"And what does marriage do?" Cooper continued. Blankenhorn: "The most important thing it does is regulate affiliation. It establishes who are the child's legal and social parents." He went on to assert that reproduction is a "primary purpose" of marriage. Cooper asked if this belief is the result of "anti-homosexual prejudice." Blankenhorn was adamant. "No, I have looked for it and I can't find it." More than once Blankenhorn made the point that the institution of marriage is already being diluted by heterosexuals with divorce and children being born out of wedlock. He said that he believes that same-sex unions would further weaken marriage and lead to other forms of marriage, including polygamy. "Putting children with their biological parents is marriage's purpose in society," he said. He also said that even in polygamous marriages that "each marriage is a separate marriage of one man and one woman."
But upon cross-examination, Prop 8 opponent Boies brought forth some of Blankenhorn's own writing in which he stated that "we would be more American on the day we permit same-sex marriage than the day before." Huh?!?!? The witness just contradicted himself! Boies also got Blankenhorn to state that he knows of no studies that show harm to children raised by homosexual couples.
WEDNESDAY JAN 27
The last day of testimony in the Prop 8 trial in San Francisco started out with defense witness David Blankenhorn telling the court that "it would be better for gay people to be married because it would lead to stability, commitment, and lessening of promiscuity."
Once again, the witness seems to be contradicting himself. This is the best that the defense can do? To be fair, they had scheduled several other witnesses, but they failed to show up, fearing opprobrium and reprisal if they testified against gay marriage in public.
Blankenhorn did manage to state his three rules for the structure of marriage, however:
- It's between two people.
- It's between a man and a woman.
- It's a sexual relationship.
Boies had the court laughing when he told Blankenhorn, "I don't want to fall into the trap of making sex boring!" Blankenhorn shot back, "Maybe together we can do that." At this point, everyone was cracking up, after two tense days in court.
Then Boies sharpened his knives and went on the attack once more, going after Blankenhorn's claim that marriage is a "sexual relationship between a man and a woman." "Are you aware of marriages where the couples do not have sex?" he thundered. "Where sex is not the basis for marriage?"
Blankenhorn said that if such marriages exist, "I would consider it grounds for divorce." He conceded that it was possible that there might be an example of a husband and wife who "were not interested in sex, but I have never met one."
With that exchange the evidence portion of the trial came to a close. Judge Walker will now go into chambers to consider all the evidence and testimony he has heard for these past three weeks, and it looks like he will issue his decision sometime in March, probably after a few more questions for both sides. Walker said he would schedule closing arguments after final written submissions from both the plaintiffs and the defense within the next 30 days.
1 | 2



