Discussion in 'Law and Justice System' started by Nic_Driver, Jun 14, 2011.
Gay judge's same-sex marriage ruling upheld - US news - Crime & courts - msnbc.com
With all the problems we face as a nation I could give a shit if gays and lesbians want to marry. It does not affect me, my wife, my marriage and my family in any way.
A non issue.
Or any other factor, for that matter.
A pathetic act of desperation on the part of the Prop 8 supporters.
The judge being gay isn't a good reason to throw out his ruling, but in all honestly, you'd have to be an idiot if you think the pro-Prop 8 side had a chance in hell at winning. Not only did the Attorney General and Governor refuse to defend it in court, but the judge they got is a gay man who lives in San Francisco.
And it's not speculation whether the judge could rule fairly on the case. It's obvious he couldn't, since he didn't. He was overturned three different times by a higher court (including once by the Supreme Court) during the initial trial, and he included in his ruling dubious "findings of fact" that were really guesses and predictions on what may or may not happen as a result of legal gay marriage.
The lead attorney fighting Prop 8 is a conservative Republican formerly the Solicitor General for the Bush administration.
His sound conservative based argument that Prop 8 is UNCONSTITUTIONAL won the case.
Nothing to do with the gay boogeyman. Olson's argument that allowing same sex couples to marry does not diminish the pro-creative aspect of marriage in any way and it does not denigrate the institution of marriage for heterosexuals in any way was fact.
The facts were that the proponents of Prop 8 included in their literature "Protect your children from learning that gay marriage is okay" and that is animus or ill feeling and hostility. Unacceptable.
The conservative argument that Olson made is that marriage between consenting adults be they gay or straight is a right belonging to Californians, TO PERSONS. It is not a right belonging to the state of California.
Or any state.
Santorum, comments? Comments?
Google his name to see his thoughts on gay marriage.
Many people think the gay judge should have recused himself. I don't. Would the same principle apply if a heterosexual judge had to decide a heterosexual claim, based upon the law?
It would be a non-issue as it should if more Americans had a better understanding of the Constitutions fundamental principle of the rule of law.
Great news, thanks.
This is good news, a victory for civil rights
Unfortunately, this will cause many fights
Separate names with a comma.