The 2010 study Hatzenbuehler released with colleagues Katie McLaughlin, Katherine Keyes and Deborah Hasin was recently covered by NPR:

Beginning around 2004, several states banned gay marriage. Just before that series of bans, the National Institutes of Health happened to conduct a massive survey of 43,093 Americans. The questions elicited detailed information about respondents’ mental health. (To validate what people reported about themselves, psychiatrists also interviewed samples of the people in the survey, and their medical diagnoses closely matched the findings of the survey.)

Soon after the wave of state bans on gay marriage, in 2004 and 2005, the NIMH conducted a second round of interviews, managing to reach 34,653 of the original respondents. (That’s a high rate compared with most polls and surveys.)

The study reiterates evidence and expert testimony presented during the 2010 Prop. 8 trial, which became a truth commission of marriage equality.

But is the reverse true? Are there mental health benefits for marriage equality?

Hatzenbuehler has also found, in a study conducted in Massachusetts, that gay men experienced fewer stress-related disorders after that state permitted gay marriage.

In a study tracking the health of 1,211 gay men in Massachusetts, Hatzenbuehler found that the men visited doctors less often and had lower health treatment costs after Massachusetts legalized same-sex marriage.

This issue is compounded by the fact that the metro areas with the highest percentages of gay and lesbian couples raising children are in states with constitutional bans on marriage, according to the UCLA Williams Institute.

The percentage of same-sex couples raising children in metro areas with a population above 1 million are the highest in Salt Lake City, Virginia Beach, San Antonio, Memphis, and Detroit. Each of these metro centers are in states with constitutional amendments banning marriage for same-sex couples. Among all states, Mississippi has the highest percentage of same-sex couples raising children at 26 percent.

Although the military has worked to make progress toward equality – namely through former Secretary of Defense Leon Panetta’s recent extension of certain benefits to same-sex couples and the repeal of Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell – DOMA prevents the military from treating gay and lesbian military couples equally. Because DOMA defines marriage for federal purposes as “between one man and one woman,” same-sex military couples cannot qualify for many protections available to other couples, including health care, housing assistance, primary next of kin status, and survivor’s benefits.

Outserve-SLDN and the Center for American Progress (CAP) have jointly authored a report about the ways in which DOMA discriminates against gay and lesbian military couples, called, “Collateral Damage: How the Defense of Marriage Act Harms the Troops and Undermines the U.S. Military.”

Two new anti-gay ads just started running in Maine this week. And as usual, they’re full of misleading, hurtful statements.

We can break down the claims in these commercials by using the testimony from AFER’s Prop. 8 trial. That case was like a marriage equality “truth commission” that, for the first time, examined our opponents’ claims in a federal court of law. And we found that in court, where there’s no room to hide behind misleading statements and vague threats, the arguments of our opponents simply have no basis in fact. They melt away.

Here’s the first ad:

“If Question 1 passes, redefining marriage, we can expect consequences for Mainers.”

Let’s stop right there. Question 1 is the ballot measure that would allow the state to issue marriage licenses to gay and lesbian couples. If it doesn’t pass, the consequences for Mainers is clear: no marriage for gays and lesbians. That is immediately harmful to those couples and their kids.

So, what are they claiming are the consequences if it does pass? Well, that’s a lot less clear.

“I was a successful school counselor in Maine for over 20 years. Once nominated as teacher of the year. Yet when I supported traditional marriage, they tried to get me fired.”

This is Don Mendell. And what he’s not telling you is that he didn’t just support an anti-gay law. He went on television and attacked gay and lesbian Mainers, despite being a school counselor at a public high school. Here he is back in 2009:

“Prevent Question 1 from being pushed on Maine students.”

Mendell wrote that LGBT couples “use children’s trusting nature to turn them against the natural law.”

Words like these do profound harm to young gay and lesbian people, especially when they come from a school counselor. That’s why he was investigated.

“When gay marriage has become law elsewhere, people who disagree with it have been fired, sued, fined, and punished.”

There are a lot of problems with this statement. Don wasn’t fired, sued, fined, or punished. The complaints against him were dismissed.

And marriage equality wasn’t even law during that time. So, whether or not gay and lesbian couples could get married, the complaints against him would have been exactly the same. In other words, marriage equality didn’t cause his problems. He caused them by speaking out against the very kids in his care.

The fact is, nobody gets punished just for having an opinion. There are only consequences for harassing people, or attacking them, or using public resources to discriminate, or using your position of authority to cause harm.

And that’s just what these marriage bans do. During the Prop. 8 trial, Professor Lee Badgett testified that laws like Prop. 8 have “inflicted substantial economic harm on same sex couples and their children.”

And Professor Gary Segura pointed out “There is no group in American society who has been targeted by ballot initiatives more than gays and lesbians.”

Now let’s take a look at the second ad.

“Marriage as a man and a woman has served Maine for hundreds of years.”

Well, it’s served some people for hundreds of years. Others, like gay and lesbian Mainers, have been out of luck.

“Marriage is more than what adults want for themselves. It’s also about the next generation.”

That’s true. And it’s why it’s so important that gay and lesbian parents be allowed to get married. Not just for themselves, for the children that they’re raising. One of the Prop. 8 proponents’ own witnesses admitted as much on the stand during the trial. David Blankenhorn testified, “same-sex marriage would likely contribute to more stability and to longer-lasting relationships for same-sex couples.”

He added that the freedom to marry “would extend a wide range of the natural and practical benefits of marriage to many lesbian and gay couples and their children,” and that it would be “a victory for the worthy ideas of tolerance and inclusion.”

Blankenhorn’s admissions are persuasive. So persuasive, in fact, that he eventually changed his mind, and he’s now a supporter of marriage equality.

Straight couples do a great job of raising the next generation. But they’re not the only ones doing it.

“Maine law prohibits discrimination against gay men and lesbians…”

That’s true. And the reason that we prohibit discrimination is that it hurts all of society, and helps no one. As the Ninth Circuit ruled, “Prop. 8 serves no purpose, and has no effect, other than to lessen the status and human dignity of gays and lesbians in California … The Constitution simply does not allow for ‘laws of this sort.’”

“And same-sex couples already have the legal protections of marriage in virtually all matters.”

Did you catch that? Virtually all matters. They’re admitting that domestic partnerships are unequal, but trying to make it okay by saying, in essence, “close enough.”

“Anything remaining can be addressed without redefining marriage.”

No. It can’t. We’ve tried. You need an army of lawyers and thousands of dollars to try to close the gap between a domestic partnership and a marriage. Not to mention, California’s had domestic partnerships since 1999, and every single year they have to pass new laws to try to close loopholes that prevent gay and lesbian couples from being treated equally.

At this point in our country’s history, we can say with confidence that separate is not equal. And it never will be.

By the way, you might be wondering who’s paying for these embarrassing ads. The answer is: we don’t know.

What we do know is that the National Organization for Marriage is funneling a ton of money into Maine without reporting their funding sources. And they recently lost a lawsuit over that secrecy. They’re now compelled to report their donors in Maine. But so far, they haven’t.

We’re now less than a month away from the election. And the polling in Maine is encouraging, but it could still go either way, since surveys generally overstate support for the freedom to marry.

Now is a crucial time to get involved in Maine, as well as in Maryland, Minnesota, and Washington. Visit afer.org/election2012 for ways that you can support the freedom to marry in those states. Together, we can push back against these misleading, dangerous messages.

What You Can Do

From the basic ability to simply say “my parents are married” to a whole host of rights and protections, children benefit when their parents are able to legally wed.

After hearing expert trial testimony and evidence presented by AFER’s legal team led by distinguished co-counsel Ted Olson and David Boies, the Federal District Court in the Perry case made the following finding of fact:

56. The children of same-sex couples benefit when their parents can marry.

Over 100,000 gay and lesbian couples across the country are raising children, according to an analysis of the 2010 Census of UCLA’s Williams Institute.

For couples like Shannan and Monica in Oregon, who are navigating the adoption process for four of their nieces and nephews in need, to Sue and Melissa in Florida, whose daughter’s greatest fear was going into foster care if anything happened to her birth mom,  the freedom to marry is about more than saying “I Do,” it’s about making sure that the children of gay and lesbian parents are no longer harmed by discriminatory laws like Prop. 8.

View Larger >

80 findings of fact, based on empirical evidence and expert witness testimony speak to the nature of marriage and discrimination of gay and lesbian Americans. Here is one of them:

52. Domestic partnerships lack the social meaning associated with marriage, and marriage is widely regarded as the definitive expression of love and commitment in the United States.

Domestic partnerships, a separate system which gives many of the rights and protections of marriage to gay and lesbian Californians, is woefully inadequate in part because it lacks the social significance and meaning of marriage.

As Harvard Professor Nancy Cott, an expert on the history of marriage in the United States, testified:

“Marriage has been the “happy ending to the romance.” Marriage “is the principal happy ending in all of our romantic tales”; the “cultural polish on marriage” is “as a destination to be gained by any couple who love one another.”

Reuters delves into one tangible burden: the complexity and disadvantages of filing taxes:

Because of DOMA, you can’t file your federal income tax returns jointly, even if you are married by state standards. If you or your partner can file as head of household instead of as single, you’ll be able to get a greater standard deduction – $8,700 in 2012, vs. $5,950 for single – and better tax rates.

The same disparity occurs when parents are claiming dependents. A married heterosexual couple simply lists children on the joint return, and accrues tax benefits. However, for gay and lesbian couples with children, there are two problems: They can’t file a joint tax return, and they may not both be legal parents of their children. (Some states allow same-sex adoptions.)

Same-sex couples can expect higher health-related taxes, too. Generally, health insurance benefits are not taxable and employers deduct the cost of health insurance from your paycheck on a pre-tax basis. But for gay and lesbian couples the benefits for the partner are taxed at the federal level as wage income.

The problem is pervasive and increasingly widespread:

There are more than 130,000 married gay and lesbian couples in the United States, according to U. S. Census Bureau data. And with more states, notably New York, legalizing same-sex marriage, that number is rising.

In addition to the importance of filing status, gay and lesbian couples currently need to take extra measures when estate planning.

Gay and lesbian couples need to make sure they have explicit estate plans and update their wills often. That’s because the same assumptions about assets going to the surviving spouse don’t hold – and families who didn’t accept the relationship may be more likely to squabble.

For those with greater wealth who may owe the estate tax (currently due on estates above $5.1 million), the big issue is that the rules letting spouses inherit unlimited amounts tax-free does not apply to gay and lesbian marriages because of DOMA.

The good news? As the article points out, there are several cases challenging DOMA that could soon be in front of the Supreme Court.

Image via Flickr Creative Commons by Donnay

In an op/ed published in today’s New York Times, Blankenhorn says:

“…I do believe, with growing numbers of Americans, that the time for denigrating or stigmatizing same-sex relationships is over. Whatever one’s definition of marriage, legally recognizing gay and lesbian couples and their children is a victory for basic fairness.

…

Instead of fighting gay marriage, I’d like to help build new coalitions bringing together gays who want to strengthen marriage with straight people who want to do the same.”

For Blankenhorn, marriage is about family. It’s an institution that strengthens our ties to each other and to society. We could not agree more.

Today’s announcement is somewhat of an evolution for the Prop. 8 witness, who is the founder and executive director of the Institute for American Values.

During the historic 2010 trial of Prop. 8, he admitted, under cross examination by AFER lead co-counsel David Boies, that we “would be more American” on the day gay and lesbian couples are allowed to marry. And more recently, he penned an editorial opposing North Carolina’s Amendment One, which has far reaching consequences, banning all forms of recognition in the state that are not marriage between straight people.

Increasingly, Americans support marriage equality. More than a dozen national polls now show majority support for allowing gay and lesbian couples the freedom to marry.

Post by Shumway Marshall, AFER Online Director