Image from source, Los Angeles Times |
The story that bugs me though is the one permeating the right-wing blogosphere, that one judge took away a democratic vote. He didn't. He ruled that the proposition was un-Constitutional. You can't pass un-Constitutional laws, no matter how many people vote for them. Worse, is the wrong depiction of Walker as a liberal, gay, activist judge whose biases conjured up a bogus ruling. My guess is, many people saying this 1) didn't read the decision, 2) don't know that Walker was appointed by George H.W. Bush, with an attempt made by Ronald Reagan, 3) don't know that Nanci Pelosi opposed Walker's appointment, thinking he was anti-gay. Also, while Walker's sexual orientation has been speculated about, he's not "out." Moreover, even if he were, he was assigned this case, he did not pick it.
Ultimately, it makes no difference that Walker might be gay. If he were straight, he'd still possibly have biases and motivations in the case. It's all irrelevant anyway, if you've followed the case, or read the decision. The defense was more than weak, it was almost nonexistent. The funny part is, the commentary from the right keeps trumpeting many of the same points the defense made, as though they weren't completely discredited in the trial.
[Excerpt]
Proposition 8 supporters are unhappy that the voter-approved ban on gay marriage has been overturned by a federal judge
When a federal judge last week struck down California's Proposition 8 as unconstitutional, proponents of same-sex marriage cheered the decision at rallies in West Hollywood and San Francisco.
Public displays of displeasure at U.S. District Chief Judge Vaughn R. Walker's ruling were far and few between. . .
Read more at: Los Angeles Times
No comments:
Post a Comment
Have something to say to us? Post it here!