Prop 8

[madlori]

I haven't posted yet about the Prop 8 ruling, mostly because so many others have done it so much better than I can. It probably won't surprise any of you that I was thrilled about the decision. I was so pleased to read the ruling and see Judge Walker articulate what so many gay marriage proponents have been saying all along, namely that civil

Comments

[fabrisse]

One of the things I love about DC, you can't hold a referendum on a Civil Rights issue. People, mostly from Maryland and Virginia, keep trying to get a proposition onto our ballot and they can't -- because it's a rights issue.

I'm happy that California is on the path to join us.

[eawen_penallion]

I totally agree with the heavy sighs expressed at Tony Perkins and his blinkered view of what is or isn't right (Anything he agrees with is right, the rest - well, we're all heading straight Down Below, according to him and his friends...)

I was reading some of the transcripts and commentary during the actual trial and some of the other readers were asking why on earth Judge Walker allowed some of the defendants to testify (yeah, well there were only two anyway) considering NEITHER were qualified as 'expert witnesses' by any stretch of the definition. (The plaintiffs' witnesses were SUPERB!) I think Judge Walker probably had calculated that any attempt to restrict the defendants' testimony would rebound badly, and maybe he was expecting the news of his sexual orientation to become common knowledge. BY allowing ALL testimony in full, he CANNOT be accused of not allowing their point of view to be completely expressed and heard...

...And laughed at by the pro-equality supporters :-)

[dentar]

The only reason it's popped up again is that it's an election year and almost November. I'm sure this is a well-timed republican strategy to drag the bigots out to the polls.

[concretesphinx]

I'm pretty sure he's openly gay?
And of course the funny thing is that the pro-prop 8 people are arguing that gay marriage affects straight people, so in their opinion straight people would have a need to recuse themselves as well!
Not to mention that if they wanted him to recuse himself that would have to be requested before the trial started.

[jbberish]

He is openly gay, and attorneys from both sides had opportunities to ask for him to step down and decided not to. In the chalk one up for irony column, this same judge once took a lot of negative heat from the gay community in San Fran, because he was a lawyer for the "wrong side" back when the Gay Games were called the "Gay Olympics" -- he obviously won the case as the word Olympics is no longer used. He's more of a libertarian queer rather than a by the book Human Rights Campaign clone.