PFLAG Amicus Brief

Case No.
14-50196
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT
CLEOPATRA DE LEON; NICOLE DIMETMAN;
VICTOR HOLMES; and MARK PHARISS,
Plaintiffs-Appellees,
v.
RICK PERRY, in his official capacity as the Governor of the State of Texas;
GREG ABBOTT, in his official capacity as Texas Attorney General;
DAVID LAKEY, in his official capacity as Commissioner of the
Texas Department of State Health Services,
Defendants-Appellants.
On Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Western District of Texas, San Antonio Division
Case No. SA-13-CA-00982 (The Honorable Orlando L. Garcia)
BRIEF OF AMICUS CURIAE PARENTS, FAMILIES AND FRIENDS OF
LESBIANS AND GAYS, INC.
IN SUPPORT OF PLAINTIFFS-APPELLEES
AND SUPPORTING AFFIRMANCE
J iyun Cameron Lee
FOLGER LEVIN LLP
199 Fremont Street, 20th Floor
San Francisco, CA 94105
Tel: (415) 625-1050
Fax: (415) 615-1091
Email: jlee@folgerlevin.com
Attorneys for Amicus Curiae Parents, Families
and Friends of Lesbians and Gays, Inc.
Case: 14-50196 Document: 00512770355 Page: 1 Date Filed: 09/16/2014

i
CERTIFICATE OF INTERESTED PERSONS
The undersigned counsel of record certifies that the following listed persons
and entities as described in the fourth sentence of Fifth Circuit Rule 28.2.1 have an
interest in the outcome of this case. These representations are made in order that
the judges of this court may evaluate possible disqualification or recusal. In
addition, pursuant to Rule 26.1 of the Federal Rules of Appellate Procedure, the
undersigned counsel states that amicus curiae Parents, Families and Friends of
Lesbians and Gays, Inc. issues no stock and has no parent corporation that issues
stock.
Plaintiffs Plaintiffs Counsel
Cleopatra DeLeon
Nicole Dimetman
Victor Holmes
Mark Phariss
Barry Alan Chasnoff
J essica M. Weisel
Michael P. Cooley
Daniel McNeel Lane, J r.
Matthew Edwin Pepping
Andrew Forest Newman
AKIN GUMP STRAUSS
HAUER & FELD LLP

Defendants Defendants Counsel
Governor Rick Perry
Attorney General Greg Abbott
Commissioner David Lakey
J onathan F. Mitchell
Kyle D. Highful
Beth Klusmann
Michael P. Murphy
OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL
FOR THE STATE OF TEXAS


ii
Amicus Curiae Counsel for Amicus Curiae
Parents, Families and Friends of
Lesbians and Gays, Inc.
J iyun Cameron Lee
FOLGER LEVIN LLP

Dated: September 16, 2014

FOLGER LEVIN LLP

s/ Jiyun Cameron Lee
J iyun Cameron Lee
Attorneys for Amicus Curiae
Parents, Families and Friends
of Lesbians and Gays, Inc.
TABLE OF CONTENTS

Page

iii
CERTIFICATE OF INTERESTED PERSONS ................................... i
TABLE OF CONTENTS ................................................................... iii
TABLE OF AUTHORITIES .............................................................. iv
INTERESTS OF AMICUS CURIAE ................................................... 1
SUMMARY OF ARGUMENT ........................................................... 2
ARGUMENT ....................................................................................... 4
I. PROHIBITIONS ON SAME-SEX COUPLES
MARRYING DISCRIMINATE AGAINST AND
HARM PEOPLE WHO ARE GAY OR LESBIAN
BY RELEGATING THEIR RELATIONSHIPS
TO AN INFERIOR STATUS ......................................... 4
A. Story of Don and Gena Rogers ............................. 5
B. Story of Leslie Bohon-Bothwell and David
Bohon .................................................................... 9
C. Story of Kristy Clark .......................................... 12
D. Story of Colette Roberts ..................................... 14
II. SAME-SEX COUPLES J OINING IN
MARRIAGE NEITHER POSE RISKS TO THE
INSTITUTION OF MARRIAGE NOR
THREATEN CHILDREN ............................................ 16
A. Story of Arantza Zabala ...................................... 18
B. Story of Tom and J an Harry ............................... 21
C. Story of Mike Neubecker ................................... 25
CONCLUSION .................................................................................. 28
CERTIFICATE OF COMPLIANCE WITH RULE 32(A) ............... 29
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE .......................................................... 30
TABLE OF AUTHORITIES

Page

iv
CASES
City of Cleburne v. Cleburne Living Center,
473 U.S. 432 (1985) ........................................................................ 28
Loving v. Virginia,
388 U.S. 1 (1967) .............................................................................. 4
Romer v. Evans,
517 U.S. 620 (1996) .................................................................... 4, 17
United States v. Windsor,
133 S. Ct. 2675 (2013) ............................................................ 4, 5, 17
Zablocki v. Redhail,
434 U.S. 374 (1978) .......................................................................... 4

1
INTERESTS OF AMICUS CURIAE
1

Parents, Families & Friends of Lesbians & Gays, Inc. (PFLAG)
respectfully submits this amicus curiae brief in support of Plaintiffs-Appellees.
PFLAG is a national, nonprofit organization that promotes the health,
well-being, and civil rights of lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender (LGBT)
persons, as well as their families and friends. Nationwide, PFLAG has more than
200,000 members and supporters, with approximately 350 affiliates. In Texas,
PFLAG has 19 chapters and more than 11,500 members.
PFLAG was founded in 1973 by mothers and fathers of gay and lesbian
children. The impetus for PFLAGs founding was the act of one mother, J eanne
Manford. Ms. Manford took the then-unusual step of publicly supporting her gay
son by participating in a gay rights march, holding a handmade sign reading
Parents of Gays Unite in Support for our Children. Ms. Manfords role in
founding PFLAG was recognized in 2013 when she posthumously received the
nations second-highest civilian honor, the Presidential Citizens Medal.
In the 40 years since its founding, PFLAG has provided support services to
LGBT individuals, their families, and friends to assist in coping with

1
This brief is submitted with the consent of the parties, who have filed
blanket consents to the submission of amicus briefs. Counsel represents that this
brief was not authored in whole or in part by counsel for any party, and no person
or entity other than PFLAG and its counsel has made any monetary contribution to
the preparation and submission of this brief.

2
discrimination and hostility. PFLAG has further engaged in education and
advocacy efforts, through which it seeks to create a society in which all citizens
enjoy full civil and legal equality. Today, PFLAGs members are predominantly
heterosexual parents, children, grandparents, siblings and friends of LGBT
individuals who desire that their family members enjoy the same right to marry as
opposite-sex couples.
PFLAG has a strong interest in ensuring the right of same-sex couples to
marry, and its members are uniquely positioned to address and rebut certain
arguments made by Appellants. In particular, PFLAGs members have first-hand
knowledge of how restrictions on same-sex marriage have negatively impacted not
only same-sex couples themselves, but also their family members. Further, having
witnessed committed same-sex relationships and marriages, PFLAG members can
rebut the argument that same-sex marriage poses risks to opposite-sex marriage
and children.
SUMMARY OF ARGUMENT
PFLAG submits that the order of the District Court should be affirmed. This
amicus curiae brief will offer the perspectives of PFLAGs members on two of the
issues raised by this appeal:
1. PFLAG offers personal stories of its members demonstrating that
prohibiting committed same-sex couples from marrying relegates their

3
relationships to an inferior status, recognized as demeaning by the couples, their
families and the wider community. Their stories illustrate both the profound
importance of marriage for these committed couples and their family members,
and the harm flowing from this discriminatory exclusion from participation in a
married family life.
2. PFLAG offers personal stories showing there is no risk to the
marriages of opposite-sex couples or children merely because same-sex couples
also commit to marriage. As heterosexual family members of people who are gay
or lesbian, PFLAGs members are uniquely situated: they can offer first-hand
accounts of how observing same-sex couples in committed relationships and
marriages has reaffirmed, rather than harmed, their views on the importance of the
institution.
* * *
The harm resulting from state bans on same-sex couples marrying is most
directly felt by the same-sex couples themselves. But family members of same-sex
couples are profoundly affected as well, and would be deeply and adversely
affected if the order below were to be reversed. Prohibitions on same-sex marriage
tell family members of people who are gay or lesbian that their children,
grandchildren and siblings are inferior and that their families are not entitled to

4
equal dignity under the law. As such, these laws cannot be reconciled with the
Constitutions guarantees of due process and equal protection.
ARGUMENT
I. PROHIBITIONS ON SAME-SEX COUPLES MARRYING
DISCRIMINATE AGAINST AND HARM PEOPLE WHO ARE GAY
OR LESBIAN BY RELEGATING THEIR RELATIONSHIPS TO AN
INFERIOR STATUS.
By excluding same-sex couples from marriage, Texas has imposed legal
disabilities on people who are gay or lesbian, and demeaned their committed
relationships. The laws of Texas preclude same-sex couples from participating in
what the Supreme Court has described as the most important relation in life
(Zablocki v. Redhail, 434 U.S. 374, 384 (1978) (citation omitted)), and one that is
essential to the orderly pursuit of happiness by free men. Loving v. Virginia, 388
U.S. 1, 12 (1967).
[A] bare . . . desire to harm a politically unpopular group cannot constitute
a legitimate government interest. Romer v. Evans, 517 U.S. 620, 634 (1996)
(citation and internal quotation marks omitted). Classifications of people who are
gay or lesbian that do not further a proper legislative end but act to make them
unequal to everyone else are thus unconstitutional. Id. at 635. The Supreme
Court has recognized that laws with the principal purpose and the necessary
effect of demean[ing] same-sex couples cannot survive due process and equal
protection challenges. United States v. Windsor, 133 S. Ct. 2675, 2695-96 (2013).

5
PFLAGs members have experienced and observed the stigmatizing and
demeaning effects of marriage prohibitions on their children and other family
members. Without being able to describe their relationships as marriages,
same-sex couples cannot fully convey the nature and importance of their life-long
commitment. See Windsor, 133 S. Ct. at 31 (non-recognition of same-sex marriage
makes it difficult for family members to understand the integrity and closeness of
their own family). PFLAG asks the court to consider the following stories from
its members, which underscore the ways in which denying same-sex couples the
right to marry harms and dishonors the couples and the families who love them.
A. Story of Don and Gena Rogers
Don: My wife Gena and I have been married 47 years. We are native
Texans, and live 15 miles south of Fort Worth. We have three sons and five
grandchildren. Our youngest son, J osh, is gay.
Gena: When J osh was 14, he told the Youth Minister at our church that he
thought he was gay. The Youth Minister called me in, and said that he did not
think J osh was gay but simply going through a phase. Both he and I basically shut
down any effort by J osh to come out. I did not even tell Don about the
conversation, and simply ignored it. It was incomprehensible to me. It couldnt be
true.

6
For a few years after that, J osh tried to be straight. He dated girls and tried
his best to be someone he wasnt. Then at the age of 19, he came out to Don and
me.
Don: I was devastated. I was a fourth-generation Southern Baptist and a
fourth-generation Texan. Everything I had known, everything I had been taught,
was that homosexuality was a sin and could not be accepted. This was something
that had been ingrained in me, and something I had never questioned. So J oshs
declaration that he was gay shook the very foundation of my beliefs.
It took a long time for us to assimilate what had happened, and each of us
dealt with it in our own way. My way was to turn to research and books. I was a
school teacher, having taught for 34 years. So I began reading everything I could,
starting with the history of Christianity and homosexuality in the Church. I
researched online, and I read books from both perspectives. Ultimately, I realized
that I could reconcile my son and my faith. I came to see that J osh was born this
way, and he cannot change who he is. Understanding this changed me completely,
and it changed the way I look at other people.
Gena: It probably took longer for me to accept that J osh is gay. I grieved
hard. I never said leave, or I do not love you, but it was incredibly difficult for
me. I prayed for a miracle for God to change J osh so he would not think he was
gay anymore.

7
But then I realized my grieving was about me. It was about my grief that
J osh would not bring home a daughter-in-law or give me grandchildren. I prayed a
lot, and I started to see that God couldnt change J osh, but He could change my
heart. I could love J osh for who he is and not for who I wanted him to be.
Don: Looking back, I am stunned by J oshs courage. He had a difficult
time growing up because kids bullied him. I suppose we should have known that
J osh was gay, but for Gena and me, that was not something we ever even
considered. We were confirmed Southern Baptists, I served as a deacon in a very
large church, and J osh himself was raised in that church. But J osh had the courage
to be honest with himself and with us about who he is.
Gena: For the past 10 years, J osh has been in a committed relationship with
David. When we were first introduced to David, I was still struggling and grieving
to accept that my son is gay. I am sure I was probably stand-offish to David for
about a year, maybe more. But now, 10 years later, we love David and consider
him every bit a part of our family. We are so proud of the two of them, both as
individuals and as a couple.
In J uly of this year, J osh and David were married. They first had a
ceremony in Fort Worth on a Saturday night, celebrating with their families and
friends. It was an absolutely beautiful ceremony and reception I never felt more

8
love than I did that night. J osh surprised David by singing When You Say You
Love Me. There was not a dry eye in the place.
Don: After the ceremony, J osh and David flew to New York to make their
marriage legal on the following Monday. It is painful to us that J osh and David
were not able to lawfully marry in Texas, and that Texas, the State in which they
were both born and raised will not recognize their marriage as valid.
While J osh and David dont have children now, they want to have children
some day. But they cant adopt a child together under Texas law. And, hospitals
in Texas do not give same-sex couples the same visitation rights or the right to
make treatment decisions as opposite-sex couples.
Gena: The unfairness of our States refusal to recognize same-sex couples
was crystallized for J osh and David when one of their friends died. The young
mans parents refused to recognize his same-sex partner; the partner was kicked
out of his home and received nothing. J osh said to me, Please do not ever do that
to David. Of course not I couldnt, and wouldnt, do that. J osh and David are a
couple, and their commitment deserves as much respect as Dons and mine.
There is no reason for our States refusal to recognize J osh and Davids
marriage, or the marriage of any other same-sex couple. The laws of Texas
demean gay men and lesbian women, and falsely tell our youth, many of whom are
struggling with their sexual identity, that they are not capable of forming life-long,

9
committed relationships deserving of societal respect. Recognizing J osh and
Davids marriage will do no harm to anyone else. On the other hand, laws that
refuse to recognize J osh and Davids marriage harm those young men and women
who are struggling with their self-identity, by telling them that they deserve less
simply because of how they were born.
I long for the day when same-sex couples can hold hands without being
stared at, a day when they will be allowed to get married and adopt children
together. Because on that day, I believe there will be fewer young men and women
who feel afraid, rejected or lonely. And our society will be that much better for it.
B. Story of Leslie Bohon-Bothwell and David Bohon
Leslie: I am a mother of three sons, David, J ohn Paul and Brian. My
husband and I live in Oklahoma, where we raised our blended family of five
children. My youngest son Brian is gay.
David: I am the oldest of the three boys, and live in Texas after having
served in the U.S. Army from 2004 to 2010 as a satellite communicator and
operator. I did two tours of duty in Iraq. Growing up, my brothers and I heard and
saw a lot of anti-gay sentiment. People did not want to deal with gay people, did
not want to acknowledge that gay people existed. Brian grew up in this
atmosphere. For a period in his teens, he had an incredibly difficult time,
struggling with his identity. My brothers and I were all raised in the United

10
Methodist Church, and during his teens, Brian tried to pray the gay away,
begging and pleading with God to change him.
Leslie: Brian came out to me in 2000 at the age of 17. We were alone in the
house, and I was getting dinner ready. Brian said he needed to talk to me, but then
hemmed and hawed for a while, clearly finding it difficult to speak. I finally asked
him to just tell me what was on his mind, and he said: Im gay. The first
question he then asked was: Do you still love me? It broke my heart that he
could ever question my love for him. It was difficult for me to know that Brian
feared rejection, even though he knew that I had continued to love and accept my
younger brother, who is gay.
But I came to realize that I, too, had internalized societal prejudices. In
talking to Brian, I realized that I had treated certain of Brians friends whom I
suspected as being gay differently than his other friends. Brian had seen that, and
was afraid I would disapprove of his lifestyle and stop loving him. But being
gay is not a lifestyle, it is not a choice. No one chooses to be gay. Why would
anyone choose to be ostracized by their families, their friends, their
communities?
David: I served in the Army during a time when there was a lot of
discussion about Dont Ask, Dont Tell, before that policy was eventually
repealed. I served proudly with many gay men and women who were, without

11
exception, among the most honorable and dedicated of the men and women with
whom I had the honor of serving. These men and women were defending basic
American freedoms, all the while being denied many of those freedoms themselves
and being forced to hide their personal identities. Risking so much while receiving
treatment second to that of a heterosexual American citizen demonstrated a level of
selflessness and dedication that I could not help but admire.
I remember coming home ceremonies, where I and other straight soldiers
could freely hug and kiss our spouses, girlfriends, or boyfriends whom we had not
seen for many months or in some cases, years. The gay soldiers, on the other hand,
could only sit meekly next to their roommate or friend, afraid to touch and
show their joy in their reunion. The profound unfairness of that moment will
always be with me: these soldiers, who had just been serving their country in a
foreign land, could not themselves exercise their rights, their freedom to express
their love. Thats one of the reasons I believe in marriage equality.
Leslie: I want Brian to have the right to get married. Marriage is an
incredibly important institution in our society: it allows two people to announce
their commitment to their families, friends, and community. Marriage is an
affirmation of the couples promise to support each other through the ups and
downs of a lifetime together. I want all of my sons to be able to marry, and have
their union recognized under the law. Brians love is no different than Davids.

12
To deny Brian the recognition of marriage under the law dishonors him, by
defining him by a single characteristic that he did not choose.
C. Story of Kristy Clark
My husband, Paul, and I live in Bountiful, Utah and have been married for
38 years. We have five children and eleven grandchildren, all of whom live within
10 miles of our home. As a mother, all I ever wanted for my children was for them
to be happy. For my third child, Weston, who is gay, one of my concerns was that
his happiness would be incomplete or limited because he would never be able to
marry or have children.
Fortunately, Weston has been able to find a life-long companion, Brandon,
and have children. Weston and Brandon met in 2000, and currently live in Salt
Lake City with their three-year-old son and two-month-old daughter. I see the
work they put into communicating with and supporting each other; the way they
complement and love each other. I am particularly impressed by what dedicated
parents they are and how they have structured their lives around their children.
Weston and Brandon are both active in the lives of their children, volunteering at
pre-school, coaching the soccer team, making their childrens needs and
development the focus of their lives.
Despite their decade-long commitment to each other and the kids that they
are raising together, Weston and Brandon were not legally permitted to get married

13
or recognized as a family in our State. This lack of legal acceptance was painful
for me. Much as we may not want to worry about what others think of us, a sense
that we are not accepted by others acts as a burr in the saddle, a constant pain or
sting, an impediment to the happiness I want for my children.
So it was with great joy that, on December 20, 2013, I learned that our
states law banning same-sex marriage had been struck down and same-sex
marriages were being performed. Because a stay might be granted at any moment,
Weston and Brandon told us that they were heading to the County Clerks office to
get married, and asked us to join them. It had been a difficult day for me that
morning I had received radiation treatment for a brain tumor. But, of course, my
husband and I drove down to the clerks office, so that we could witness and
celebrate Weston and Brandons wedding. It was an amazing scene: so much
excitement, so many committed couples who finally had a chance to have their
relationships recognized by the state.
Weston and Brandon were married at around 5:00 p.m. that day, surrounded
by family members, many friends, and hundreds of exuberant strangers. The most
important witness was their three-year-old son, whom Weston held in his arms as
he and Brandon exchanged their vows. I am so grateful that my grandchildren can
grow up knowing that society recognizes their dads commitment to each other as a
marriage.

14
As we watched Brandon and Weston exchange their vows, my husband
whispered to me, Look at Westons eyes. Ive never seen him so happy. A little
burr a little impediment to his happiness was being removed. A mother cannot
ask for anything more than to see that look in her sons eyes.
D. Story of Colette Roberts
J im and I married in 1958, when inter-racial marriage was still banned in
more than 16 states. I am the product of a mixed-race marriage my heritage
includes a bit of everything, including East Indian, French, African-American
and my family accepted my relationship with J im from the start. J ims ancestry is
a little bit British, a little bit Swiss. His mom objected at first but eventually
accepted our marriage. We were lucky in that way we did not face too many
problems, although I do remember one of J ims college classmates saying: Its
bad enough that youre marrying her. J ust dont have any kids. Needless to say,
we ignored his advice and I am so glad we did.
We have four children. I know it was sometimes difficult for the kids to
have us as parents. They were taunted and teased. I reminded them many times
that ignorance is loud and prejudice is strong, but that they should hold their
heads high because this is who they are. And all four of them have grown up to be
confident and successful individuals.

15
Nina, our second eldest, is lesbian. Nina never said anything to us about her
sexual orientation when she was in high school. She went away to college and
during one Christmas break, I found a love note that she had written to another
young woman in the trash can. Shortly after finding the note, I said to Nina, Your
dad and I know that you are gay. I told her how much we loved her and asked her
why she had not said anything. Nina started crying. She said she had met so many
young people who had been rejected by their families because of their sexual
orientation, and that although she knew we loved her, she was scared that we, too,
would reject her. It just broke my heart that any child of ours could be so scared
that we might reject her.
Did I worry about Nina once she came out? Of course. I worried that she
would experience discrimination, that she would have a tough time, simply for
being who she is. Would she find someone to love, who loved her? Would she be
able to marry, to have that security that J im and I have enjoyed, that her brother
and sisters can enjoy without question?
For the last nine years, Nina has been in a committed relationship with
Michele. So the laws against same-sex marriages impact me and my family on a
personal level. The sole purpose of such laws is to prevent gay and lesbian couples
from marrying. But the word marriage is very important in our society. If J im
and I were told that we could not use that word to describe our union, that we have

16
to use some other word to describe our relationship because the word marriage
was not available for inter-racial couples, that, to me, would mean that our
relationship did not have the respect of our society. And laws against same-sex
marriage tell my daughter, and all other gay and lesbian sons and daughters, just
that: that they do not have the respect of our society.
It wasnt that long ago that J im and I would have been barred from
marrying. The reasons why people wanted to outlaw inter-racial marriage then
very much resemble the reasons why people want to ban same-sex marriage now:
it is because both kinds of marriages are seen as somehow not right or natural.
But it is unthinkable today to imagine a law that says inter-racial couples may not
marry.
People say to me all the time that race is different because people cannot
choose their race. But thats just it: Nina did not choose to be gay; she can no
more choose to be straight than I can choose to be White.
II. SAME-SEX COUPLES JOINING IN MARRIAGE NEITHER POSE
RISKS TO THE INSTITUTION OF MARRIAGE NOR THREATEN
CHILDREN.
Even under a rational basis analysis,
2
government action that discriminates
against a discrete class of individuals cannot survive an equal protection challenge

2
PFLAG agrees with Plaintiffs that the Texas laws are subject to heightened
scrutiny. However, PFLAG will confine its discussion to responding to arguments
regarding application of rational basis review.

17
unless the classification bears a rational relation to some legitimate end. Romer,
517 U.S. at 631.
PFLAG believes that the reliance on supposed risks to the institution of
marriage or the commitment of heterosexual parents to their children as
justification for laws banning same-sex marriage is entirely misplaced. This
specious claim ignores the many children who are currently being raised by
same-sex couples, who as the Supreme Court has observed, are being
humiliate[d] by non-recognition of same-sex marriage, making it even more
difficult for children to understand the integrity and closeness of their own family
and its concord with other families in their community and in their daily lives.
Windsor, 133 S. Ct. at 2694. This contention also ignores the double standard
Texas is imposing, since the state freely permits marriages between opposite-sex
couples who are unable or unwilling to procreate.
PFLAG offers the Court the unique perspectives of its members, the very
demographic group for which the state of Texas professes concern: heterosexual
family members and close friends of same-sex couples who have witnessed the
commitments made by same-sex couples. As the following stories illustrate,
observing same-sex couples in committed relationships and marriages brings joy
and security to their heterosexual family members, and reaffirms the importance of
the institution.

18
A. Story of Arantza Zabala
I grew up as the eldest of six children. Three of my siblings two brothers
and one sister are gay. While all six of us dealt with the ordinary challenges of
growing up, the difficulties faced by my gay brothers and lesbian sister were
particularly acute because society has always treated gay men and lesbian women
differently, as somehow lesser than, straight men and women.
Because of societal prejudices, it took one of my brothers a long time to
accept the fact that he is a gay man. He spent a significant part of his life trying to
be someone he was not; he married a woman, with the marriage eventually ending
in divorce. He remained closeted at work, eventually outed and fired for his sexual
orientation. Only recently has he found employment with an inclusive employer,
and is living in an accepting community. As a straight woman and sister, both the
internal and external struggles my brother must have gone through are
unimaginable: I never had to suppress my true self in order to live up to societal
expectations, nor have I ever been ostracized by my community.
My brother, of course, is not alone. Too many gay men and lesbian women
have struggled in the face of laws and norms that treat them differently. Laws
against same-sex marriage are just one example of such laws, and I believe these
laws are unfair because they treat gay men and lesbian women, and their
relationships, differently.

19
I have two very close friends I will call them Tom and Mark whom I
have known for over ten years. Tom has two daughters from an early marriage,
and during the entire time I have known them, Tom and Mark have raised the two
girls, who are now in college. Throughout my friendship with Tom, Mark and
their daughters, I have observed the very ordinary joys and challenges they faced
as a family.
One occasion, in particular, stands out in my mind. We were at a mutual
friends house enjoying a Sunday evening barbeque. Tom, who is the more
outgoing of the two, was socializing, while Mark was sitting, together with their
older daughter, whom I will call Kelly, at the table where I was seated. Mark
asked Kelly if she had finished her homework, and Kelly responded that she had
not. Kelly had a project due the following day, and from their conversation, it was
clear to me that Mark had been involved in this project from its inception and that
Kelly still had a fair amount of work left to do. Mark stood up, called to Tom that
they needed to leave, and shepherded all of them including Tom out the door so
Kelly could go home and finish her project.
What struck me then was how normal they were as a family. While I
usually dont like that word, normal, it really fit the situation: here was a very
traditional, normal, family scene, of a parent asking his child about her
homework, the child grumbling but acknowledging that she had yet to finish it, and

20
the parent deciding that they should go home despite the childs objection. While
this moment was memorable to me because it was so representative of every
family, years later when I discussed it with Mark and Kelly, neither could
remember it. There was no difference caused by the fact that Tom and Mark are
two gay men, or that Mark is not Kellys biological parent. They were, and are, a
family who has faced their everyday challenges as a family unit.
The two girls are, and have always been, very close to Tom and Mark. Last
year, Tom and Mark finally got married in Washington State. They chose to marry
there because the two girls were going to college near the Idaho-Washington
border, and could easily travel to witness the union. Tom and Mark wed, with
their daughters as their two witnesses.
But in Idaho, Tom and Marks marriage, like the marriages of so many
same-sex couples I know, is not recognized, even though they have been together
for 17 years. Denying Tom and Mark, and other same-sex couples, recognition of
their union under the law does no good, but does a lot of harm. In the event one
partner were to become ill, the other is not automatically entitled to make medical
decisions. If one partner passes away, the other partners right to inherit may be
jeopardized. Worse yet, a parent that is, someone who has, for all intents and
purposes, carried out all the duties of parenting for 1, 5, 10 or more years could
lose his or her rights to have custody or visitation, because that parent was not

21
allowed to be legally married and was not allowed to adopt the biological child of
his or her partner.
There is no fairness in any of these outcomes. As a straight woman, I can
take for granted that if I marry, I will be able to make medical decisions for my ill
husband, receive his retirement benefits, adopt a child together, and file taxes
jointly. Many of my friends, and my brothers and sister, cannot. But their
commitment to their partners and their children is no less deserving than mine. I
hope that as a society, we will soon cross that threshold, and grant the right to
same-sex couples to marry.
B. Story of Tom and Jan Harry
Tom: I was born and raised in Ohio. J an and I married in 1971, and have
lived and served in Ohio ever since. We are both pastors in the United Methodist
Church. For the past11 years, we have served two churches together as co-pastors.
Jan: We have two children, our daughter Sonya and our son Chris. Both
children are married, but Sonyas marriage is not recognized under the laws of
Ohio.
Growing up, Sonya always dreamt of getting married and having two kids.
She wanted the whole wedding package: a beautiful white dress, a tiered wedding
cake, and a big party with her family and friends. A family friend promised to
make a fancy wedding cake for her when the big day came.

22
Tom: Sonya came out to us as an adult. At the time, she was living at home,
having completed her Masters degree and saving money to pay off her educational
debts. J an and I remember the day a little differently than Sonya we do not recall
having a hard time with her news that she is gay, but what Sonya recalls of our
reaction is different than what we remember (or have chosen to remember). If we
had a hard time in the moment, I think Sonya will agree we came to acceptance
quickly.
Jan: What I mainly recall about her coming out is my fear for our daughter.
Sonya was just embarking on her career in social services. It was 2000 our
society was even less accepting of lesbians and gays then and I worried that as a
lesbian, Sonya would encounter barriers, even hostility, in her chosen field. There
was also her dream of marriage and children I feared that dream had gone down
the tubes.
But Sonya proved us wrong. By 2002, she was in a committed relationship
with Alison, and they wanted to affirm their commitment in a ceremony before
family and friends. So we put up two big tents in our yard, and Sonya made two
beautiful white dresses, one each for herself and Alison. They had a covenant
ceremony, adapting the vows that Tom and I had used at our wedding to make
them uniquely theirs.

23
Tom: A colleague of Alisons who was a retired Catholic priest led the
ceremony, in which not only they, but their friends, spoke. While we were deeply
saddened that we could not perform the ceremony as clergy (our Church does not
recognize same-sex marriage), it was meaningful for all of us that their ceremony
was grounded in their faith. I have always believed that marriage includes God.
While the two people make the marriage, there is a sacredness in marriage that
transcends them. Sonya and Alison are women of faith, who believe in the
sacredness of their commitment. Their ceremony reflected that sacredness.
Jan: Over 100 family and friends came together to celebrate their
commitment. Several gay couples we knew said at the time, we wish we had
lived in a time when we could have done that. Our family friend even made the
tiered wedding cake as she had promised Sonya many years ago.
It wasnt all rosy, of course when some of our neighbors learned the reason
for the two big tents in our yard, they said they would go away to avoid exposing
their children to the event. But several other neighbors came to us, sharing stories
of their brother, their aunt, or another family member who is gay.
Tom: Sonya and Alison are now parents to two boys, fulfilling Sonyas
childhood dream of being a mom.
We are fortunate to live just three blocks away from our grandchildren.
Having witnessed their journey as parents, we can say, without hesitation, that

24
Sonya and Alison are conscientious and nurturing parents. They volunteer at
school, ride bikes and play sports with their kids, and have made thoughtful
decisions to select the right schools, as well as to foster the boys strong connection
with their Church. They are doing a beautiful, but also very ordinary, job as
parents, in the sense that what they do for their children is no different than what
any other couple, same-sex or opposite-sex, would want to do for their children.
Jan: Unfortunately, Ohios laws fail to recognize Sonya and Alison as a
married couple, despite the fact that in October 2013, they were legally married in
New York State. Sonya and Alison have had to incur costs that straight, married
couples do not have to incur. For example, they had to go to court to make sure
that Alison would have equal parental rights and responsibilities as Sonya, and
they have incurred greater tax burdens because their union is not recognized under
the law.
These financial issues directly impact Sonya, Alison, and our grandchildren
on a daily basis. Every dollar they have to spend to ensure legal rights for Alison
as a parent puts them behind financially. This is unequal and unfair.
Unequal treatment of Sonya and Alisons marriage under the law continues
to legitimize discrimination against them and their children. We want our
grandchildren to be treated as typically delightful children, like all the others in
their school or neighborhood. While we understand that it will take time for

25
schools, recreation programs, and the society at large to speak of parents, and not
of mom and dad, we firmly believe that legal recognition of Sonya and Alisons
relationship will help raise awareness, and with it, acceptance.
C. Story of Mike Neubecker
I was born and raised in Michigan. My wife J anice and I have been married
for 42 years and have one child, our son Lee. Until Lee came out to me at the age
of 19, I had no idea he was gay.
Lees coming out definitely challenged me. I grew up in a conservative
Catholic family, attended Catholic schools from K-12, and then was drafted into
the Army where I served for six years. Along the way, I had absorbed many
negative views about gay people. These negative views were not based on anyone
I knew personally, but from the misinformation and stereotypes so prevalent in our
culture.
When Lee first came out, I thought I had to choose between loving my son
and my faith. I loved my son, so I was not willing to cast him aside. But my faith
is also important to me, so I engaged in prayer, reading and study. It took some
time but I came to realize that the most important lesson the Bible teaches is
unconditional love. The Bible teaches us to love others and treat them as we
ourselves would like to be treated, and I see no contradiction between that teaching
and my love for Lee.

26
Opponents of same-sex marriage have said marriage should be reserved for
opposite-sex couples, because permitting same-sex couples to marry will somehow
pose risks to children, especially children in future generations. I could not
disagree more with that statement. Anyone who knows my son, Lee, and his
partner, David, would understand that their sexual orientation does not impact their
ability to be good parents. The idea that they, as a couple or as a family, could
pose a risk to anyone elses marriage or children, either now or in the future, makes
no sense.
About seven years ago, Lee and David adopted our grandchildren, Braiden
and Michael, through the foster care system. Braiden, who is now 11 years old,
wrote the following letter last year, in the hopes that it may help someone else
understand her perspective. She wrote it on her own, with minor assistance from
her teachers on spelling and grammar. Her words convey, more eloquently than I
ever could, why allowing her dads and other same-sex couples like them to marry
will not pose any risks to children.
Love is important! It doesnt matter who people love,
as long as they are happy. Everyone should have the
right to marry who he or she wants. You may not like
two men being married, but for them, its normal.
. . .
Before I lived with my two dads, my life was horrible.
My old family never treated me well. They wouldnt
stand up for me. If my foster sister fought with me, my

27
old mom would just sit there and watch me get hurt, so I
would have to fight back. Each time I was at foster
home, the foster parents promised me they would keep
me safe and treat my brother and I equally.
But they always broke their promise. I moved five times
until my dad and daddy found me. They also promised
that they would always love me and keep me safe and
they would treat me equal to my brother. I was 4 when I
met them. Now I am 10 and they have kept their
promises. They do so much for me. They never hurt me
or my brother. I feel so safe. I believe I can do anything
with my two dads. Would there be any purpose to ban the
marriage of two men or two women when they can treat
children the same or even better than other couples. I
hope that you will do the right thing and let anyone marry
who they want to.
Braiden and Michael continue to thrive under Lee and Davids care. Both
excel in school and are happy, well-adjusted children.
Lee and David recently added to their family, by obtaining legal custody of
Davids nephew, Cody. Before joining Lee and David, Cody was labeled
trouble. But since becoming part of their family, he has become a model
student, receiving straight As and making the Deans list. Cody was accepted at
four out of five universities he applied to, and has started college this fall. Cody
has been active in his local church youth group, helping to organize the regional
youth conference for their denomination.
No one can tell me that Lee and David are lesser parents, or that they and
their children are any less a family, just because Lee and David are both men.

28
They have given structure, stability, and most of all, love, to their children, and all
of them and our society are the better for it.
CONCLUSION
Permitting two committed individuals to commit their lives to each other in
marriage can do no harm to the institution of marriage. Any contention otherwise
is nothing more than irrational speculation. See City of Cleburne v. Cleburne
Living Center, 473 U.S. 432, 448 (1985) (mere negative attitudes, or fear,
unsubstantiated by factors which are properly cognizable . . . are not permissible
bases for differential treatment). Such speculation is also contrary to the evidence
presented to the District Court, the experience of jurisdictions that recognize
same-sex marriage, and the experience of PFLAGs members.
For the foregoing reasons, the order of the District Court should be affirmed.

FOLGER LEVIN LLP

J iyun Cameron Lee


29
CERTIFICATE OF COMPLIANCE WITH RULE 32(A)
Certificate of Compliance With Type-Volume Limitation, Typeface
Requirements, and Type-Style Requirements
This brief complies with the type-volume limitation of
Fed. R. App. P. 32(a)(7)(B) because this brief contains 6,874 words, excluding
parts of the brief exempted by Fed. R. App. P. 32(a)(7)(B)(iii).
This brief complies with the typeface and spacing requirements of Fed. R.
App. P 32(a)(5) and 32(a)(6) because this brief has been prepared in a
proportionally-spaced typeface using Microsoft Office Word 2007 in 14-point
Times New Roman style.

FOLGER LEVIN LLP

J iyun Cameron Lee


30
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
In accordance with Fed. R. App. P. 25(c)(1)(D) and 5th Cir. R. 25.2.5, the
undersigned certifies that on September 16, 2014, a true, correct, and complete
copy of the foregoing was filed with the Court via the Courts ECF system. The
undersigned certifies further that all participants in the appeal are represented by
some counsel who are registered CM/ECF users and that service will be
accomplished by the Appellate CM/ECF System.


FOLGER LEVIN LLP

J iyun Cameron Lee


PFLAG Amicus Brief

Încărcat de

Informații document

Drepturi de autor

Formate disponibile

Partajați acest document

Partajați sau inserați document

Opțiuni de partajare

Vi se pare util acest document?

Este necorespunzător acest conținut?

Drepturi de autor:

Formate disponibile

PFLAG Amicus Brief

Încărcat de

Drepturi de autor:

Formate disponibile

Case No.

S-ar putea să vă placă și