From the horse's, er, mouth:
It's...extremely problematic that Judge Walker is a practicing homosexual himself. He should have recused himself from this case, because his judgment is clearly compromised by his own sexual proclivity. The fundamental issue here is whether homosexual conduct, with all its physical and psychological risks, should be promoted and endorsed by society. That’s why the people and elected officials accountable to the people should be setting marriage policy, not a black-robed tyrant whose own lifestyle choices make it impossible to believe he could be impartial.
--Tim Wildmon, president of the American Family Association
Mmm...K. How quickly the dyed-in-the-wool opponents of identity politics can take a U-turn. Funny how that works. From now on, may we demand that Catholic judges recuse themselves when pedophile priests are brought before them? Black judges, when affirmative action is challenged?
And then there's that so-called mosque (actually a Muslim cultural centre) to be built in New York, not at Ground Zero, but two blocks away. Never mind: a Muslim is a Muslim. Just don't build any Christian churches anywhere near the Alfred P. Murrah Building in Oklahoma City. Fair ball?
1 comment:
I'm still chasing this down, but the Prop 8 haters may not have legal standing to appeal. To wit, there's no governmental entity involved, yet a state constitutional amendment is involved. Since neither Gov Schwartzenegger nor AG Brown were involved in the orgiainal case, there is no governmental involvement.
No governmental interest, no appeal. Prop 8 could be quite dead.
Post a Comment