|
''8'' (or ''8 the Play'') is an American play that portrays the closing arguments of ''Perry v. Schwarzenegger'', a federal trial that led to the overturn of Proposition 8—an amendment eliminating rights of same-sex couples to marry in California. It was created by Dustin Lance Black in light of the court's denial of a motion to release a video recording of the trial and to give the public a true account of what transpired in the courtroom. The play is written in the style of verbatim theatre reenactment, using transcripts from the trial, journalist records, and media interviews from the plaintiffs, defendants and proponents involved. ''8'' first premiered on September 19, 2011 at the Eugene O'Neill Theatre in New York City, and later broadcast worldwide from the Ebell of Los Angeles on March 3, 2012. The American Foundation for Equal Rights (AFER) and Broadway Impact, sponsors of the play, have licensed the play for readings nationwide on college campuses and in community theaters free of charge, as an educational tool.〔See *(【引用サイトリンク】url=http://www.8theplay.com/stage-a-reading/ ) * * * *Long Beach, CA: (【引用サイトリンク】url=http://www.lbpost.com/life/2000000819-8-the-play-lb ) *Sacramento, CA: (【引用サイトリンク】url=http://www.sacramentopress.com/headline/74589/Dustin_Lance_Blacks_8_Comes_to_Sacramento/ ) *Sacramento, CA: 〕 A radio adaptation was broadcast on JOY 94.9, a GLBTIQ community radio station in Melbourne, Australia, on 27 March 2014. ==Context== In May 2009, AFER filed a lawsuit, ''Perry v. Schwarzenegger'', in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California on behalf of plaintiffs, two same-sex couples, to challenge a voter-approved constitutional amendment, known as Proposition 8, that eliminated same-sex couples' right to marry in the state. The same-sex couples were represented by David Boies and former U.S. Solicitor General Theodore Olson, two high profile attorneys who opposed each other in the U.S. Supreme Court case, ''Bush v. Gore''. During the trial, the plaintiffs presented expert witnesses of which nine the court found "were amply qualified to offer opinion testimony on the subjects identified" and "offered credible opinion testimony on the subjects identified." The defense presented only two expert witnesses who were willing to testify under oath. David Blankenhorn, who had been allowed to testify for the defense, was ultimately judged as lacking "the qualifications to offer opinion testimony".〔 During Blankenhorn's cross-examination, he identified 23 benefits of adopting same-sex marriage, published on page 203 of his book "''The Future of Marriage''", stating only 5 with which he disagreed. Some of the benefits with which he did agree included that it would: improve the happiness and well-being of gays, lesbians, their children and family members; increase the proportion of gays and lesbians in stable, committed relationships; lead to higher living standards for same-sex couples; lead to fewer children growing up in state institutions and more growing up in loving adoptive and foster families; decrease the amount of anti-gay prejudice and hate crimes; and decrease the number of those warily viewed as "other" in society, further reaching the American idea.〔(【引用サイトリンク】url=http://www.afer.org/wp-content/uploads/2010/01/Perry-Vol-12-1-27-10.pdf )〕 Kenneth P. Miller admitted that he lacked awareness of official anti-gay discrimination and harassment, anti-discrimination statutes, and scholarly literature on gay issues.〔(【引用サイトリンク】url=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PSlrDXl8e_g )〕 Due to his lack of focus on gay and lesbian issues in his research; his lack of basis for comparison; his lack of familiarity with relevant research; his inability to confirm he had "personally identified the vast majority of the sources that he cited in his expert report"; and his admission that gays and lesbians face discrimination and "current discrimination is relevant to a group's political power", the court ruled that his testimony was "entitled to little weight...only to the extent...amply supported by reliable evidence."〔 Opponents of same-sex marriage were unable to provide credible evidence proving their claim that same-sex marriage would harm society or the institution of marriage. Instead, the defense witnesses consequently testified favorably for the plaintiffs' case. On August 4, 2010, Chief District Court Judge Vaughn Walker ruled that the Proposition 8 ban on same-sex marriage violated the Due Process and Equal Protection Clauses of the Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution, and that there was no legitimate reason to deny same-sex couples the fundamental right of marriage. 抄文引用元・出典: フリー百科事典『 ウィキペディア（Wikipedia）』 ■ウィキペディアで「8 (play)」の詳細全文を読む スポンサード リンク
|