have been dissected, above as elements of the Ten Misbehaviors; it only remains to discuss the failure of the gay community to provide a viable alternative to the heterosexual family. (Kirk and Madsen, After the Ball How America Will Conquer Its Fear and Hatred of the Gay’s in the 90s, p.363)

This book, After the Ball How America Will Conquer Its Fear and Hatred of the Gay’s in the 90s, written by two homosexuals was to outline an agenda to gain greater public acceptance of homosexuality. Their idea had its beginnings as noted in the following quote. In February 1988, however, a "war conference" of 175 leading gay activists, representing organizations from across the land, convened in Warrenton, Virginia, to establish a four-point agenda for the gay movement. (Kirk and Madsen, After the Ball How America Will Conquer Its Fear and Hatred of the Gay’s in the 90s, p.162) The strategy adopted at this war conference was to undertake in a carefully calculated public relations campaign to shift the public’s focus from homosexual behavior to the idea of gay rights. Up until that time, homosexuals attempted to gain public acceptance based on their behavior. Typical was the idea of Gay Pride and the celebration of being different based on sexual behavior. But this was successful only to the point of a limited tolerance of homosexuality by society. Often those who opposed homosexuality easily reversed the small gains made by homosexual activists in many instances. An example of this was in Florida with Anita Bryant’s Save Our Children campaign where voters repealed a Dade County’s human rights ordinance in 1977. So, at the time the idea of gay rights was radical shift from how many homosexuals were attempting to gain public acceptance. Legally sanctioning homosexual relationships as gay marriage in 2004 in MA is a logical continuation of this shift to a gay rights idea as a means gaining social acceptance of homosexuality.
What about children who become members of homosexual families if homosexual relationships are detrimental to the adults? A supporting attachment is being offered titled, [Homosexual Parenting Myth>http://banap.net/article.php3?id_article=8] that addresses this issue of the children in families with homosexual parents. A second supporting attachment titled, Child Custody and Gay Divorce addresses legal court proceedings arising from homosexual relationships and homosexual families. A position statement by the American College of Pediatricians on homosexual parenting is being offered as a supporting attachment. It is titled [Homosexual Parenting: Is It Time For Change?>http://www.acpeds.org/index.cgi?CONTEXT=art&cat=22&art=50&BISKIT=312739740] The majority opinion written by Chief Justice Marshall in Goodridge versus Department of Public Health raised two critical concerns surrounding the issue of protecting the welfare of children and providing a stable setting for children rearing and conserving State resources. The information presented here is to give a more normative view of homosexual relationships and the families of homosexual parents. This information has been gathered from sources that support and advocate for homosexuality.
The information presented in this document is relevant and important in the discussion of same-sex marriage. To legally sanction same-sex relationships would continue to normalize and legitimatize relationships, which may include same-sex physical sex acts, that are detrimental to the individuals involved and to our society at large. What has been written in this document is to share information that should be a part of an open and honest discussion of homosexuality in light of the majority opinion written in the legal case, Goodridge versus Department of Public Health. Including this information, it could be logically argued that the marriage ban does meet the rational basis test for either due process or equal protection. It is being presented to reveal a larger picture of homosexual relationships and homosexuality.
One last supporting attachment is being offered. It is a bibliography of over 300 books and articles I have read in my research and study of what it means to be a homosexual and the nature of homosexuality. Though this is an extensive list it is not an exhaustive list and it continues to grow as the unprecedented historical tolerance of homosexuality by modern western societies is being expanded to allow for the complete normalization and legitimatization of homosexuality along with heterosexuality.

The Advocate.com news briefs

Boston syphilis increase may be linked with meth use

Drug-resistant syphilis detected among gay men

Syphilis rates continue rising among gay men

N.H. health officials concerned about syphilis increase

Minnesota syphilis rate continues to climb

Rising national syphilis rate linked to gay men

Syphilis cases on the rise among New Jersey gays

Massachusetts launches syphilis prevention campaign for gay men

New York syphilis outbreak continues

L.A. health officials worry about White Party

Syphilis cases up among gay men in Florida

Syphilis cases in Tucson triple since 2000

Syphilis rates climb in Oregon

Syphilis cases in NYC up 55% in 2002

Syphilis outbreak among L.A. gay men in 2002 leads to calls for more testing

Syphilis rate increase linked to gay, bisexual men

U.S. syphilis rate hits all-time low, but increases posted among gay men

Minnesota Health Department issues second syphilis warning

New York City’s syphilis rate increases 90%

New York syphilis cases more than doubled in 2001

Syphilis on the rise among gay men in Chicago

Syphilis cases up among S.F. gay, bisexual men

Drug-resistant staph infection spreading among L.A. gay men

Drug-resistant staph strain reported among S.F. gays

Drug-resistant staph outbreak spreads to Boston, Washington

Drug-resistant staph infections reported in Atlanta

HIV-positive men report engaging in unsafe sex in public sex environments

CDC: AIDS cases rose in 2001

L.A. bathhouses partially blamed for rise in HIV

Health officials: Gay leaders failing to curb rises in unprotected sex

Bathhouses and drugs linked with rectal gonorrhea in San Francisco


Signatures: 0

forum

Date Name Message