Box Turtle Bulletin

Consequences of Same-Sex Marriage: Lowest Divorce Rate Since WWII

Massachusetts was the first state in the union to grant full marriage rights to same-sex couples. They’ve been at it now for five years, and what do we have to show for it?

According to the most recent data from the National Center For Vital Statistics, Massachusetts retains the national title as the lowest divorce rate state, and the MA divorce rate is about where the US divorce rate was in 1940, prior to the Japanese bombing of Pearl Harbor that triggered the US entrance into World War Two.

Provisional data from 2008 indicates that the Massachusetts divorce rate has dropped from 2.3 per thousand in 2007 down to about 2.0 per thousand for 2008. What does that mean ? To get a sense of perspective consider that the last time the US national divorce rate was 2.0 per thousand (people) was 1940. You read that correctly. The Massachusetts divorce rate is now at about where the US divorce rate was the year before the United States entered World War Two.

Matthew Shepard: a gay Everyman?

I have a piece in the American Prospect today that questions whether the gay rights movement should be elevating Matthew Shepard to the status of gay Everyman:

Over 1,400 members of the LGBT community are victims of a hate crime every year, which includes violent attacks as well as harassment. Why, then, is Shepard the “face” of gay rights? The implication is that all the other candidates weren’t quite right: not urban New Yorkers dying of AIDS in the 1980s, not inner-city black adolescents whose parents kicked them out of the house, not leather daddies marching on Washington. The pictures of other gays, lesbians, and transgender people did not prove sufficiently salable to make it onto rally placards.

I guess what I think is problematic is that Matthew Shepard — the person — has very little to do with Matthew Shepard, the icon. I know Shepard has become a religion to many gay rights supporters, but how we’ve deified him says a lot about the politics of the gay rights movement. And should we really be fighting for hate-crimes legislation? I think it would be better to fight for the federal nondiscrimination act; hate-crimes legislation can’t bring back the dead, but nondiscrimination laws do a lot to protect gay people who are living.

I’d be interested to hear what BTB readers think.

Maine’s Anti-Gay Marriage Campaign Leader is Completely Insane

Mark Mutty, Executive Chairman of the Stand for Marriage coalition, made a most interesting to a reporter from the Maine Public Broadcasting Network:

As a longtime public affairs director for the diocese, Mutty views himself and the coaliton as defending the traditional definition of marriage and the role it plays in society. To redefine it by allowing same-sex couples to marry, Mutty says will lead to curriculum changes in the schools.

“And many certainly feel uncomfortable about that, and the fact that children as young as seven or eight years old are going to be taught about gay sex in some detail.”

Wait… what?!?

If Maine gets marriage equality then seven year old kids will be taught about gay sex in detail?

OK.

That’s completely and entirely irrational. Second graders aren’t taught about straight sex and heterosexuals have been getting married in Maine all year long. No one is going to be telling small children the mechanics of sex between anyone in school.

So either Mutty is a completely delusional nutcase with no cognizance of the world around him and should be put somewhere for his own safety or he’s a bald-faced liar who is seeking to demonize gay people and scare voters with claims that he himself knows to be completely bogus.

Liar or lunatic. There really aren’t any other options.

Military Response to Hazing and Abuse: Promote the Perpetrator and Kick Out the Victim

One of the most egregious injustices of Don’t Ask – Don’t Tell is that it invites bullies and bigots to wreak havoc on the lives of gay servicemen without allowing any recourse.

We learned last week of how Air Force Lt. Col Victor Fehrenbach’s 18 year career was destroyed by the false accusation of a mentally damaged citizen. Now we learn that Petty Officer 3rd Class Joseph Rocha was put through hell only to be thrown out like the trash and his tormentor rewarded as a result of investigations. (Stars and Stripes)

According to documents released by Youth Radio this week, Navy investigators found dozens of hazing incidents over a two-year span at the Military Working Dog unit in Naval Support Activity-Bahrain. At one point, the documents show, Rocha was hog-tied, fed dog food and tossed into a dog kennel full of feces. Commanders also openly questioned his sexuality and forced him to simulate oral sex on other men.

Following the investigation, Rocha sought treatment for PTSD and later admitted he is gay, the news outlet reported. Shortly thereafter, he was discharged under the military\’s “don\’t ask, don\’t tell” policy, which prohibits homosexual troops from serving openly in the ranks.

However, the commander in charge of the unit at the time of the hazing did not lose his job, and was recently promoted to senior chief, documents show.

This is unconscionable. And if the Commander in Chief has any sense of outrage that a voting block which supported him in huge numbers and whom he courted is so mistreated, this will not be swept under the rug.

President Obama may not be able singlehandedly reverse DADT. But he certainly can see to it that rewards for bigots and bullies are revoked and that punishment is meted out. And failure to act only feeds fuel to the growing suspicion that his promises were hollow and his concern about our community is insincere.

I hope he proves such suspicions false.

None of the alleged abusers was punished, according to the report.

Referendum 71 Signatures Released… But Not Public

The suit to release the names of the signatories of Referendum 71 to gay groups seeking to know who signed (and to publish the names) has been delayed for another week. But the opponents of the referendum seeking to have invalid signatures disqualified were provided with the names.

Yes, it’s confusing.

The Stranger:

In a dance between federal and state courts, US District Court Judge Benjamin Settle has just announced that petitions for Referendum 71 will remain sealed until September 10, when he will make his final decision whether the names and addresses of people who signed should be made public. However, Judge Settle did release petitions to Washington Families Standing Together (WAFST), which, earlier this afternoon, filed a lawsuit in Thurston County Superior Court to challenge the validity of signatures that were accepted by elections officials.

I’m From Driftwood

That’s the name of an amazing web site I just ran across. I’m From Driftwood is a collection of true stories contributed by ordinary LGBT people from all over the U.S., Canada, and elsewhere around the world, like this one from a fellow Ohioan:

I’m From Georgetown, Ohio
I was not originally from Cincinnati; I was from a small conservative town of about 2,000 people with five stop lights and dial up. This town was called Georgetown, a town rich in Underground Railroad history and Ulysses S. Grant\’s childhood (you know, the guy on the 50 dollar bill). This history shaped a lot of my passions and my sense of morality.

Then the day I turned 12 everything changed. That damn bible verse, “Shit, I\’m in trouble this time; I think I\’m going to hell?!?” That day I grew up and childhood was over. I hid everything about me and became “a man”. I lost three years of my life to depression & suicide attempts. One day I got tired of being alone and trying to be someone I couldn\’t be for this god. I came out to my parents at 15. Mistake. They checked me in to the first ex-gay counseling clinic they could find. I sat in my bedroom and did the only thing I could do then… count the days down till I could leave.

You can read the rest there. Don’t worry, Blake turned out just fine and he’s now a student at the University of Cincinnati, my alma mater.

The blog’s title comes from the movie Milk, namely the scene in which Harvey Milk is seen riding on the hood of a car in a Pride parade holding a sign reading “I\’m From Woodmere, N.Y.,” a proud announcement that we come from everywhere and we live everywhere. The blog’s creator, Nathan Manske, comes from Driftwood, Texas, hence the name. He worked on the Chemistry.com advertising campaign as copywriter. That’s the campaign that mocked eHarmony\’s discriminatory policies towards gays and lesbians. Two others also contribute their talents on a regular basis: Rafi Mittlefehldt handles technical issues, and Marquise Lee runs the video blog, where LGBT people in the New York area can contribute their stories in video form.

The project is a great idea. Check it out and contribute your own story. The more, the merrier!

Smart, Educated People Support Marriage Equality; Uneducated People, Not So Much

That’s the conclusion reached by researchers at the University of Florida, who looked into whether race or education played a larger role in voter approval of bans on same-sex marriage:

Controlling for political and socioeconomic factors, the study found each additional 1 percent of a county’s population with bachelor’s degrees correlated with a 1 percent decrease in support for the amendment. In comparison, each 1 percent increase in a county’s black population led to two-tenths of a percent increase in support.

“There’s a lot of evidence showing increased education leads to greater tolerance,” Smith said.

Mormon Reorientation Efforts

On his site, conservative Christian psychology professor Dr. Warren Throckmorton has been following the debate between some same-sex attracted Mormon and some NARTH-affiliated Mormons. The discussion so far consists of

• In Quiet Desperation, a book by Ty Mansfield, a same-sex attracted but faithfully observant Mormon and Fred and Marilyn Matis, the parents of a son who committed suicide. They argue for faithful following of teaching but also for compassion and sympathy for those who are same-sex attracted and for a change in social condemnation and rejection.
• A Slippery Slope that Limits the Atonement, a review of the book by Dean Byrd, Shirley E. Cox, and Jeffrey W. Robinson. Byrd is the past president of the anti-gay therapist group, National Association for the Research and Therapy of Homosexuality. In this review, they condemn Mansfield and the Matises for conceding that some people will remain same-sex attracted and that such persons should not be subjected to social condemnation. They felt that the book’s admission of the continuing existence of same-sex attraction “inadvertently limits the power of the atonement in the lives of people who struggle with homosexual attraction” and that Mansfield had “simply conceded victory to his homosexuality.” For good measure they also throw in large doses of homophobic ranting.
• A rebuttal on Dr. Throckmorton’s site by Dr. Michael Bailey expressing that Byrd et al had taken his words out of context and given them a meaning nearly the opposite to what Bailey intended.
• A rebuttal by Ty Mansfield expressing that Byrd et al had ascribed to him motivations and beliefs that he did not hold.
• A response by four Mormon professors, William Bradshaw, Robert A. Rees, Ron Schow, Marybeth Raynes, which accuses Byrd et al of making baseless claims, misconstruing LDS theology, and ultimately of armchair analysis that was “not only inappropriate, [but] professionally irresponsible”.

Considering that every party in this discussion (except Bailey) is an observant member of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints and all hold to the church’s teachings about heterosexual monogamy, the entire exchange is a fascinating illustration of the extremism found in those who gravitate to NARTH. I recommend that those interested should at least follow Dr. Throckmorton’s highlights of the debate if not the extended discussion.

But I want to step away from the discussion and pull out one interesting side note. In the response by Bradshaw et al, we find the first hint of the measure of success that the Mormon Church has had in assisting same-sex attracted Mormons to become heterosexual.

First I have to bring to your attention a peculiarity about Mormon theology (As I am not an authority on LDS theology, I welcome correction): Unlike standard Christian beliefs, celibacy is not quite adequate for fully achieving the will of God. Although a Baptist, for example, might see celibacy as adhering to God’s morality code, a Mormon would believe that only through heterosexual marriage can one attain the highest levels of the Celestial Kingdom and achieve godhood. Recognizing marriage as the goal, Bradshaw makes the following observation:

Given the fact that Byrd was the lead person directing therapy for same sex attraction at Church Social Services during a period when many hundreds of Latter-day Saints were undergoing reparative or change therapy, one would think he would cite the findings of such therapy. It is in fact scandalous that such studies either were not undertaken or have been suppressed since the findings would help enlighten our present discussion of this subject. We are acquainted with one therapist at Church Social Services during Byrd’s tenure who did a large portion of this work in that he counseled with nearly a thousand homosexuals and whose experience contradicts the point of view taken in this review.2

Footnote 2 clarifies:

2. Our informant has told us that in over a 30 year career at LDS Family Services he worked with about 400 single men, 200 of whom left therapy after 1-2 sessions. Of the remaining 200, only 20 (10%) were able to marry. Furthermore, 19 of the 20 who married identified themselves as bisexual when they entered therapy. The quality of these marriages is unknown. Another Latter-day Saint therapist with whom we are familiar reports that of the hundreds of clients with sexual identity issues she has seen only those clearly identified as bisexual are given any chance of making successful marriages.

I wish to caution that this is third hand information. Yet it comes from sources that would likely find joy in announcing that reorientation efforts in the church were largely successful, if that were true.

What I find particularly troubling is that Dean Byrd would be unavoidably aware of the measure of success or failure that Church Social Services had in achieving the reorientation (or marriage) goals of his own program. If the results were as Bradshaw and company relay, then it is difficult to understand how Byrd could say that “there is much hope and substantial evidence that those who want to overcome same-sex attraction can make changes and achieve happiness and peace in their lives” and that “many men (and women) … have successfully dealt with same-sex attraction, have married, have families, are not depressed, and are living hopeful and happy lives.”

Considering the stark disparity between Byrd’s words and his results, I have to conclude that either the report is wildly incorrect, Byrd is seriously self-deluding, or that he has willingly adopted a policy of deception and fabrication in order to advance a politico-religious social agenda.

NOM Spent 86K To Defeat A Pro-NOM Candidate And Failed

This just doesn’t make sense. As Timothy reported, the National Organization for Marriage threw $86,000 to Iowa State House candidate Stephen Burgmeier to give the pro-NOM candidate more than a 3:1 advantage over his opponent, Curt Hanson. Despite that huge financial advantage, Burgmeier lost. NOM spent that money because Burgmeier supports allowing a constitutional vote on whether Iowa should ban same-sex marriage.

But so does Hanson.

So that means that NOM spent a bucketfull of money to support a pro-NOM candidate in order to defeat another pro-NOM candidate. And lost. The mind reels…

NOM Loses Big in Iowa

Maggie Gallagher gambled big in Iowa. Her National Organization for Marriage spent over $86,000 to buy television ads for the Republican candidate, Stephen Burgmeier, who supports putting marriage equality up to a vote.

While $86,000 might not be a large sum in, say, the New York gubernatorial campaign, it towers in comparison to the $63 K Burgmeier raised on his own or the $43 K pulled in by his opponent. But this flood of cash did not accomplish what they had hoped. (Iowa Independent)

Democrat Curt Hanson has defeated Republican Stephen Burgmeier by 107 votes in Iowa House District 90, according to unofficial results released by the Iowa Secretary of State\’s office Tuesday night.

Hanson will replace former state Rep. John Whitaker (D-Hillsboro), who was appointed to a position with the USDA. The balance of power in Iowa\’s lower legislative chamber remains unchanged, with Democrats holding on to a somewhat volatile 56-44 majority.

But the bigger loss for Maggie and NOM may be procedural and in reputation. As in Maine, questions have arisen about whether NOM is flouting campaign law and illegally money-laundering contributions. (Los Angeles Times)

Last month, W. Charles Smithson, the director of the Ethics and Campaign Disclosure Board, wrote to NOM to “make sure everyone was on the same page” and that the group was familiar with Iowa election law. One point Smithson made was that NOM would need to register as a political action committee if donors are giving $750 or more for “express advocacy activities” – as well as disclose the identities of donors.

When NOM did not register as a PAC or disclose the source of the television ad funds, One Iowa and the Interfaith Alliance of Iowa Action Fund filed a complaint with the Iowa Ethics and Campaign Disclosure Board.

As these complaints continue to stack up, state by state, eventually Gallagher will find herself explaining to a judge a good deal more about the structure and funding of the National Organization for Marriage than she wishes. And if Fred Karger’s accusation about NOM being a front-group for the Mormon Church has any basis whatsoever, such a disclosure could be devastating to her efforts.

I hardly see how gambling on a long-shot candidate in Iowa in flagrant violation of campaign laws could have been considered a wise bet.

India’s Reversal of Sodomy Laws to go Nationwide

In July, the Delhi High Court declared that India\’s law which criminalizes sex between consenting adults of the same gender is a violation of fundamental human rights. Since that time, various factions have argued against the decision and there was some uncertainty as to whether this was binding only in the Capital.

It now appears that the government will allow the decision to apply to the entire nation. (AFP)

The July verdict by the Delhi High Court was non-binding outside the Indian capital, meaning the government had the choice to appeal to the Supreme Court or repeal the law nationwide.

A note from the cabinet, reproduced by the CNN-IBN television network, recommended that the government should accept the court ruling while letting the Supreme Court rule on appeals by some religious groups.

Prime Minister Manmohan Singh is expected to make a final decision this week, but CNN-IBN said he was in favour of following the advice in the cabinet note.

Washington Judge OK’s Referendum 71 Certification

In Washington, Judge Julie Spector has decided not to block Referendum 71 from being being certified. But her decision may be procedural rather than based on content. (Seattle PI)

Spector said challenges to a referendum must be filed in Thurston County Superior Court after certification – and supporters of the “everything but marriage” law still had that option for trying to get R-71 off the ballot. The group that brought the original lawsuit – Washington Families Standing Together – said it would go to court in Thurston County to try to block R-71.

As to whether the signatures were invalid, the judge found that question ambiguous.

In her ruling Spector said Reed has the power under state law to reject petitions with falsely signed declarations, petitions with blank declarations and signatures from people who weren’t yet registered to vote.

“It is conceded that the number of signatures represented by these inadequate petitions is significant. Without them, the secretary of state could not certify Referendum 71 for the ballot,” Spector wrote.

However she also said that state law does not require the secretary of state to not accept petitions that don’t meet statutory requirements. “In summary, under Washington case law it is unclear whether there are any limits to the secretary of state’s discretion as long as he has chosen to accept petitions rather than reject them.”

In other words, it was up to the Secretary of State whether he wanted to allow Referendum 71 to go to ballot. We will see if Superior Court agrees.

But judge also noted that there was language in the petition that may invalidate the entire process.

The judge also said there were highlights on top of the petitions that contain “apparent falsehoods,” such as the statement that if same-sex marriage becomes law public schools would be forced to teach that homosexuality is “normal…even over the objections of parents.”

Spector said the required signature-gatherers declaration swears that people who signed the petition did so “knowingly.”

“It is unclear whether a signature-gatherer can swear than an individual signer has signed the petition ‘knowingly’ when the signature-gatherer has allegedly misrepresented the contents of the petition,” Spector wrote.

Maine’s Marriage Equality to go to Vote

It’s official.

The Secretary of State’s Office has confirmed that groups opposed to same-sex marriage have gathered enough petition signatures to place a repeal effort on the November ballot. David Farmer, spokesman for Gov. John Baldacci, said that the governor signed a proclamation on Wednesday setting up the Nov. 3 vote.

Protect Maine Equality issued the following statement:

“There’s no surprise here. Everyone knew marriage equality would be challenged by a referendum and that’s why our allies began having conversations with Mainers three years ago. We now have nearly 80,000 Mainers who have pledged their support for equality.

“This was a quarter-of-a-million dollar signature effort by a Michigan firm, and it highlights the stark differences in our campaigns. Their’s is a cynical, pay-for-every signature approach that doesn’t reflect the homegrown values of our state.

“By contrast, we have put our trust in the common sense and fair mindedness of our friends, neighbors and co-workers. And that’s why we believe voters will reject Question 1 because here in Maine, we believe everyone should be allowed to live their lives and be treated equally under the law.”

Researcher Blasts NARTH Official for “Blatant Misquotation”

A researcher has blasted a prominent NARTH official for misrepresenting his work, calling it a “blatant misquotation.” That denunciation has led one conservative Christian psychologist and supporter of Sexual Identity Therapy to call for an apology and retraction by the NARTH official.

Grove City College professor Warren Throckmorton discovered a lengthy undated book review by NARTH Past President A. Dean Byrd, Brigham Young University Social Work professor, Shirley Cox, and private practitioner, Jeff Robinson for a Mormon apologetics web site. In the book review Byrd and company blasted the book’s authors for offering a realistic portrayal of the unlikelihood of changing one’s sexual orientation. Never mind that the 2004 book was not in any way gay-affirming — the book was published by LDS publisher Deseret Books and the authors come down squarely on LGBT people conforming to Mormon teachings which condemn same-sex relationships — Byrd was upset that the books authors chose not to distort science in the process similar to what Byrd and his co-authors used in their book review.

The book review itself is a classic anti-gay polemic which not only provides an untenable view of the certainty of “change,” but also goes through great lengths to try to demonstrate that homosexuality is a mental illness — a core NARTH position that is in direct odds with professional psychiatry, psychology and psychotherapy. In the book review, Byrd and his co-authors assert that gays and lesbians have a much higher incidence of mental illness, and that this incidence is not explainable by stigma:

Activist researcher J. Michael Bailey offered other hypotheses: “homosexuality represents a deviation from normal development and is associated with other such deviations that may lead to mental illness,” or “the consequences of lifestyle differences associated with sexual orientation” leads to mental illness or “behavioral risk factors associated with male homosexuality such as receptive anal sex and promiscuity” leads to mental illness.

In Byrd’s highly selective quotes, the reader would be led to believe that these “other hypothesis” better explain the incidence of mental distress in LGBT people than stigma. It’s normal for researchers to examine all hypotheses and evaluate their relative viabilities. It doesn’t mean the researcher endorses them, believes they have merit, or that they outweight the primary hypothesis. And that’s the case here. Warren Throckmorton contacted Dr. Bailey and received this reaction:

I was dismayed to read Byrd, Cox and Robinson\’s summary of my views. In the context of a debate about the reasons for higher rates of mental illness among homosexual individuals, Byrd et al cites me as “offering” several hypotheses other than the increased stigmatization of homosexual people. It is unfortunate and misleading that they did not indicate that I discussed some versions of the hypotheses they mention alongside the stigma hypothesis. I was noncommittal about the merits of the hypotheses, because the required scientific research had not been conducted (and still hasn\’t for the most part). I concluded: “it would be a shame—most of all for gay men and lesbians whose mental health is at stake—if sociopolitical concerns prevented researchers from conscientious consideration of any reasonable hypothesis.” But I also wrote: “It would indeed be surprising if antihomosexual attitudes were not part of the explanation of increased suicidality among homosexual people, but this remains to be demonstrated.”

One of Byrd et al\’s out-of-context quotations is so egregiously wrong that it amounts to a blatant misquotation. They suggest that I believe that “behavioral risk factors associated with male homosexuality such as receptive anal sex and promiscuity leads to mental illness.” I do not. I brought up receptive anal sex and (relative) promiscuity as factors that help explain increased rates of HIV infection among gay men. I said explicitly that it was unclear how these could help explain the increased rates of suicidality and depression among homosexual people. I favor open debate on controversial issues, including those related to sexual orientation. But constructive debate depends on responsible, accurate reporting of facts (and facts include what other people actually said and meant). In these remarks Dean Byrd, Shirley Cox and Jeff Robinson fail to live up to these requirements. For those interested in what I really said, please see the actual article that Byrd et al mischaracterize.

Dr. Throckmorton, who supports Sexual Identity Therapy (which may or may not include goals for changing sexual orientation identity and/or behavior) calls for an apology and a retraction:

In my opinion, Byrd, Cox and Robinson owe Bailey an apology and a retraction. Here I have only dealt with the misrepresentation of Bailey\’s views. According to this rebuttal by Ty Mansfield, the entire review is a lengthy misrepresentation of his book. And I am not the only one who believes Byrd et al have done an injustice to this book and to the science of sexual orientation.

Bishop Jackson is Back to Fighting Marriage in D.C.

In July Bishop Harry Jackson of Maryland lost his battle to stop the District of Columbia from recognizing same-sex marriages conducted in states where they are legal. The D.C. Board of Elections & Ethics ruled that such a referndom was in violation of the city\’s election code because it was not consistent with the District’s Human Rights Act.

Now he’s back with a request for a ballot initiative. (Washington Post)

The one-sentence initiative reads, “only marriage between a man and a woman is valid and recognized in the District of Columbia.”

The legislature of the District has already indicated that it will propose and pass legislation legalizing same-sex marriage in the nation’s capital. Jackson hopes this will stall the process.