He didn’t say a word about the origins of same sex attraction. There was not a single witness who provided scientific evidence for the claim that same sex attraction is a genetically determined, immutable trait. Instead, he relied on reports of personal experiences to suggest (but not prove) that “gays and lesbians are the type of minority strict scrutiny was designed to protect.” (pg 121.)
Below, I list the plaintiffs’ expert witnesses. Not a single one has the slightest expertise in the origins of same sex attraction. Please notice: the defenders of same sex marriage are backing away from the claim that sexual orientation is a genetically determined, immutable trait, because that claim has no scientific basis whatsoever.
Plaintiffs’ Expert Witnesses:
1. Nancy Cott, Harvard historian, testified as an expert on the history of marriage in the US.
2. George Chauncey, Yale historian, testified on the social history of gays and lesbians.
3. Lee Badgett, UCLA and U Mass Amherst economist, testified on demographic and economic information about gays and lesbians.
4. Edmund Egan, chief economist for the San Francisco Comptroller’s Office, testifies on the economic impact of prohibiting same sex marriage on San Francisco’s budget.
5. Letitia Anne Peplau, UCLA psychologist, testified on couple relationships.
6. Ilan Meyer, a Columbia University social epidemiologist, testified on the stigma gays and lesbians experience.
7. Gregory Herek, UC Davis psychologist, testified on “the nature of sexual orientation” and “the amenability of sexual orientation to change through intervention.” This witness is the closest they came to defending the claim of immutability of sexual orientation.
8. Michael Lamb, Cambridge University psychologist, testified on the developmental psychology of children including children raised by gay and lesbian parents.
9. Gary Segura, Stanford University political scientist, testified on the political powerlessness of gays and lesbians in the US.