Is there anything sillier than the anti-gay camp trying to get their utter embarrassing defeat in court – when they could provide no rational argument against marriage equality at all – overturned on the grounds that the judge is apparently gay?
Today, a court in San Francisco heard arguments about one of the most contemptible legal claims advanced in decades: that Vaughn Walker, the federal judge who voted last spring to strike down California’s ban on gay marriage, was too gay to decide the case fairly…
They don’t say that Walker, who retired from the federal bench last February following his Prop 8 ruling, is biased in favor of gay marriage because he is gay. Instead ProtectMarriage argues—see this April 25 motion to vacate Walker’s ruling—that Walker, who has lived with his partner for 10 years, may have ruled for gay marriage so that he himself could get married and someday enjoy the benefits of marriage.
What they’ve failed to notice, there, is that their entire argument is that marriage equality affects them, as straight Christians, and therefore precisely the same objection could be made of any straight Christian judge. It either affects everyone or it doesn’t; if it affects them, then their preferred option is also “biased” – if it doesn’t, then they should have no standing to bring their case.
Seriously, these are not rational people. How long are we going to pander to their nasty stupidity?