Box Turtle Bulletin

Transgender Non-Discrimination Bill Passes New York Assembly

Many people have argued that the state of Transgender advocacy is at about where LGB (without the T) advocacy was ten or twenty years ago. Which makes this development especially important. On June 3, the state assembly voted overwhelmingly (102-33!) to to amend the state’s human rights law to include anti-discrimination protections for gender identity and expression.

The bill’s prospects in the Senate are uncertain, where Republicans hold a slim majority. Gov. Paterson has indicated that he will sign the bill if it reaches his desk.

CA Anti-Marriage Amendment Certified for Ballot

What we reported yesterday is now official. California’s Secretary of State Debra Bowen has annouunced that the proposed anti-marriage constitutional amendment has enough valid signatures to appear on the November ballot.

Greece’s First Same-Sex Marriage

We reported last week that mayor Tassos Alfieris of the Greek island of Tilos announced that he would officiate the first same-sex wedding ceremony in Greece. Today, the BBC reports that two men and two women were married in civil ceremonies, despite threats from Greece’s top prosecutor to criminally charge the mayor if he went forward with the weddings.

APA Statements on DSM Workgroups

Last week, we posted a statement from four transgender advocacy organizations on the American Psychiatric Association’s ongoing efforts to update the Diagnostics and Statistical Manual for its fifth edition (DSM-V). This week, we have two statements from the APA. The first one is about the DSM revision process, and the second one is about Kenneth Zucker’s participation on the DSM workgroup.

APA STATEMENT ON GID AND THE DSM-V
May 23, 2008

The American Psychiatric Association has received inquiries about the DSM-V process, particularly concerns about the Sexual and Gender Identity Disorders Work Group. The APA recognizes that this work group and others will address difficult and sometimes controversial issues. The APA’s goal is to develop a diagnostic manual that is based on sound scientific data, but also sensitive to the needs of clinicians and their patients. To this end, the APA has created a process that involves opportunities for review and input from persons with varied backgrounds and opinions.

Thirteen DSM-V work groups have been established to review all existing diagnostic categories in the current DSM. Individual work groups may propose revisions to existing disorder criteria, inclusion of new disorders, removal of existing disorders, or no changes to a disorder or its criteria. They may also propose revisions to the text that accompanies the criteria for each disorder. The Sexual and Gender Identity Disorders Work Group, chaired by Kenneth J. Zucker, Ph.D., has three subworkgroups:

• Gender Identity Disorders, chaired by Peggy T. Cohen-Kettenis, Ph.D.
• Paraphilias, chaired by Ray Blanchard, Ph.D.
• Sexual Dysfunctions, chaired by R. Taylor Segraves, M.D., Ph.D.

Each subworkgroup meets regularly, in person or on conference calls. They begin by reviewing DSM-IV’s strengths and problems, from which research questions and hypotheses are developed and then investigated through literature reviews and analyses of existing data. They also may further test research questions in field trials involving direct data collection. Because the work groups are limited in size, they may request outside advisors to assist them in these tasks, and to provide reviews and comments from other perspectives. Finally, in order to invite comments from even wider communities of researchers, clinicians, and consumers, the APA launched a web site in 2004, on which these groups can submit questions, comments and research findings, which are then distributed to the relevant work groups.

Based on this comprehensive review of scientific advancements, targeted research analyses and clinical expertise, the subworkgroups will develop draft DSM-V diagnostic criteria. After a period of comment, the subworkgroups will review submitted questions, comments and concerns. The final draft of DSM-V will be submitted to APA’s Council on Research, Assembly, and Board of Trustees for their review and approval. The final, approved DSM-V is expected to be released in May, 2012.

In summary, the DSM-V development process was constructed to achieve a thorough, balanced review of scientific data, with multiple levels of approval required, and opportunities for input from stakeholders. It is important to recognize that the DSM is a diagnostic manual and does not provide treatment recommendations or guidelines. The APA is aware of a need for more scientific and clinical knowledge about the best medical and psychiatric care for individuals with Gender Identity Disorder. To address this need, the APA Board of Trustees voted to create a Task Force to review the scientific and clinical literature on GID treatment. The members of this Task Force will be appointed shortly.

Statement on Dr. Kenneth Zucker and Gender Identity Disorder (5/23/2008)

Kenneth J. Zucker, Ph.D., C.Psych., the Chair of the DSM-V Sexual and Gender Identity Disorders work group, is a widely respected and pre-eminent scholar in the world of academic sexology research. As Chair of the work group for Sexual and Gender Identity Disorders, Dr. Zucker’s role is to coordinate and facilitate the work of the three sub-work groups addressing Sexual Dysfunctions, Paraphilias, and Gender Identity Disorders. Further information on the DSM-V development process can be found at [this web site].

Dr. Zucker has published 97 peer-reviewed journal articles, 48 book chapters, and a landmark textbook. His published work addresses psychosexual differentiation and its disorders, based on a wide range of empirical research studies on children and adolescents with gender identity disorder, with a focus on diagnosis and assessment, and their associated behavioral and psychological distress. As the current Editor of Archives of Sexual Behavior, the premier human sexuality research journal, he also has a wide familiarity with the disparate areas of sexual dysfunctions and paraphilias. Since 2001, he has been the Psychologist-in-Chief at the Centre for Addiction and Mental Health (CAMH), is a Professor in the Departments of Psychiatry and Psychology at the University of Toronto, and is on the Scientific Staff (Division of Child Psychiatry) at the Hospital for Sick Children. He was the President of the International Academy of Sex Research in 2005-2006.

Dr. Zucker and his service team at CAMH in Toronto have the longest standing research-clinical service for children and youth with gender identity problems in North America. Since the mid-1970s, Dr. Zucker and his team have evaluated over 900 children and youth with gender identity issues. Dr. Zucker is one of the few researchers who is doing long-term follow-up of the patients he has treated.

The philosophy of Dr. Zucker’s team is to provide client-centered care that maximizes benefit and minimizes harm to each child or youth. The goal of treatment is a well-adjusted youth, regardless of ultimate gender identity or sexual orientation, who feels she or he has been genuinely helped by her or his healthcare providers. Dr. Zucker has offered a variety of treatment options, understanding that options may vary greatly with the age of the client. For younger clients, therapy options include helping the child to overcome discomfort with his or her body, i.e., helping clients learn to live comfortably in their natal sex. Diagnosis and treatment of other problems that may be present, such as anxiety, depression, or substance abuse are also available, as are services for family members.

For adolescent patients (including those who first came to the clinic as young children), Dr. Zucker follows the Standards of Care Guidelines of the World Professional Association for Transgender Health. The treatment options include helping patients make a satisfactory transition to the opposite sex, including the institution of hormonal treatment to facilitate transition. In some cases, treatment may include helping an interested adolescent obtain sex-reassignment surgery.

For all patients, regardless of age, the focus of therapy is the patient’s gender identity, not the patient’s sexual orientation. Dr. Zucker’s therapeutic approach has no relationship to so-called reparative or sexual conversion therapies that attempt to change homosexual orientations to heterosexual ones. The goal of his therapy is the opposite of conversion therapy in that he considers well-adjusted transsexual, gay, lesbian or bisexual youth to be therapy successes, not failures.

LaBarbera Award: Pastor John Hagee

I don’t know how we managed to overlook John Hagee when handing out LaBarbera Awards. He’s uttered so many doozies in the past, so much so that presumptive GOP presidential nominee Sen. John McCain was finally forced to distance himself from the man whose support he once courted.

But this latest discovery looks like it’s about as good a reason as any to recognize some of the lunacy which runs rampant among anti-gay extremists:

On March 16, 2003, on the eve of the United States’ invasion of Iraq, Pastor John Hagee took to the pulpit to warn of the coming Antichrist. In his sermon, “The Final Dictator,”Hagee described the Antichrist as a seductive figure with “fierce features.” He will be “a blasphemer and a homosexual,” the pastor announced. Then, Hagee boomed, “There’s a phrase in Scripture used solely to identify the Jewish people. It suggests that this man [the Antichrist] is at least going to be partially Jewish, as was Adolph Hitler, as was Karl Marx.”

You see? Fred Phelp’s Westboro Baptists aren’t a complete aberration. You can get the full effect here:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lxQ-3LVofHs

Now you see, that’s how you win the LaBarbera Award.

By the way, Sen. Joseph Lieberman (I-CT) still says he’s going to deliver the keynote address at Hagee’s Christians United For Israel (CUFI) summit. Also scheduled to attend is Rep. Elliot Engel (D-NY). No word yet on whether Engel has reconsidered given this latest outburst.

Colorado Gets Non-Discrimination

The Denver Post reports

Gov. Bill Ritter today quietly signed a controversial bill expanding the prohibition of sexual-orientation-based discrimination, over the vocal opposition of conservative Christian groups like Focus on the Family.

The bill bans discrimination based on a person’s religious belief or sexual orientation – including transgender people – in places of public accommodation, housing practices, family planning services and 20 other public spheres. Such prohibitions are already in place with regard to race.

Ah, poor Dr. Dobson. He’s just not as influential as he once was. I guess if you are willing to sell out your integrity for some skirmish in a culture war you lose the reputation necessary to influence public policy.

Opponents said the bill would have serious consequences, such as opening up Colorado public restrooms and locker rooms to all genders and transgender people, exposing children and women to sexual predators.

I guess Coloradans saw that none of these things happened in any of the other states to ban discrimination and figured Dr. Dobson was just lying again.

One State Reverses Position on CA Marriage Decision Stay

Last week the Attorneys General of ten states united to request that the Supreme Court of California stay its decision to treat all citizens equal under the law until November: Alaska, Colorado, Florida, Idaho, Michigan, Nebraska, New Hampshire, South Carolina, South Dakota and Utah. They claimed that if California allowed gay couples to marry that this would create havoc and confusion for the court systems in their own states.

Immediately one state stood out from the others.

Although not all of these states have anti-gay marriage clauses in their constitution, only one state, New Hampshire, has taken efforts to offer recognition to same-sex relationships. And New Hampshire already had taken legislative steps to direct how out-of-state gay marriages would be treated – as civil unions.

Now it seems that the havoc and confusion caused by gay marriage in New Hampshire has been cleared up. Attorney General Kelly Ayotte, has now been apprised of the law in her state.

The Boston Globe reports

[O]n Saturday, Attorney General Kelly Ayotte announced that New Hampshire was withdrawing from the request because the state addresses the recognition issue in its civil union law.

She said under the law, New Hampshire will recognize a legal gay marriage from California as a civil union.

California Anti-Gay Marriage Initiative has Enough Signatures

The total number of signatures required to place the anti-gay marriage amendment to the California Constitution on the ballot is 694,354. The procedure is to have the county clerks test a sample of the signatures and if the extrapolated valid signatures exceed 110% of the signatures required, then it is assumed that enough signatures were received.

The total number of extrapolated signatures required is 763,790.

Currently, the Secretary of State is reporting that there are at least 732,860 valid signatures with several counties as yet unreported. The initiative supporters require another 30,930 valid signatures of the 175,124 signatures yet to be tested. I think we can say with certainty that adequate signatures were collected.

In the next few months, each of us should consider what we are willing to sacrifice to help in the effort to ensure that gay couples in California retain the right to be treated equally under the law. This issue is closely divided in the state and anything you can give to help appeal to the decency of everyday Californians will be needed.

Moscow Pride Organizers Jubilant

Organizers of yesterday’s Moscow Pride events consider yesterday’s actions a tremendous success. Throughout the day, they were able to stage two highly visible demonstrations garnering local and international media attention while eluding police. Police had tried to preemptively detain Moscow Pride organizer Nickolai Alekseev earlier that morning, but he was able to get away.

No one was hurt during the events, but five activists were ultimately detained. One was briefly held but let go, while the four who unfurled the banner from an apartment across from Moscow City Hall were released by the court the following Monday morning.

With the release of those four activists, Alekseev declared the event over and hailed the event a success:

“Our people showed that we are not only a force for gays but a political force and won’t compromise on our rights,” he told AFP.

Alekseev elaborated further in an email:

“No human rights group or opposition [has] ever humiliated the Moscow authorities so much.

We wanted to defy the Mayor in front of his office. Not only [has the] homophobia of Mayor Luzhkov been advertised today, but also the full collapse of his administration to prevent gays and lesbians [from] realiz[ing] their constitutional rights to march.

Today, we showed that our group is powerful not only in gay and lesbian aspects, but in general. Our fight is only at its beginning.”

[Hat tip: Bob Schwartz, Gay Liberation Network]

Russian Gay Rights Activists Besieged By Police and Arrested

In the latest attempts to hold a Pride demonstration in Moscow, activists unfurled a banner from a private apartment across the street from Moscow City Hall on Sunday. Shortly after 1:00 in the afternoon, activists unfurled the six meter banner reading, “Rights to gays and lesbians — homophobia of mayor Luzhkov to be prosecuted.”

Four unidentified activists were in the apartment, which was immediately besieged by Moscow police who spend the rest of the day trying to gain forced entry into the apartment without a court order. At one point, the police threatened to plant drugs on the four and charge them with false drug charges.

Shortly after 9:00 that evening, police were able to force their way into the apartment and arrest the four activists.

UK Gay News is facilitating a rolling update on their web site of continuing coverage from Russian bloggers. It’s a very riveting account. Bloggers also report that the Russian LGBT websites GayRussia.ru and Gay.ru were taken offline for unknown reasons. (Gay.ru appears to be back online.)

The action across from Moscow City Hall followed a cat-and-mouse game of chase between gay activists and Moscow police. LGBT activists, who had been keeping their plans secret, eluded police and staged a short protest in front of the Tchaikovsky statue at the Moscow music conservatory. Thirty-five people unfurled a banner and flag and shouted pro-gay slogans, and then left before police could arrive.

There are no other reports of arrests of pro-gay activists, although it has been reported that perhaps as many as fifteen anti-gay and nationalist protesters were also arrested.

It had been reported earlier that Russian President Dmitriy Medvedev ordered the Prefecture of the Central Administrative area of Moscow to authorize a Gay Pride demonstration. Since his election the the Russian presidency, there has been widespread speculation that he would be a mere figurehead president as former president Vladimir Putin takes the role as Prime Minister. It appears that Moscow city authorities have adopted a similarly dismissive view of Medvedev’s authority as well.

Foolish Anti-Marriage Activists

The Alliance Defense Fund – not surprisingly – has asked the California Supreme Court to stay its marriage equality decision until after the likely November election. I think that their petition betrays a weakness in the anti-gay position that greatly increases the likelihood that no stay will be issued.

I’m going to segue off for a moment and then get back to that.

I just noticed something about the dates of the process that I find interesting.

The county clerks in California have until June 18 to determine whether there are adequate signatures for the constitutional amendment to be considered in November. But the Supreme Court only has until June 16 to decide whether to issue a stay. Thus, the anti-gays are asking the court to act on a possible result to an election that potentially can’t even be verified as occurring until after the stay is made.

Although it’s pretty likely that there will be a vote in November, this argument is based on more than one uncertainty and thus is not very compelling. Theoretically, the anti-gays could be asking the court to stay its decision until after a vote that won’t even take place.

OK, back to the anti-gays. In their petition, the ADF did something that surprised me. Even for them.

Great public harm and mischief, as outlined herein, will result from permitting same-sex “marriages” for a five-month period, only to later change the law by returning marriage to its traditional definition.

The Court determined that marriage was open to same sex couples; marriage, as in the legal recognition by the civil government. The Court spoke on what the civil institutions of the State of California would do in regards to marriage. As is their right.

But the ADF did not give this court the recognition of their right to make determinations about civil law. Instead, in their petition, the ADF refers to same-sex marriage as “marriage”, in quotes. They objected to “marriage” licenses and “marital” relationships.

They said, in essence, that regardless of the decisions of the highest legal body in the state, that same-sex marriage was not real or genuine, that it was only “marriage” in name, and not marriage in actuality. No matter what the Court may have determined.

I question the wisdom of that decision.

“It’s NOT marriage and I won’t call it so!” may be an argument that serves well in fundraising emails, but I don’t think it will fare well with judges who just said that, indeed, it IS marriage.

Now I may not be as imperturbable as the Justices of the Court, but if I were being asked to rule in favor of a petition, I would not be immediately encouraged to do so if the pleading party deliberately insulted me and my position and indicated that my decisions were not valid.

Now it may be that ADF is comprised of particularly weak legal minds. Or they may have recognized that their plea is futile and therefore the plea was written with their donors in mind rather than the Justices of the Supreme Court of California.

But in either case, this seems to me to be a foolish action and one which makes them appear to be petty and bitter.

In other words, thanks ADF, you’re helping our cause.

UCLA to Study Identical Twins

Anti-gays cling to the mantra “there is no gay gene” to comfort them when troubled about their efforts to legislate discrimination. As long as sexual orientation is not genetic then they can claim it is not innate and therefore gay people can be blamed and punished.

Anti-gays know we can’t change our genes, but if they can convince themselves that orientation is brought on by environment, well then it can be reversed and they can insist that gay persons choose to change. And if we don’t, then they have every right to deny us marriage, redress from organized bigotry, the opportunity for housing or employment, and the rights to serve our country, raise our children, and care for our own.

If “there’s no gay gene” and gays choose to stay “in the lifestyle”, then anti-gays can convince themselves that they aren’t monsters, but that we are.

Hey, we all have to find a way to sleep at night.

One of the “evidences” that anti-gays use to insist that sexual orientation is not based in genetics is the fact that not all identical twins have the same orientation. As Focus on the Family’s Melissa Fryrear puts it

The third major study trumpeted as “proof” of homosexuality’s genetic link was also conducted in 1991 by psychologist Michael Bailey and psychiatrist Richard Pillard. Using pairs of brothers — identical twins, non-identical twins, biological brothers, and adopted brothers — Bailey and Pillard attempted to show that homosexuality occurs more frequently among identical twins than fraternal twins.

Again, what the majority of people do not know, and what the media did not accurately report, is that this study actually provides support for environmental factors versus genetics! If homosexuality were in the genetic code, then both of the twins would have been homosexual 100 percent of the time, yet this was not the case.

Most researchers see the differences of orientation matching (50% in identical twins and 20% in fraternal twins compared to a general population rate of probably less than 6%) as an indication that genetics are a factor. But anti-gays magically find just the opposite. Since Melissa’s research credentials are, well, not particularly solid, she relies on NARTH’s Neil Whitehead to back up her assertions.

Identical twins have identical genes. If homosexuality was a biological condition produced inescapably by the genes (e.g. eye color), then if one identical twin was homosexual, in 100% of the cases his brother would be too. But we know that only about 38% of the time is the identical twin brother homosexual. Genes are responsible for an indirect influence, but on average, they do not force people into homosexuality. This conclusion has been well known in the scientific community for a few decades but has not reached the general public. Indeed, the public increasingly believes the opposite.

Fryrear may be excused for having but a layman’s understanding of genetics. But when Whitehead implies that genetics can be disregarded he is either demonstrating a willful ignorance or is cynically seeking to play on the public’s lack of expertise.

Genetic influence is not limited to a gene’s presence. Identical genes do not behave identically. And a research team at the University of California at Los Angeles (UCLA) Center for Gender-Based Biology is setting out to study just what role genes play in determining sexual attraction. Out in America reports

Identical twins provide a unique model to study the role of gene regulation: “Both twins have the same genes, but they might use these genes differently,” says Bocklandt. “And that difference in gene use could explain the difference in sexual orientation.”

“If we can identify specific genes that are ‘turned off’ or ‘turned on’ among our gay and straight twins, we will have excellent genetic targets for further investigation with respect to sexual orientation,” Bocklandt adds.

Study researchers will measure the chemical signal attached to the DNA that controls if and when a gene is turned on and off. Utilizing novel DNA-chip technology, large parts of the human genome can be screened for differences in gene regulation between the twins. “Because identical twins have the same DNA sequence, we can study a ‘gay genome’ and a ‘straight genome’ within one single genetic background, and that’s extremely powerful,” says Bocklandt.

The study is headed by Drs. Eric Vilain, Cisco Sanchez, and Sven Bocklandt. Drs. Vilain and Bocklandt were part of the team that observed the extreme skewing of x chromosome inactivation in the mothers of gay men. Bocklandt also worked with Hamer on his earlier gene research (which was horribly misreported) and is one of the “gay sheep guys” who researched the variances in the brains of same-sex attracted rams. These researchers are at the very forefront of studying how genetics and orientation interplay.

This research promises to add to the growing knowledge on what does and does not contribute to sexual orientation. It may help understand whether genes can be solely, significantly, or only minimally responsible for the sex to which each of us are attracted. And while I doubt that a “gay gene” that indisputably determines orientation is likely to be the result, additional information in this field of study is very welcome.

The team currently has about 20 sets of mixed-orientation identical twins and is seeking to double that size. If you are an identical twin whose sibling does not share your orientation, check out the study to see if you would like to participate.

If you are not an identical twin but are a gay man with a gay brother, please consider contributing to the work being performed by Dr. Sanders at Northwestern University.

Latvian Pride March Held, No Incidents Reported

An estimated 400 gay and lesbian marchers took part in a Pride parade in Riga, Latvia, today amid tight security and insults from anti-gay extremists. No incidents were reported, as police sealed off the streets surrounding the Pride parade and kept an estimated 400 anti-gay protesters behind barricades and away from the marchers.

As the parade concluded, a statement by Latvian President Valdis Zatlers was read out to the crowd in Latvian and English, in which he called for tolerance and accommodation:

“We have a truly free country in which every citizen has the right to express himself, and that opportunity is respected. … I think that these are values from which we must not retreat.”

“If some people have a common household and they have — let’s say — the common life of a single gender, then we certainly need to resolve these aspects of social privileges … inheritance, the right of the spouse to enjoy certain privileges, and so on.

“That is what needs to be done, and it would be a gesture of understanding, comprehension and good will.”

Given some of the rhetoric surrounding Pride activities recently — particularly the violent rhetoric coming from the Watchmen On the Walls and its Latvian co-founder Alexey Ledyaev — many LGBT Latvians don’t feel safe.  A Ledyaev supporter was found guilty of throwing feces as worshipers emerged from an LGBT prayer service two years ago after that year’s Pride march was canceled.

Which is why marches like this are so important:

…[T]here is a considerable number of Latvian gay men and women who remain too scared to participate.

“I would very much like to go on the march,” a gay man, who asked not to be identified, told UK Gay News over a drink in the Golden Bar yesterday evening.

“But I am scared that I will be seen by someone I know and this will result in problems within my family and at work.

“You are so lucky in your country that homosexuality is so open. Perhaps one day here…”

LaBarbera Blames Gays for Heterosexual Beastiality Porn

While Peter LaBarbera will grudgingly admit that some of the participants at the International Mr. Leather event held every Memorial Day Weekend in Chicago are heterosexual, he insists that this is mostly a gay male event. And that is probably correct.

And LaBarbera places the blame for the most extreme elements, those which he declares are most objectionable, squarely on gay persons or, in an exercise of extrapolation, on the gay community as a whole. He trots out his pictures and his descriptions as an evidence that gay people – and not just some small subset – are depraved, perverted, and satanic.

This year Pete’s leading off his porno pic collection with a snapshot of a DVD display.

Note that we’ve covered up the pornographic images. The bestiality titles (e.g., “Goat Fever,” “Amateur Animal 1,” speak for themselves. “Scat,” according to one online (and sexually explicit) “Robert Scott’s Gay Slang Dictionary,” refers to [*] “A gay male who gets sexual gratification from acts involving faeces.” That is, excrement, which to us at Americans For Truth is proof that Satan is alive and well in this world.

I’m not sure that Satan was all that obsessed with poop; I couldn’t find any references in Scripture that tied the two together. But I’m willing to concede that Pete may be on better terms with Satan than I am.

I was, however, able to find out some interesting information about the videos that Pete highlighted to titilate and horrify his readers. They are heterosexual.

Goat Fever involves a man, two women, and a (presumably female) goat. Amateur Animal 1 features “A couple with a blonde and german shepherd”. (I’m not providing links but descriptions of these videos are available by Googling their titles).

Neither of these videos involve male-male contact. But you wouldn’t know that from Pete’s posting.

I did not do an exhaustive search of every DVD shown in his promo picture; my interest level in such matters is much lower than Pete’s. But while it does appear that some of the scat DVDs are same-sex, the bestiality vids all seem to be evidence that if Satan is alive and well in this world, then he’s decidedly pushing a heterosexual agenda.

UPDATE:

* As reader PiaSharn correctly noted, this is not the definition of “Scat”. This is, rather, the definition of “Scat Queen”. Although LaBarbera prefers a definition that starts with “a gay male”, scat is actually a fetish that is practiced among heterosexuals as well and does not appear to be more common among homosexual fetishists than heterosexual fetishists.

Ten State Attorney Generals ask California Supreme Court to Stay Marriage Decision

The Attorneys General for the states of Alaska, Colorado, Florida, Idaho, Michigan, Nebraska, New Hampshire, South Carolina, South Dakota and Utah have petitioned the Supreme Court of California to stay their marriage equality decision (place it on hold) until November. They argue that citizens of other states will marry in California and come home to sue their own state for recognition.

“We reasonably believe an inevitable result of such ‘marriage tourism’ will be a steep increase in litigation of the recognition issue in our courts,” Utah Attorney General Mark L. Shurtleff wrote in the brief submitted on behalf of the 10 states.

However their argument fails on three fronts.

First, they assume that voters in November will reverse this decision. That result is not a foregone conclusion. And there is no reason to believe that these Attorneys General would be any more prepared for ‘marriage tourism’ in November than they are today; it’s hardly been a secret that the Supreme Court was considering this case. And if they aren’t prepared, then they have no right to punish gay couples for their own ineptitude.

Second, the federal DOMA provides states protection from just such a challenge. If there is any challenge, it would be to federal law, and federal law is not going to change between now and November.

Third, the California decision has not raised any new risk to their states’ entrenched discrimination. There is nothing to stop a legally married Massachusetts couple from moving to New Hampshire today and suing for recognition.

Arnold Schwarzenegger, the Governor of California, and Jerry Brown, the Attorney General of California, agree that this issue has been resolved and oppose a stay. Marriage equality is supported by the California Lieutenant Governor, the California Senate, the California House, and a majority of the California voters.

So to you outsiders I say: Go home. You are not Californians. Your constitution is not our constitution. Your laws are not our laws. Your values are not our values. Your biases are not our biases. Stop being meddlesome busy-bodies and leave the citizens of the State of California alone.