A litmus test to secure rights

I finally found a direct source (that's more concise than a Twitter feed) of the Michigan marriage equality case (now that it ends tomorrow). It is a blog written by a lawyer observing the trial. There is a lot to read, which I'll do starting tomorrow.

Yes, testimony in the case ends tomorrow. The judge might rule immediately. Or he might take his two week vacation first.



Nathaniel Frank of Slate reviews the infamous study by Mark Regnerus that is being used in an attempt to deny marriage equality. Regnerus is a star witness for the state in the current Michigan case. Frank calls the actions of Regnerus "shameless" and explains why he uses that word:

What makes this all the more galling is that the Michigan couple is raising three special-needs children the women are trying to adopt from the foster care system. Research shows that gays and lesbians are more likely to adopt difficult-to-place children from foster care. It’s bad enough to claim, incorrectly, that straight couples make better homes for kids than gay couples. But it’s an outrage to support policy that could let kids languish in group homes rather than live with loving, capable parents. Indeed it’s a shocking goal for conservative Christians claiming to care about vulnerable children to be pursuing.

What’s equally maddening about the focus on how gay parents do is that none of it should matter. Research has long made clear that divorce, single parenthood, adoption, and poverty disadvantage kids. Where is the passionate advocacy for barring adoption, or parenthood by divorcés, single people, or poor people? Why are gay people the only ones subject to a litmus test to secure rights that everyone else gets by birth?