A reader writes:

Watching and reading Yes on 8 ads, I dismissed their "protect the children" themes as patently absurd - how could thinking people believe that allowing individuals who love each other make a lasting commitment to each other be a threat to children?  How could creating more stable families be a threat to families?  But what the experts' testimony at the trial brings out is that the real issue isn't gay marriage - it's the fact of homosexuality. 

Maybe that should have been obvious, but with all the advances in gay rights over the past decades I started to take it for granted that we could have a referendum on this issue decided on the merits of gay marriage itself - not visceral reactions to the very fact of homosexuality.  I was naive.  As your recent post quoting DiA suggested, this issue can only be considered rationally, maturely, intelligently in a courtroom.  That is the only (somewhat) public forum at this point in time that is going to let these historical, cultural and sociological arguments actually be heard and weighed fairly. 

Regardless of the outcome, I think that this trial will be powerful and carry a great deal of weight.  The right conversations are happening.  The right questions are being asked.  And even though we don't get to see it, there are people like the bloggers at Prop 8 Trial Tracker making sure the country knows what's being said. 
 

We want to hear what you think about this article. Submit a letter to the editor or write to letters@theatlantic.com.