So where the hell was GLAAD and other liberal groups during the Summer/Fall of '08 when Prop 8 was on ballot? Why wasn't it declared unconstitional then? Why didn't they raise a stink over it just being on the ballot? This sets a BAD precedent; THE PEOPLE vote on an issue but 3 alleged randomly selected judges can void it. Scary thought. And no, the issue is not gay marriage; the issue is can you marry who you love? That answer should be no. Marriage must be defined or it will be exploited.
Gergen was an idiot right there. Vaughn is gay. That doesn't necessarily mean anything one way or the other. But, for Gergen to act like, "well, he's not a lefty, so he has no potential personal interest here" is just dumb and dishonest.
@ActaNonVerba71 Saying he has personal interest in this case would be like saying all black judges have to recuse themselves in civil rights cases because they have a "personal interest" in it. Everyone has a personal interest in liberty, my friend.
@jesushlincoln I'm not saying he must recuse himself, simply that is disingenuous to pretend critics are "looney" for pointing out a potential conflict of interest as Gergen appears to be doing.
looks like the courts disagree with you. However, the stats don't treat it as such. Confusing. Like they are but the arent. Affirmative action has nothing for gays, Census either. When do you stop subdividing people? Whats next, a census for sexual activity? Gay, Straight, bi, S&M, Pedophila, Animals, All the above? And the sick thing is some of those people just might make a case for their particular sexual group to be recognized and have full rights. Disgusting, I know.
David, you let slip your strong antipathy toward Liberal thinkers when you said, "this is not coming from some lefty out on the left coast. This is coming from a man with principled views of the law." You don't believe people on the left are "principled?" I have the feeling you didn't intend it to sound this way, but that's how it came out.
Walker is a disgrace and needs to step down! The decision by ONE MAN overrides the will of the majority of Californians who favor the traditional view of marriage: between only one man and one woman. This was passed TWICE in this state with similar proposal passing in most other states. Hopefully, the Supreme Court hears the appeal and overturns Walker's idiotic decision
"the will of the majority of Californians..." < you are being dishonest
It's estimated that about 35% of Californians voted "yes" on prop 8. The rest voted "no", or didn't vote.
The majority of Californians DID NOT vote for prop 8, so you don't know the "will of the majority of Califonians."
Defense lawyers couldn't answer the judge's questions (as in actually said "I don't know" a number of times), and defense witnesses helped the case AGAINST prop 8.
@rodgierad FIne, I stand corrected based on your statistics. Nevertheless, this measure passed (along with a similar one about 8 years previously). Only 5 states, plus DC have legalized such marriages. Gay marriage proposals were defeated in all 31 states in which it had been directly put to a popular vote. So that worthless Gavin Nuisance pretentiously annoucing gay marriages being legal "...whether you like it or not!" clearly did not bide well (in Calif at least).
There were no "gay marriage proposals" on any ballots anywhere-only proposed laws to make ssmarriage impossible. In the late 90s, religious groups (backed by the LDS church) began traveling state to state putting initiatives on ballots to create laws which would make it impossible for gay to even have domestic partnerships. These groups say they just want to "protect marriage", but there is much more to it which they don't mention in their multi-million dollar campaigns.
Judge Walker's appointment was a slap in the face to the people of California, who had Ronald Reagan's gay activist agenda forced on them.
Reagan, a man who used to gallivant around Hollywood wearing makeup and was a close, personal friend of Rock Hudson , initially nominated Judge Walker, who was supported by Republican governor Pete Wilson, despite the objections of Nancy Pelosi and Edward Kennedy, who are both good Catholics.
This has been flagged as spam show
So where the hell was GLAAD and other liberal groups during the Summer/Fall of '08 when Prop 8 was on ballot? Why wasn't it declared unconstitional then? Why didn't they raise a stink over it just being on the ballot? This sets a BAD precedent; THE PEOPLE vote on an issue but 3 alleged randomly selected judges can void it. Scary thought. And no, the issue is not gay marriage; the issue is can you marry who you love? That answer should be no. Marriage must be defined or it will be exploited.
valglass12 2 weeks ago
Gergen was an idiot right there. Vaughn is gay. That doesn't necessarily mean anything one way or the other. But, for Gergen to act like, "well, he's not a lefty, so he has no potential personal interest here" is just dumb and dishonest.
ActaNonVerba71 1 year ago
@ActaNonVerba71 Saying he has personal interest in this case would be like saying all black judges have to recuse themselves in civil rights cases because they have a "personal interest" in it. Everyone has a personal interest in liberty, my friend.
jesushlincoln 1 year ago 3
@jesushlincoln I'm not saying he must recuse himself, simply that is disingenuous to pretend critics are "looney" for pointing out a potential conflict of interest as Gergen appears to be doing.
ActaNonVerba71 1 year ago
@jesushlincoln Being gay and a race are not the same thing.
mikeyrobins022585 8 months ago
@mikeyrobins022585
looks like the courts disagree with you. However, the stats don't treat it as such. Confusing. Like they are but the arent. Affirmative action has nothing for gays, Census either. When do you stop subdividing people? Whats next, a census for sexual activity? Gay, Straight, bi, S&M, Pedophila, Animals, All the above? And the sick thing is some of those people just might make a case for their particular sexual group to be recognized and have full rights. Disgusting, I know.
valglass12 2 weeks ago
Judge Vaughn Walker is openly gay so it is hardly a daring ruling. The US Supreme Court will vacate it in a few years in a 5-4 decision.
007ObiWan 1 year ago
David, you let slip your strong antipathy toward Liberal thinkers when you said, "this is not coming from some lefty out on the left coast. This is coming from a man with principled views of the law." You don't believe people on the left are "principled?" I have the feeling you didn't intend it to sound this way, but that's how it came out.
fostercourt 1 year ago
Walker is a disgrace and needs to step down! The decision by ONE MAN overrides the will of the majority of Californians who favor the traditional view of marriage: between only one man and one woman. This was passed TWICE in this state with similar proposal passing in most other states. Hopefully, the Supreme Court hears the appeal and overturns Walker's idiotic decision
frtw4428 1 year ago
@frtw4428
"the will of the majority of Californians..." < you are being dishonest
It's estimated that about 35% of Californians voted "yes" on prop 8. The rest voted "no", or didn't vote.
The majority of Californians DID NOT vote for prop 8, so you don't know the "will of the majority of Califonians."
Defense lawyers couldn't answer the judge's questions (as in actually said "I don't know" a number of times), and defense witnesses helped the case AGAINST prop 8.
The judge did his job.
rodgierad 1 year ago
@rodgierad FIne, I stand corrected based on your statistics. Nevertheless, this measure passed (along with a similar one about 8 years previously). Only 5 states, plus DC have legalized such marriages. Gay marriage proposals were defeated in all 31 states in which it had been directly put to a popular vote. So that worthless Gavin Nuisance pretentiously annoucing gay marriages being legal "...whether you like it or not!" clearly did not bide well (in Calif at least).
frtw4428 1 year ago
@frtw4428
There were no "gay marriage proposals" on any ballots anywhere-only proposed laws to make ssmarriage impossible. In the late 90s, religious groups (backed by the LDS church) began traveling state to state putting initiatives on ballots to create laws which would make it impossible for gay to even have domestic partnerships. These groups say they just want to "protect marriage", but there is much more to it which they don't mention in their multi-million dollar campaigns.
rodgierad 1 year ago
Judge Walker's appointment was a slap in the face to the people of California, who had Ronald Reagan's gay activist agenda forced on them.
Reagan, a man who used to gallivant around Hollywood wearing makeup and was a close, personal friend of Rock Hudson , initially nominated Judge Walker, who was supported by Republican governor Pete Wilson, despite the objections of Nancy Pelosi and Edward Kennedy, who are both good Catholics.
sleeplesseye 1 year ago
@sleeplesseye
"Ronald Reagan's gay activist agenda..."
BWAAAAAAAHHHHH!!!!!
Reagan was kryptonite to gay activists!!!
Walker wasn't nominated for his orientation, you whacko! Pelosi was against his nomination because he was "too conservative"!
What planet do you live on?
rodgierad 1 year ago