Today was a half day, because we’ve reached the end of testimony! If you’re worried you missed anything pivotal, you didn’t. In fact, it was the most pathetic and tedious exercise I’ve ever witnessed, and I wasn’t even there. Here is an excerpt from Boies’ continued cross-examination of Blankenhorn that I think best epitomizes the way Blankenhorn answers avoids answering questions.
Boies: Are you aware of marriages in other societies that have not been limited to people of the opposite sex?
Blankenhorn: Well I am certainly aware that assertions have been made in the popular and infrequently scholarly press but I have troubled myself to try to understand such assertions but I have views about them which I am happy to share.
Are you aware? Yes, I am aware. No, I am not aware. I am not sure whether I am aware or not. Those are the answers to pick from. Here’s my best translation:
I don’t really know anything, I just comment on what other people say.
Quite the expert indeed.
Extending marriage rights to same-sex couples would probably reduce the proportion of homosexuals who marry persons of the opposite sex, and thus would likely reduce instances of marital unhappiness and divorce.
Gay marriage would be a victory for the worthy ideas of tolerance and inclusion. It would likely decrease the number of those in society who tend to be viewed warily as ‘other’ and increase the number who are accepted as part of ‘us.’ In that respect, gay marriage would be a victory for, and another key expansion of, the American idea.
Because marriage is a wealth-creating institution, extending marriage rights to same-sex couples would probably increase wealth accumulation and lead to higher living standards for these couples as well as help reduce welfare costs (by promoting family economic self-sufficiency) and decrease economic inequality.
Thanks, Mr. Blankenhorn!
So what was the defense’s case again? It’ll be interesting to see it when they reconvene in a few weeks for closing arguments.
Here’s your last roundup of links. It’s early in the day, so I’ll update this throughout the evening.
Shannon Minter (NCLR): Day 12 Recap
San Jose Mercury: Prop. 8 trial Day 12: Live coverage from the courtroom
San Francisco Chronicle: Prop. 8 witness warns of societal upheaval
San Francisco Appeal: Testimony Ends In Trial To Overturn Prop 8
Keen News Service: Prop 8 trial closes; Boies expresses confidence
Box Turtle Bulletin: Perry v. Schwarzenegger: day twelve summary
Defense expert believes SSM wld, of course, meet the sordid desires of homosexuals, but also begin the zombie apocalypse.#prop8
Sooooo anyone wanna bolt from #prop8 early and check out Apple’s presentation? Heard they have a shiny new toy! Sigh. This witness sucks.