Rights Deniers Whine About Public Spotlight In Court

Procrustes Stretched

And you say, "Oh my God, am I here all alone?"
Dec 1, 2008
60,153
7,426
1,840
Positively 4th Street
Why do the anti ray marriage rights people fear? Like cockroaches many are used to playing in the dark.

I suspect a few are afraid of the skeletons in their closets may be shaken.

Plus deciet, deception and lies fear the light.

Backers of Proposition 8 filed an emergency petition with the U.S. 9th Circuit Court of Appeals today to prevent the broadcast of a federal trial on the constitutionality California's ban on same-sex marriage.
The trial, scheduled to start Monday, was supposed to be videotaped by the court and disseminated on YouTube and in other federal courthouses.

Andy Pugno, a lawyer for the Proposition 8 campaign, said the broadcast would be unprecedented and would violate federal court rules. He said the scheduled broadcast "collides with the longstanding policy of the federal courts not to televise trials."

"Many supporters of Proposition 8 who are being dragged into this case are fearful about being questioned about their personal, political and religious beliefs on the stand and having that televised," Pugno said.
 
One idiot says he fears for his life? WTF?

This douchebagh most definitely has something to hide. What a creep.
The helps cause a crisis and walks away from defending whatever shitty principles he may have imagined having.

geesh!
U.S. District Court Judge Vaughn R. Walker, who is presiding over the San Francisco trial, said Wednesday that he favored a limited public broadcast of the trial as part of a trial project authorized by Judge Alex Kozinski, chief judge of the 9th Circuit.

The campaign today also asked Walker to stay any order authorizing a public broadcast.
[Updated at 3:08 p.m.: One of the sponsors of Proposition 8 also asked Walker today to be removed as a defendant in the case because he feared for his life. Hak-Shing William Tam was one of five campaign sponsors who intervened in the case after Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger and Atty. Gen. Jerry Brown declined to defend the initiative. He said the trial would bring him unwarranted publicity and possible retribution from supporters of same-sex marriage.]
--Maura Dolan
 
SCOTUS Put Freedom Of Info On Hold.

stay tuned

Civil Rights Argument: Due Process & Equal Treatment
Judge Walker set a questioning tone early, repeatedly interrupting an opening statement by Theodore B. Olson, a lead counsel for the plaintiffs - two gay couples who filed their suit in the spring after the California Supreme Court upheld Proposition 8. The judge asked Mr. Olson why domestic partnerships, which are allowed in California, were not sufficient for gay couples and wondered what kind of evidence would be introduced to show harm to same-sex couples who are not allowed to marry

Mr. Olson, a prominent conservative litigator whose co-counsel is David Boies, his foe from the 2000 battle over the presidential election, countered that marriage "was a building block of family, neighborhoods and community" in America, and that to deny gays that right was to effectively make them second-class citizens. Proposition 8, he said, "isolated gay men and lesbian individuals and said 'you're different'''
 
Last edited:
SCOTUS Put Freedom Of Info On Hold.

stay tuned
The defenders of Prop. 8 get to make their case in a legal venue instead of the public square...where deciet, deception and disinformation reigned.
Charles J. Cooper, the lead counsel for the defense, opened his case by arguing that limitation of marriage to men and women was a tradition "across history, across cultures and across societies" meant to "channel natural procreative activities between men and women" into stable relationships.

But Judge Walker interrupted Mr. Cooper to ask about other marital benefits like companionship and support, and he noted that there were no restrictions on marriage for heterosexual couples who could not or did not want to have children. The judge also questioned the assertion by Mr. Cooper that same-sex marriage would "radically alter" traditional marriage and could decrease marriage rates for heterosexuals.
weirdest argument yet. :rofl:

I wonder if Crusader Frank in hiw nitwit brain thinks a hetero marriage could be in danger because gays get married?
 
Last edited:
Why do the anti ray marriage rights people fear? Like cockroaches many are used to playing in the dark.

I suspect a few are afraid of the skeletons in their closets may be shaken.

Plus deciet, deception and lies fear the light.

Backers of Proposition 8 filed an emergency petition with the U.S. 9th Circuit Court of Appeals today to prevent the broadcast of a federal trial on the constitutionality California's ban on same-sex marriage.
The trial, scheduled to start Monday, was supposed to be videotaped by the court and disseminated on YouTube and in other federal courthouses.

Andy Pugno, a lawyer for the Proposition 8 campaign, said the broadcast would be unprecedented and would violate federal court rules. He said the scheduled broadcast "collides with the longstanding policy of the federal courts not to televise trials."

"Many supporters of Proposition 8 who are being dragged into this case are fearful about being questioned about their personal, political and religious beliefs on the stand and having that televised," Pugno said.

What's a ray marriage?
 
I think it's a bad idea to film or have cameras at ANY trials. It increases distraction, showmanship and playing to an audience over justice.
 
Why do the anti ray marriage rights people fear? Like cockroaches many are used to playing in the dark.

I suspect a few are afraid of the skeletons in their closets may be shaken.

Plus deciet, deception and lies fear the light.

Backers of Proposition 8 filed an emergency petition with the U.S. 9th Circuit Court of Appeals today to prevent the broadcast of a federal trial on the constitutionality California's ban on same-sex marriage.
The trial, scheduled to start Monday, was supposed to be videotaped by the court and disseminated on YouTube and in other federal courthouses.

Andy Pugno, a lawyer for the Proposition 8 campaign, said the broadcast would be unprecedented and would violate federal court rules. He said the scheduled broadcast "collides with the longstanding policy of the federal courts not to televise trials."

"Many supporters of Proposition 8 who are being dragged into this case are fearful about being questioned about their personal, political and religious beliefs on the stand and having that televised," Pugno said.

It's obvious....they don't wanna become targets for the left like Sarah Palin, George W. Bush, Dick Cheney, Sean Hannity, Glenn Beck, Rush Limbaugh, Trent Lott, Ronald Reagan, Gerald R. Ford, Mel Gibson, Anita Bryant, Ann Coulter, Machelle Malkin, .....etc.

That exactly what they will become. Targets for violence.
 
Last edited:
SCOTUS Put Freedom Of Info On Hold.

stay tuned
So here we have Ed Meese whining...
...there is no question that virtually every ruling by Judge Walker so far has put advocates of traditional marriage at an increasing disadvantage.

Despite this, during the trial, the supporters of Proposition 8 will work hard to demonstrate that it was rational for voters to conclude that marriage is a unique institution that promotes the interests of child-rearing, and that those interests are broader than the personal special interests of the adults involved.

It remains to be seen whether traditional marriage, and the rights of the voters who approved Proposition 8, will prevail in Judge Walker's courtroom. Most likely, no matter how the judge rules, the Perry case is destined for appeals and a final decision in the United States Supreme Court. But it is during the present trial that the facts in the case will be determined, and it is there that the two sides should be able to present their cases on a level playing field.

Edwin Meese III,
and here Edwin is disingenuous...
promotes the interests of child-rearing, and that those interests are broader than the personal special interests of the adults involved.
Gay marraiges usually lead to the couples having their own childern (surrogate sperm or eggs) and adopting....which would ''promote... the interests of child-rearing.''
 
Why do the anti ray marriage rights people fear? Like cockroaches many are used to playing in the dark.

I suspect a few are afraid of the skeletons in their closets may be shaken.

Plus deciet, deception and lies fear the light.

Backers of Proposition 8 filed an emergency petition with the U.S. 9th Circuit Court of Appeals today to prevent the broadcast of a federal trial on the constitutionality California's ban on same-sex marriage.
The trial, scheduled to start Monday, was supposed to be videotaped by the court and disseminated on YouTube and in other federal courthouses.

Andy Pugno, a lawyer for the Proposition 8 campaign, said the broadcast would be unprecedented and would violate federal court rules. He said the scheduled broadcast "collides with the longstanding policy of the federal courts not to televise trials."

"Many supporters of Proposition 8 who are being dragged into this case are fearful about being questioned about their personal, political and religious beliefs on the stand and having that televised," Pugno said.

What's a ray marriage?

Hmmm a typo that couldn't be fixed because the system fears me being able to go back and play with posts?

ss_crusader_frank_nitwittisims.jpg

What's that hump on your back? Oh, yeah...you got thrown out of Notre Dame.
 
Why do the anti ray marriage rights people fear? Like cockroaches many are used to playing in the dark.

I suspect a few are afraid of the skeletons in their closets may be shaken.

Plus deciet, deception and lies fear the light.

Backers of Proposition 8 filed an emergency petition with the U.S. 9th Circuit Court of Appeals today to prevent the broadcast of a federal trial on the constitutionality California's ban on same-sex marriage.
The trial, scheduled to start Monday, was supposed to be videotaped by the court and disseminated on YouTube and in other federal courthouses.

Andy Pugno, a lawyer for the Proposition 8 campaign, said the broadcast would be unprecedented and would violate federal court rules. He said the scheduled broadcast "collides with the longstanding policy of the federal courts not to televise trials."

"Many supporters of Proposition 8 who are being dragged into this case are fearful about being questioned about their personal, political and religious beliefs on the stand and having that televised," Pugno said.

It's obvious....they don't wanna become targets for the left like Sarah Palin, George W. Bush, Dick Cheney, Sean Hannity, Glenn Beck, Rush Limbaugh, Trent Lott, Ronald Reagan, Gerald R. Ford, Mel Gibson, Anita Bryant, Ann Coulter, Machelle Malkin, .....etc.

That exactly what they will become. Targets for violence.

Was that sarcasm?
 
I really love liberals sometimes. They feel the only time it's OK to be hateful and consistently ad hominem is when you disagree with their conception of what's right. Of course, they reject the idea that morals are absolute and that you should be able to force them on people. They just believe you should be able to show unyielding vitriol for that position. And you'd deserve it, because you're intolerant, while they're...

Something else. I guess.
 
I really love liberals sometimes. They feel the only time it's OK to be hateful and consistently ad hominem is when you disagree with their conception of what's right. Of course, they reject the idea that morals are absolute and that you should be able to force them on people. They just believe you should be able to show unyielding vitriol for that position. And you'd deserve it, because you're intolerant, while they're...

Something else. I guess.

yeah, yeah, yeah...here is a voice from right wing lgf web site talking from experience...not from his ass:
''The kinds of hate mail and the kinds of attacks I am getting from the right wing are way beyond anything I got when I was criticizing the left or even Islam.''
nuf said
d.
 
Last edited:
I think it's a bad idea to film or have cameras at ANY trials. It increases distraction, showmanship and playing to an audience over justice.

While I disagree with your position, I totally agree with the points used in your reasons.

The judge ruled against media request for your reasons. That is why the camera feed and more is severely restricted. It will be controlled.

You have little faith in Americans and little understanding of how important it is to allow the people access to PUBLIC hearings.
 

Forum List

Back
Top