Fact

The marriage equality law passed in Washington has nothing to do with curriculum taught in schools.  The text of the legislation can be found here – it makes no mention of schools or curriculum.

Fact

In 2004, gay and lesbian couples were granted the freedom to marry in Massachusetts as a result of a state Supreme Court decision. This decision had no effect on educational standards or other instructions to schools.

State educational policy on families was established five years earlier, long before marriage was legalized for same-sex couples in the state. In 1999, Massachusetts developed a new Comprehensive Health Curriculum Framework that read, “Students will gain knowledge about the significance of the family on individuals and society.” 

As the US Court of Appeals First District summarized: “In January 2005, when Jacob Parker (‘Jacob’) was in kindergarten, he brought home a ‘Diversity Book Bag.’ This included a picture book, 'Who's in a Family?', which depicted different families, including single-parent families, an extended family, interracial families, animal families, a family without children, and -- to the concern of the Parkers -- a family with two dads and a family with two moms. The book concludes by answering the question, ‘Who's in a family?’: ‘The people who love you the most!’ The book says nothing about marriage.”

Fact

As a United States Court of Appeals ruled: “Massachusetts does have a statute that requires parents be given notice and the opportunity to exempt their children from curriculum which primarily involves human sexual education or human sexuality issues. Mass. Gen. Laws ch. 71, § 32A. The school system has declined to apply this statutory exemption to these plaintiffs on the basis that the materials do not primarily involve human sexual education or human sexuality issues.”

The Boston Globe reported that parents in the Parkers’ school did get notification: “Rachel Cortez, president of the school’s parent-teacher association, said … parents are given a chance to examine the books during a back-to-school night event early in the school year.”

Fact

The marriage equality law passed in Washington has nothing to do with curriculum taught in schools.  As noted above, the curriculum taught in Massachusetts Public Schools was completely unrelated to the court’s decision to legalize same-sex marriage.

Fact

While domestic partnerships are legal in Washington, states that have passed such laws have found them to be fundamentally unequal and harmful. [See here, here, and here.] As the Supreme Court of Connecticut wrote in 2008 when it struck down a statute that prohibited same-sex marriage, civil unions and marriage “are by no means ‘equal’.”

The court explained in its opinion: “Despite the truly laudable effort of the legislature in equalizing the legal rights afforded same sex and opposite sex couples, there is no doubt that civil unions enjoy a lesser status in our society than marriage.”

Fact

In 2010, sociologists Judith Stacey (New York University) and Tim Biblarz (University of Southern California) conducted a review of nearly every study on gay parenting. They found that “Current claims that children need both a mother and father are spurious… At this point no research supports the widely held conviction that the gender of parents matters for child well-being.”

Studies contending that children of same-sex parents fare worse than children of heterosexual couples have been widely criticized for employing faulty methodology.

The American Academy of Pediatrics “recognizes that a considerable body of professional literature provides evidence that children with parents who are homosexual can have the same advantages and the same expectations for health, adjustment, and development as can children whose parents are heterosexual.”

The National Association of Social Workers sa

id, “Legislation legitimizing second-parent adoptions in same-sex households should be supported. Legislation seeking to restrict foster care and adoption by gay, lesbian, bisexual or transgender people should be vigorously opposed.”

Fact

In 2010, sociologists Judith Stacey (New York University) and Tim Biblarz (University of Southern California) conducted a review of nearly every study on gay parenting. They found that “Current claims that children need both a mother and father are spurious… At this point no research supports the widely held conviction that the gender of parents matters for child well-being.”

Studies contending children of same-sex parents fare worse than children of heterosexual couples have been widely criticized for employing faulty methodology.

The American Academy of Pediatrics “recognizes that a considerable body of professional literature provides evidence that children with parents who are homosexual can have the same advantages and the same expectations for health, adjustment, and development as can children whose parents are heterosexual.”

The National Association of Social Workers said, “Legislation legitimizing second-parent adoptions in same-sex households should be supported. Legislation seeking to restrict foster care and adoption by gay, lesbian, bisexual or transgender people should be vigorously opposed.”

Fact

States that have passed civil unions have found that they’re fundamentally unequal and harmful. [See here, here, and here.] As the Supreme Court of Connecticut wrote in 2008 when it struck down a statute that prohibited same-sex marriage, civil unions and marriage “are by no means ‘equal.’”

Fact

R74 does not redefine marriage. It simply asks voters to affirm the bipartisan state law by approving the question, which would allow all loving couples to marry.

Fact

The issue here is not same-sex marriage but rather existing state laws that prohibit discrimination. For example, the manager of the Vermont inn cited the owners’ “personal feelings” as the reason why it refused to host the lesbian couple’s wedding. But the Vermont Fair Housing and Public Accommodations Act prohibits public accommodations – such as inns, restaurants and schools that serve the public – “from denying goods and services based on customers’ sexual orientation.” A summary of Washington State’s anti-discrimination law can be found here.

The Portland Press Herald deemed an anti-equality ad in Maine that used the same footage of the inn owners “mostly false,” calling it “misleading”.

Fact

While the National Organization for Marriage claims Goddard was fired from his position at Toronto’s Rogers Sportsnet for his tweet regarding same-sex marriage, the company denied that assertion, noting the “well documented” reasons for his termination.  Goddard was not an employee, but “a freelance contractor” for Rogers Sportsnet.  And Canada’s National Post reported “Sportsnet had already made the decision to terminate Mr. Goddard for cause.”

Fact

A U.S. Court of Appeals decided: “On the facts, there is no viable claim of ‘indoctrination’ here.”

The independent fact-checking website PolitiFact called the school “indoctrination” myth perpetuated “false.”

A marriage equality opponent even admitted that the “indoctrination” myth is “not completely accurate” and “hyperbole.”  Marc Mutty, chairman of Maine’s Yes on 1 campaign, admitted during a strategy meeting: “We use a lot of hyperbole and I think that's always dangerous. … You know, we say things like ‘Teachers will be forced to (teach same-sex marriage in schools)!’ … Well, that's not a completely accurate statement and we all know it isn't, you know? … Let's look back at our ads and see what we say. … And I think we use hyperbole to the point where, you know, it's like ‘Geez!’”

Fact

The book was not required reading.  According to a U.S. Court of Appeals, the children “were not forced to read the books.”

The incident did not occur “in March of this year” – the Wirthlins and the Parkers made their first court complaint back in April 2006.

Again, the Wirthlins’ son was in second grade in 2006, not earlier this year.

According to the Bay Area Bay Area Reporter, “Parents in the Lexington School District in Massachusetts disputed many of the Wirthlins’ claims to the [Reporter], pointing out that when the Wirthlins moved into the district they were already involved with two groups seeking to ban same-sex marriage.  One of those groups, MassResistance… has been called an ‘anti-gay hate group’ by the Southern Poverty Law Center. Lexington parents told the [Reporter]that they suspected the Wirthlins moved into the community following parent David Parker's very public fight with the district the year before, in order to become actively involved in the issue and to join Parker in filing a lawsuit to enforce parental rights… In fact, the Wirthlins moved into the district just weeks before filing suit with Parker.”

The Lexington School District superintendent made numerous attempts to accommodate the Wirthlins’ religious beliefs, but said he “came to the conclusion that they had no intent on settling.”

Two of Rob Wirthlin’s family members were high-ranking officials in the Mormon Church.  Rob Wirthlin’s uncle, Dick, was a political strategist for the church and his name appeared throughout an internal strategy memo related to same-sex marriage.  The Bay Area Reporter characterized the memo as “tangible proof that Mormon leaders had been working to prevent marriage equality in California and Hawaii at least for the last 11 years.”

The Wirthlins received financial support from proponents of Prop 8 in California.  According to campaign finance records filed with the California Secretary of State, the “Yes on 8” campaign paid Rob Wirthlin $768 for “Staff/Spouse Travel, Lodging And Meals” in November 2008.

Fact

The Boston Globe reported that the parents did get notification: “Rachel Cortez, president of the school’s   parent-teacher association, said … parents are given a chance to examine the books during a back-to-school night event early in the school year.”

The courts have ruled that parents’ rights to exercise their religious beliefs are not violated because of contrary ideas in school.  Federal District Court Judge Mark L. Wolf wrote in response to the Wirthlin and Parker lawsuit that schools are “entitled to teach anything that is reasonably related to the goals of preparing students to become engaged and productive citizens.”  A U.S. Court of Appeals affirmed that ruling, saying, “[P]ublic schools are not obliged to shield students from ideas which are potentially offensive to their parents.”  The Supreme Court refused to hear the case.

Fact

Parker was arrested for trespassing because he refused to willingly leave school grounds. 

Again, the parents did get notification, according to Rachel Cortez, president of the school’s parent-teacher association.

Parker spent the night in jail only because he chose not to pay the $40 bail, ABC News reported

Fact

Federal District Court Judge Mark L. Wolf wrote in response to the two couples’ lawsuit that schools are “entitled to teach anything that is reasonably related to the goals of preparing students to become engaged and productive citizens.”  A U.S. Court of Appeals agreed, ruling that, “[P]ublic schools are not obliged to shield students from ideas which are potentially offensive to their parents.”  The U.S. Supreme Court refused to hear the Parkers’ and Wirthlins’ case.

There are only two examples of Massachusetts parents issuing complaints about the materials taught in their children’s classrooms. Six years have passed, and Kris Mineau, executive director of the Massachusetts Family Institute, couldn’t cite incidents other than the two in Lexington when he was pressed to do so. He said, “I don’t have documentation of everything going on.”

Fact

Perkins fails to provide any factual backup for this assertion.  Still, the most commonly citedexample of what Perkins appears to be referring to involved a student in Texas, where same-sex marriage is not legal.

Fact

While domestic partnerships are legal in Washington, states that have passed such laws have found them to be fundamentally unequal and harmful. [See here, here, and here.] As the Supreme Court of Connecticut wrote in 2008 when it struck down a statute that prohibited same-sex marriage, civil unions and marriage “are by no means ‘equal.’”  The court explained in its opinion: “Despite the truly laudable effort of the legislature in equalizing the legal rights afforded same sex and opposite sex couples, there is no doubt that civil unions enjoy a lesser status in our society than marriage.”

Fact

Backholm cites no actual research to substantiate this claim.  In fact, a wealth of research exists that finds the gender of parents has no impact on children’s wellbeing. In 2010, sociologists Judith Stacey (New York University) and Tim Biblarz (University of Southern California) conducted a review of nearly every study on gay parenting. They found that “Current claims that children need both a mother and father are spurious… At this point no research supports the widely held conviction that the gender of parents matters for child well-being.” Studies contending children of same-sex parents fare worse than children of heterosexual couples have been widely criticized for employing faulty methodology.

Fact

The courts have ruled that parents’ rights to exercise their religious beliefs are not violated because of contrary ideas in school.  There are only two examples of Massachusetts parents issuing complaints about the materials taught in their children’s classrooms.

One of the children was given a “diversity book bag” that included the book, "Who's in a Family", which depicts a variety of non-traditional families, but the book was not required reading.  Another involved a child being read "King & King" in a second-grade class.

After two rulings that were favorable to the schools, the Supreme Court refused to hear the couples’ joint case.  Kris Mineau, executive director of the Massachusetts Family Institute, couldn’t cite incidents other than the two in Lexington when he was pressed to do so.  He said, “I don’t have documentation of everything going on.”

Fact

Catholic charities in Massachusetts, Illinois and Washington, D.C. CHOSE to abandon adoption services--  instead of complying with non-discrimination laws currently on the books that apply to any organization receiving taxpayer dollars.

These conflicts arose over long-standing non-discrimination laws, which had nothing to do with same-sex marriage. The former chair of Catholic Charities in Boston disputes this claim, adding that eight board members resigned as a result of that decision.

Fact

The issue here is not same-sex marriage but rather existing state laws that prohibit discrimination. For example, the manager of the Vermont inn cited the owners’ “personal feelings” as the reason why it refused to host the lesbian couple’s wedding. But the Vermont Fair Housing and Public Accommodations Act prohibits public accommodations – such as inns, restaurants and schools that serve the public – “from denying goods and services based on customers’ sexual orientation.” A summary of Washington State’s anti-discrimination law can be found here.

Finally, this was no "mom and pop" operation. The owners have a business with annual revenues between $2.5-5 million and, like any business, were subject to public accommodations laws.  It's also important to note that the couple sought $1 and punitive damages, but ultimately agreed to more -- $20,000 for a charitable trust, with payments extended into 2015, and a $10,000 penalty paid to the state of Vermont.

Fact

According to the Williams Institute, at the UCLA School of Law, about 9,500 same-sex couples would marry in Washington State within the first three years of the law, creating an $88 million boost to the state and local economy, with a $57 million boost the first year alone. In addition, the Institute concludes that those marriages would add $8 million in tax revenue to state and local coffers, with an additional $5 million in the first year. See the full study here.

Iowa and New York, two states that recently passed laws allowing the freedom to marry, have seen an immediate uptick in revenue as a result.  In the first year after Iowa legalized same-sex marriage, wedding arrangements and tourism generated $12 to $13 million in economic activity and nearly $1 million in tax revenue.  In the year following New York’s state passage of marriage equality, same-sex marriage generated $259 million in economic activity for New York City alone.

On October 15, 2012,The Wall Street Journal published a piece on its MarketWatch entitled, "Gay Marriage is a Shot of Adrenaline for the U.S. Economy."  The columnist notes, "…why not try something that brings families together and doesn't cost the tax payer a dime. In fact, it saves taxpayers money, as it is much cheaper for the IRS to process joint income tax statements than it is to process them individually…More jobs, more tax revenue, less money wasted on the IRS seems like a good deal to me." See the full article here.

Fact

Allegations Of A “Systematic” And “Coordinated” Intimidation Campaign Against Opponents Of Marriage for Same-Sex Couples Are Unsubstantiated – The Argument Itself Is A Political Tactic. The opposition’s claims that an intimidation campaign has been waged against them – a common refrain in political campaigns – are unfounded.

As noted in an amicus brief filed with the U.S. Supreme Court by lawyers for the nation’s leading LGBT rights organizations: “When subjecting a minority group to political attack, a common tactic is to claim that the minority is itself the aggressor from whom protection is required.”

Opponents of the freedom to marry point to allegations of intimidation tactics during the Proposition 8 battle in California as well as the Referendum 71 battle in Washington State – allegations that are not supported by the facts.

Some signers of the petition to put Prop 8 on the ballot in California claimed they were subjected to retaliation.  But, as noted in an amicus brief filed with the U.S. Supreme Court by lawyers for the nation’s leading LGBT rights organizations: “[T]here is not a single alleged incident of retaliation based on signing a petition opposing legal protections for same-sex couples.  The best Petitioners have been able to come up with is that a lesbian couple ‘glared’ at a woman signing their petition and tried (unsuccessfully) to lobby her not to sign by telling her that ‘[w]e have feelings too.’”
 
Opponents of same-sex marriage alleged that their supporters “became death threat targets,” “feared physical harm to self or family,” and had their property vandalized.  But as the lawyers wrote in the amicus brief, “[T]here is no basis for claiming that such incidents, if true, were pervasive or even common – much less part of a ‘well-coordinated’ campaign. … Second, such alleged instances were in large part directed at persons engaged in visible advocacy (or advocacy items, such as yard signs). While this is no excuse, the targeting of leaders and symbols is endemic tomany heated campaigns.”

Fact

A Republican-Appointed U.S. District Judge In California Ruled That Prop 8 Supporters Had “Limited Evidence” That Violence Against Opponents Of Same-Sex Marriage Was Pervasive Or Even Related To Prop 8. U.S. District Judge Morrison England wrote in November 2011: “Plaintiffs have produced insufficient evidence that the more incendiary events on which they rely were connected to Proposition 8 or to gay marriage at all.

Rather, a number of these incidents were directed at the Mormon church, which, though a backer of California’s proposition, may also have been a target for any of a number of other reasons. … [W]hile Plaintiffs can point to a relatively few unsavory acts committed by extremists or criminals, these acts are so small in number, and in some instances their connection to plaintiffs’ supporters so attenuated, that they do not show a reasonable probability plaintiffs’ contributors will suffer the same fate.

Given the grand scale of plaintiffs’ campaign and the massive (and national) support they garnered for their cause, plaintiffs’ limited evidence is simply insufficient to support a finding that disclosure of contributors’ names will lead to threats, harassment or reprisals.”

Fact

The Facts Show The Opposite To Be True – Incidents Of Increased Violence and Harassment Against Lesbians and Gay Men Have Been Associated With Ballot Initiatives Aimed At Preventing Marriage for Same-Sex Couples. According to the Los Angeles County Commission on Human Relations’ 2008 Hate Crime Report, numerous California counties reported increases in hate crimes during and immediately following the Proposition 8 campaign.

The report stated: “The public debate around Prop 8 triggered 9 anti-lesbian, gay, bisexual, or transgender (LGBT) crimes. Five of these crimes were acts of vandalism in which opponents of Prop 8 had their property targeted by homophobic (and in 1 case, anti-black) graffiti. In addition, there were 4 violent crimes.”

A similar increase in hate crimes occurred in Massachusetts in 2007, around the time of a Constitutional convention to discuss outlawing same-sex marriage.  According to Fenway Community Health’s Violence Recovery Program, “There were 105 total [hate crimes] reported for 2004 and nearly 1/3 of them occurred during February and March, months when same-sex marriage was the focus of intense debate and demonstrations on Beacon Hill. Several victims reported that their attackers specifically referenced the marriage fight or marriage rights.”

Fact

Ballot Measures Aside, Gays And Lesbians Continue To Face Discrimination And Violence.  According to a 2011 National Coalition of Anti-Violence Programs report, violent crimes committed against people based on sexual orientation (or perceived sexual orientation) or those who are HIV-positive increased by 13 percent from 2009 to 2010.  The homicide count increased from 22 to 27 – the second-highest total since 1996, when NCAV began following hate crimes.

1,706 of 9,601 reported hate crimes in 2008 were motivated by sexual orientation, an increase of 11 percent from the previous year, according to data collected by the FBI.  Nearly all of those hate crimes – 98 percent – were against gay men, lesbians, and bisexuals.

Fact

While domestic partnerships are legal in Washington, states that have passed such laws have found them to be fundamentally unequal and harmful. [See here, here, and here.] As the Supreme Court of Connecticut wrote in 2008 when it struck down a statute that prohibited same-sex marriage, civil unions and marriage “are by no means ‘equal.’”

The court explained in its opinion: “Despite the truly laudable effort of the legislature in equalizing the legal rights afforded same sex and opposite sex couples, there is no doubt that civil unions enjoy a lesser status in our society than marriage.”

Fact

Many households headed by same-sex couples in the U.S. are raising children. According to the U.S. Census, approximately 20 percent of same-sex couples are raising nearly 250,000 children.  Children being raised by loving, committed same-sex couples – like all children – deserve the protections that come from allowing their parents to marry.

Fact

A Seattle Times national investigation “failed to turn up any evidence that same-sex marriage had produced a rash of suits involving businesspeople.”  The newspaper “also checked with human rights commissions in four of the six states where marriage is legal; the commissions said there was not an increase in discrimination findings or suits involving same sex marriage.”

Fact

The courts have ruled that parents’ rights to exercise their religious beliefs are not violated because of contrary ideas in school.  There are only two examples of Massachusetts parents issuing complaints about the materials taught in their children’s classrooms.

One of the children was given a “diversity book bag” that included the book, Who's in a Family, which depicts a variety of non-traditional families, but the book was not required reading.  Another involved a child being read King & King in a second-grade class.

After two rulings that were favorable to the schools, the Supreme Court refused to hear the couples’ joint case.  Kris Mineau, executive director of the Massachusetts Family Institute, couldn’t cite incidents other than in Lexington when he was pressed to do so.  He said, “I don’t have documentation of everything going on.”

Fact

The children were not forced to go on the field trip.  Parents of the children who participated were required to give their consent beforehand and could opt out if the trip violated their beliefs (two parents did).

• The class that participated in this field trip was from a charter school, which is publicly funded but privately run, according to the Chronicle.

Fact

The issue here is not same-sex marriage but rather existing Vermont law that prohibits discrimination.  The manager of the Vermont inn cited the owners’ “personal feelings” as the reason why it refused to host the lesbian couple’s wedding.  But the Vermont Fair Housing and Public Accommodations Act prohibits public accommodations – such as inns, restaurants and schools that serve the public – “from denying goods and services based on customers’ sexual orientation.”

Fact

While the National Organization for Marriage claims Goddard was fired from his position at Toronto’s Rogers SportsNet for his tweet regarding same-sex marriage, the company denied that assertion, noting the “well documented” reasons for his termination.  And as Equality Matters pointed out: “Goddard himself admitted that it was ‘absolutely’ possible that his tweet had nothing to do with his termination.”

Fact

A handful of elected officials publicly denounced Chik-fil-A for Dan Cathy’s disparaging comments about same-sex marriage, but only two mayors said they would try to prevent the company from opening in their cities.  One of the mayors later clarified his position by saying that the city could not do anything to stop the company from opening up shop if it chose to do so. (A third mayor expressed disapproval but did not explicitly say he would work to keep the company out if it tried.)

Fact

The organization that designated the Family Research Council a “hate group” is the well-respected Southern Poverty Law Center, “a nonprofit civil rights organization dedicated to fighting hate and bigotry, and to seeking justice for the most vulnerable members of society.”  The group immediately condemned the act of violence against the FRC.

Fact

In 2007, a publicly subsidized boardwalk pavilion in Ocean Grove, NJ that happened to be owned by a Methodist organization lost its real estate tax-exempt status after refusing to allow two same-sex couples to have civil union ceremonies at the pavilion.

The State Division on Civil Rights opened a discrimination investigation against the organization and found, “It is clear that the pavilion is not open to all persons on an equal basis.”  A federal district court judge refused to stop the investigation after the organization claimed it violated its First Amendment rights because the United Methodist Church does not believe in civil unions.

Fact

Instead of complying with non-discrimination laws currently on the books that apply to any organization receiving taxpayer dollars, Catholic charities in Massachusetts, Illinois and Washington D.C. CHOSE to abandon adoption services.

These conflicts arose over long-standing non-discrimination laws, which are unrelated to same-sex marriage. And in Massachusetts, the board chair of Catholic Charities and seven other board members resigned over the position forced on the agency by the bishops.

Fact

All reporting on this incident originates from religious publications so it is difficult to discern the facts.

Fact

In his letter, Henry compared homosexuality to prostitution and pornography and argued that the government should use “coercive power” to stop them: “Since homosexuality, adultery, prostitution and pornography undermine the foundations of the family, the basis of society, then the State must use its coercive power to proscribe or curtail them in the interests of the common good.”

Numerous respected individuals and organizations denounced Henry’s letter – including the Toronto Star editorial board; Challenge the Church, a progressive Canadian Catholic group; and the Globe and Mail’s Michael Valpy.

Fact

The California bill, SB 1476, was designed to offer flexibility to families so that legal parenting can be extended to more than two qualified parties if it is deemed to be “required in the best interests of the child.”  It never became law because Governor Brown vetoed it.

Fact

States that have passed civil unions have found that they’re fundamentally unequal and harmful. [See here, here, and here.] As the Supreme Court of Connecticut wrote in 2008 when it struck down a statute that prohibited same-sex marriage, civil unions and marriage “are by no means ‘equal.’”

Fact

A wealth of research exists that finds the gender of parents has no impact on children’s wellbeing. In 2010, sociologists Judith Stacey (New York University) and Tim Biblarz (University of Southern California) conducted a review of nearly every study on gay parenting. They found that “Current claims that children need both a mother and father are spurious… At this point no research supports the widely held conviction that the gender of parents matters for child well-being.” Studies contending children of same-sex parents fare worse than children of heterosexual couples have been widely criticized for employing faulty methodology.

Fact

R74 does not redefine civil marriage in any way. It simply allows gay and lesbian couples to marry under Washington law.

Fact

States that allow same-sex couples to marry have not experienced any discernible increase in either litigation or complaints. As the Seattle Times wrote in February 2012: “A search of newspaper clips failed to turn up any evidence that same-sex marriage had produced a rash of suits involving businesspeople. We also checked with human-rights commissions in four of the six states where same-sex marriage is legal; the commissions said there was not an increase in discrimination findings or suits involving same-sex marriage.”

Fact

Instead of complying with non-discrimination laws currently on the books that apply to any organization receiving taxpayer dollars, Catholic charities in Massachusetts, Illinois and Washington, D.C. CHOSE to abandon adoption services. These conflicts arose over long-standing non-discrimination laws, which had nothing to do with same-sex marriage.

Fact

The courts have ruled that parents’ rights to exercise their religious beliefs are not violated because of contrary ideas in school. There are only two examples of Massachusetts parents issuing complaints about the materials taught in their children’s classrooms.

One of the children was given a “diversity book bag” that included the book, "Who's in a Family", which depicts a variety of non-traditional families, but the book was not required reading. Another involved a child being read "King & King" in a second-grade class. Both happened in one town, Lexington, MA.

After two rulings that were favorable to the schools, the Supreme Court refused to hear the couples’ joint case. Kris Mineau, executive director of the Massachusetts Family Institute, couldn’t cite incidents other than in Lexington when he was pressed to do so. He said, “I don’t have documentation of everything going on.”

Fact

The issue here is not same-sex marriage but rather existing state laws that prohibit discrimination. For example, the manager of the Vermont inn cited the owners’ “personal feelings” as the reason why it refused to host the lesbian couple’s wedding. But the Vermont Fair Housing and Public Accommodations Act prohibits public accommodations – such as inns, restaurants and schools that serve the public – “from denying goods and services based on customers’ sexual orientation.” A summary of Washington State’s anti-discrimination law can be found here.