The depositions of Prop 8 witnesses Paul Nathanson and Katherine Young who may have withdrew out of fear for their own safety reveal today how damaging their statements could have been (and ultimately are) to their case. Watch:

Paul Nathanson a Canadian religious scholar who just happens to be gay (duh!) was also trotted out in Varnum v. Brien which ultimately led to the Iowa Supreme Court legalizing same-sex marriage. In the document Defending Faith, Family and Freedom by the Family Research Council Nathanson is quoted as saying that cultures can only survive and thrive via opposite-sex marriage.

“Because heterosexuality is directly related to both reproduction and survival … every human society has had to promote it actively … Heterosexuality is always fostered by a cultural norm” that limits marriage to unions of men and women. He adds that people “are wrong in assuming that any society can do without it.”

Not surprisingly marriage scholar Maggie Gallagher also surfaces in said document.

Nathanson and Young also co-authored  Marriage à la mode: Answering the Advocates of Gay Marriage in 2003 which attempts to dissect and tear down many marriage equality positions. Some of their arguments below.

Argument 7: Children would be no worse off with happily married gay parents than they are with unhappily married straight ones: This comparison is false, because it involves the best of one scenario with the worst of another. A legitimate comparison would compare either the best of both or the worst of both. Once again, we suggest that the best of marriage (providing at least one parent or other adult of each sex) is better than the best of gay marriage (which provides two parents of the same sex and none of the other one).

Argument 15: Anyone who opposes same-sex marriage is homophobic: This argument amounts to verbal terrorism. By “homophobic” is meant prejudice and hostility, although this word actually connotes the neuroticism of a phobia. The implication is that only evil or sick people can possibly disagree with any claim made by gay people. So much for the possibility of rational debate. (Never mind that not even all gay people are in favor of gay marriage.)

Moreover, this is an ad hominem argument. It is easy to trivialize arguments by attacking the personal integrity of those who make them. That way, you need not deal with the argument itself.

It’s a lengthy document but a good source for “verbal terrorists” such as myself in developing counter arguments.

Many of us missed this particular video in the run up to Prop 8 and is perhaps one of the most offensive, with high production value appealing to young voters. This video among others was presented as evidence in court today. Watch:

More on homophobic pastor Miles McPherson here.

8: The Mormon Proposition, a documentary exploring the role of the LDS Church in the passage of Proposition 8, will make its world premiere at the Sundance Film Festival, deep in the Mormon heartland. From the Salt Lake Tribute:

“We’re bringing the pain of this home,” said Reed Cowan, who directed “8: The Mormon Proposition,” which will have its world premiere next month in Park City at the Sundance Film Festival.

Cowan’s documentary is one of more than 50 titles announced Dec. 3 in the festival’s non-competitive slate.

“It’s really well done, and it’s really thorough,” festival director John Cooper said. “[Cowan] goes very deep, into the Mormon Church and its relationship to the anti-gay-marriage movement, all the way back almost before it really started, all the way back to the ’90s.”

The movie chronicles the 2008 campaign for Prop. 8, which overturned a court decision to allow same-sex marriage in California. In the film, Cowan tracks the LDS Church’s involvement with the Yes on 8 forces — and reveals what the film’s producer/editor Steven Greenstreet calls “an orchestrated strategic campaign” by the church to pass similar ballot measures in other states over the past two decades.

The LDS Church had no comment on the film, a spokesman said Thursday.

The trailer for the film is below.

Gavin Newsom, mayor of San Francisco who made national headlines in 2004 when he challenged California state law by allowing gay and lesbian couples to marry, has quit the governor’s race in California.

Newsom is withdrawing from the Democratic primary amid lackluster poll numbers and meager fund-raising receipts. His withdrawal leaves state Atty. Gen. Jerry Brown, who is expected to run even though he has not officially entered the race, with little opposition in the Democratic primary.

“It is with great regret I announce today that I am withdrawing from the race for governor of California,” Newsom said in a statement. “With a young family and responsibilities at City Hall, I have found it impossible to commit the time required to complete this effort the way it needs to — and should be — done. This is not an easy decision. But it is one made with the best intentions for my wife, my daughter, the residents of the city and county of San Francisco, and California Democrats.”

Although Newsom had been effectively running for more than a year, his campaign never gained much traction. Even in his hometown, which Newsom touted as a model of cutting-edge policies, his candidacy was widely derided among civic insiders.

The events of 2004 which gave Newsom national prominence set off a chain reaction that ultimately led to overturning the gay marriage ban by the California Supreme Court and the ultimate passage of Prop 8.