Cali Prop 8: Walker's ruling stands

Submitted by on

Printer-friendly version

Author: 

Taxonomy upgrade extras: 

I've just read this Independent article about the recent attempts to overrule Judge Vaughn Walker's 2008 ruling on Proposition 8.

So I then hopped onto Google News, and discovered that Judge James Ware has now ruled that Walker's judgement stands. Here's one article briefly mentioning the decision, and the Google News feed.

One of the Indy commentators had an interesting argument: "Maybe they can revisit the marriage laws drafted by hetrosexuals too... After all, there are likely conflicts of interest."

-oOo-

Meanwhile, the Indy also mentions the New York Senate is currently mulling over a bill to make gay marriage legal. Apparently the decision is still on a knife-edge, with the bill currently one or two votes short of passing - but there are several undecided senators.

Comments

I wondered how anyone could actually justify that...

Submitted by on

Andrea Lena's picture

....heterosexuals have made rulings about the same issues without objection even though that would be an obvious conflict of interest as well, and they've never been disqualified or asked to recuse. Any asexual judges out there? To get serious, any ruling needs to be based firmly in law. While public opinion can be highly influential, opinions can change, and then things are subject to 'democracy' rather than law. Democracy, if i may repeat something I once heard, can be defined as "two foxes and a chicken deciding what to have for dinner." In Iowa, thankfully the foxes are vegetarians. But we chickens are stuck with some very carnivorous foxes in the rest of the country.


Dio vi benedica tutti
Con grande amore e di affetto
Andrea Lena

  

To be alive is to be vulnerable. Madeleine L'Engle
Love, Andrea Lena

Sigh.

Submitted by on

Look, only people have votes, OK?

Asexual jugdes? There always are the old stand-bys...

Submitted by on

The old Magic 8-Ball toy. A dart board. Flipping a coin?

That or a minor operation could make some real easy, you know, snip snip? Hey it works for cats and dogs.

-- grin --

What gall to claim"conflict of interest" but then the *moral police* have few morals. What they have done with these "Defense of Marriage" laws is a sin. I am embarrassed my supposedly progressive state, Wisconsin, passed such an abomination.

Whatever happened to live and let live, let he who is without out sin cast the first stone? When did Senator McCarthy come back from the dead?

John in Wauwatosa

John in Wauwatosa

Cali Prop 8: Walker's ruling stands

Submitted by on

What about marriage between a post op woman and her partner?

    Stanman
May Your Light Forever Shine
    Stanman
May Your Light Forever Shine

Here is the point, Stan.

Submitted by on

You have a majority view of 'straight' birth-sex people who consider that the original crotch equipment determines who you are. You have a branch of feminism that considers all transwomen to be heterosexual men who have their genitalia reassigned so that they can rape women in the showers with the bits they, er, had removed.
Overlying all of that is a perversion of religion that says that the Great Beard in the Sky has spoken as soon as the chromosomes first fission.
And you ask what happens post op?

Sorry all, bad day.

It was lost from the start

Submitted by on

Breanna Ramsey's picture

This appeal was so weak a cabbage could have shot holes in it. The argument used in the attempt to vacate Judge Walker's ruling could just as easily be applied to a married heterosexual judge hearing the case; after all, one of the primary points of opposition to same sex marriage is it somehow degrades the institution of marriage so a married judge, it could be argued, would have a vested interest in supporting Prop 8.

A decision in favor of the appeal would have had far greater consequences, however; every rape or domestic violence case presided over by a female judge, every racial issue decided by a minority judge, could have been questioned if this argument had been accepted. It's not at all surprising Judge Ware upheld Judge Walker's ruling; I'd frankly be shocked if it took him more than five minutes to reach that conclusion.

Scott

Your Grace, I have only one question. Do you wish this man crippled, or dead?
David Weber's Honor Harrington -- Flag in Exile
http://genomorph.tglibrary.com/

Bree

The difference between fiction and reality? Fiction has to make sense.
-- Tom Clancy

http://genomorph.tglibrary.com/ (Currently broken)
http://bree-ramsey314.livejournal.com/
Twitter: @genomorph

It's sad

Submitted by on

Very shortly we'll be hearing the bigots calling for Ware to be impeached as a judge because he dared to support the law. Judge Walker was a judge who qualifies as conservative in the good way (less governmental interference) and to see him tarnished unfairly is frankly sickening. I also agree that if the appeal had been upheld and Walker's ruling overturned...then I would like to have seen every single heterosexual judge recuse themselves from any case involving heterosexuals.

This is about people having the same rights as others. How is that unfair??
Shannon Johnston

Samirah M. Johnstone

Thankful...

Submitted by on

... that the obvious ruling was made in this case. Even with the people trying to uphold Prop 8 doing so on questionable standing grounds, the right ruling was made. At least California's judicial system gets one thing right. :)

If the people that want to "defend (opposite sex) marriage" want to apply their logic, they'd push for the removal of the term marriage from the law, and have the law only recognize civil partnerships (and extend the concept of civil partnerships to opposite sex couples as well). Then they could regulate marriage however they wanted as a private act, and nobody would be discriminated against.

But nah, that's too logical for these bigots. :)

More like this