I admit, I wish Judge Walker were straight

[dsc]

I can't help but think that if a judge who were deacon at a Southern Baptist church and ruled against us we would have considered him biased. Plus if he is in a relationship he might gain financially by this ruling. I love the ruling but admit to being worried that this will become a valid point of attack.

[shraby]

1. He backed up his ruling with numerous points of fact.

In a court of law, facts are what counts and will be considered. Inuendo about his sexual orientation cannot become a valid point of anything or, the hint that he "might" gain financially by the ruling...what is that supposed to mean besides more inuendo?

[Jumping John]

2. Yea but judges are so special just 'cause they are judges. They used to be lawyers too. So yea. n/t

[Angry Dragon]

3. Would not the same be true if a straight judge ruled differently??

[Warpy]

4. The fact that he isn't produced a magnificent ruling

Have you read it? He backed everything up with references to peer reviewed research and demolished every silly secular argument Blankenhorn made. The ruling had the effect of including every expert witness in the country within it. I'm astonished by his thoroughness in this thing. It was well worth waiting for.

The only way it can be overturned is by setting a precedent that any group's civil rights can be abolished by majority vote, something the framers clearly wanted to avoid, even as they enshrined slavery and withheld the vote from women. Those have been rectified.

It's going to be fascinating to see this play out.

[ruggerson]

14. exactly +1 n/t

[still_one]

5. This ruling was entirely based on Contitutional considerations. Also keep in mind that Ted Olsen

one of the most right wing people you would find, was arguing that Prop 8 was not Constitutional in denying a specific group of people certain rights

[Bumblebee]

6. Would it be equally "valid" if a black judge ruled against discrimination

in a race-discrimination case? I agree that there would be less ammunition for the other side if the judge was not gay but that does not make it valid.

[dsc]

7. I get that

but I don't want this to have any way of going down.

[boobooday]

8. From what I understand, and have read

His ruling stands on its own merits. He made the argument.

And I think the fact that is is a GOP appointee, and that the plaintiff's case was argued by Ted Olsen, gives it extra credibility.

[Q3JR4]

9. If he were straight it would make it harder for them to attack him,

but I'm sure he knew what he was getting into when he took the case.

If the only arguments they can come up with are personal attacks against the judge rather than attacks against the facts in the case, then we've already won.

Q3JR4.

[WingDinger]

10. Yes, the gays must beg, and only straight people determine their fate, Nice.

[NMMNG]

11. I don't

Yes, the bigots are just using his orientation as yet another reason to trash the ruling. But it wouldn't matter if he were a heterosexual Christian. They'd still be screaming. Olson and Boies are as straight as you get and the RRRWers whined about them.


Walker had no more reason to recuse himself than any Christian judge does when a Christian is the subject of the case, or a white judge does when a white person is on trial, a man does when a man is on trial, etc. The bigots just have to accept the fact that they had no case, they presented no evidence, and they lost fair and square.

[bigwillq]

12. He is who he is.

Just like all of us.

[ruggerson]

13. Actually I like the fact that he's a gay, conservative Republican

His decision, rightly or wrongly, will more than likely resonate even louder with Justice Kennedy, because of who he is.

[dsc]

15. To be clear I don't think he was biased and think the opinion is a strong one

but I also have to say it would be much harder to attack without that issue. It is nice to be two for two on this though (counting the one in MA).

[sui generis]

16. not at all. How would it be less potential bias if he were heterosexual?

If we feel any discomfort about his sexuality, then we're kind of tacitly agreeing that they might have a point.

[dsc]

17. we can't simultaniously argue that this doesn't affect straights

and that they would be as biased against as we would be in favor. Clearly religious conservatives would be biased against which is why I mentioned deacon at a southern baptist church in my op. It is hard to make an argument that gay people wouldn't gain from eliminating this barrier to marriage. If it doesn't affect straight people, and it doesn't, then we can't turn around and say they would be biased simply because they are straight.

[PanoramaIsland]

21. Which is why we shouldn't imply bias from sexuality, whether that sexuality is gay or straight. n/t

[GodlessBiker]

18. No way. It's about time we started controlling our own future. I'm glad an LGBT judge

is helping to create equality for us.

[mitchtv]

19. +1

that's the way the cookie crumbles. God knows we've had enough straight Xians deciding our future. like two face in the WH.

[PanoramaIsland]

20. I get that from an appearance angle, but couldn't you argue straight folks are "biased"

on matters of sexuality as well? I mean, NOBODY comes without sexual bias - even asexual folks have sexual bias, in that they are biased against sex.

That being the case, the insinuation that Judge Walker is gay and therefore unfit to rule on Prop 8 is simply an insult to all queer people everywhere - implying that we are categorically unfit and unable to be objective on matters of sexuality, whereas straight people -are- fit and objective.

[WillParkinson]

22. Another thought...

Anyone who is straight likely knows people who are gay. Even subconsciously that could influence their decision. No one, except perhaps a computer, would be non-biased one way or another.

Though I do know some folks might be biased and still make the right ruling based on the rule of law. They don't have to like it, but the law is the law.