This is the letter I emailed Peter LaBarbera after the decision in Perry et al, v. Schwarzenegger et al (the Prop. 8 decision) came out. Perry was released on the eve of Peter's "Truth Academy". LaBarbera claims the point of the academy is to train people better in countering the "lies" of the "homosexual agenda" and provide a venue to discuss issues in a way disallowed by the "Gay Thought Police" in academia. But, one should note that the people in charge of the political campaign and judicial defense for Prop. 8 had the most training in countering the so-called agenda. And, LaBarbera took CIA-worthy measures to screen students for his "academy" out of fear a "homosexual activist" would sneak in. So much for free thought, but what about training?
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I take a lot of solace that your “Truth Academy” is
happening right after the Prop. 8 decision was announced. You purport to teach people how to
counter the “homosexual agenda”.
However, the people in charge of the Prop. 8 campaign in 2008 and the
legal team established to defend it were educated people extremely skilled in
their various professions. Skilled
politicians tasked with selling a message and skilled attorneys experienced at
litigation went before the judge.
And still, Prop. 8 was called what it is, irrational
discrimination.
“It [California] has already issued 18,000 marriage licenses
to same-sex couples and has not suffered any demonstrated harm as a result, see
FF 64-66; moreover, California officials have chosen not to defend Proposition
8 in these proceedings.”
You can claim that there is harm. However, when forced under oath to demonstrate harm it is
impossible because there IS NO HARM.
The problem for your side isn’t a lack of training. The people working to sell Prop. 8 to
California voters and defend it in court have a lot of training. The fault is a fundamental flaw in your
position.
You can blame “activist judges”, as I’m sure your side will
do. You never once look at your
losses and blame inadequate argumentation. You continue to lose in court over and over again and fail
to realize that the argument is the problem rather than a lack of training or
obstinate judges.
All your side had to do was go into that courthouse and
demonstrate the harm. The National
Organization for Marriage had an ad about a coming storm. It’s a nice metaphor but if there
really were some coming threat or harm that should have been easy to explain in
court. Instead, Judge Walker saw
both sides present their best arguments for and against Proposition 8 and
concluded:
“Proposition 8 fails to advance any rational basis in
singling out gay men and lesbians for denial of a marriage license. Indeed, the
evidence shows Proposition 8 does nothing more than enshrine in the California
Constitution the notion that opposite-sex couples are superior to same-sex
couples. Because California has no interest in discriminating against gay men
and lesbians, and because Proposition 8 prevents California from fulfilling its
constitutional obligation to provide marriages on an equal basis, the court
concludes that Proposition 8 is unconstitutional.”
Simple.
Straightforward. Correct.
Proposition 8 was about discrimination and saying, without
any basis, that one group of people is better than another. Your Truth Academy can train people in
messaging but the facts behind the message do not change. It’s not a matter of training to sell
something better or get better at arguing the ridiculous. When given equal time for two sides to
make their case, one side wins and the other side loses because only one side
is grounded in rationality while the other relies on subjective religious
interpretation that is unconvincing in court.
