Page 5 of 6 FirstFirst ... 3456 LastLast
Results 41 to 50 of 55

Thread: Gay jurist in Proposition 8 case had no legal obligation to remove himself, judge rul

  1. #41
    Sage
    Hicup's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    Rochester, NY
    Last Seen
    12-07-17 @ 03:18 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Very Conservative
    Posts
    7,846

    Re: Gay jurist in Proposition 8 case had no legal obligation to remove himself, judge

    Quote Originally Posted by Kal'Stang View Post
    What I find in this case is that the supporters of prop 8 agreed to let Walker preside over the case knowing that he was gay. They could have asked for a different judge and used these arguements to state why he should have to recuse himself before the trial. But they didn't, they let him be the judge. Again, knowing that he was gay.

    In anycase according to Judge Ware, Walkers ruling will not be thrown out.

    Judge's Prop. 8 ruling upheld
    It may very well turn out that way, Kal. My arguments were in direct relation to how I interpret the law as it is written. I think it isn't unreasonable to suspect a strong degree of non-impartiality in this case. I'm not privy to all the details, nor does it interest me so much that I would spend a great deal of time on it, but on the surface I think that Walker should have recused himself.


    Tim-
    “When buying and selling are controlled by legislation, the first things to be bought and sold are legislators.” - P. J. O’Rourke
    “Socialism is great until you run out of someone elses money” Margaret Thatcher

  2. #42
    Outer space potato man

    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Last Seen
    Today @ 07:16 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    51,847

    Re: Gay jurist in Proposition 8 case had no legal obligation to remove himself, judge

    Quote Originally Posted by Hicup View Post
    It may very well turn out that way, Kal. My arguments were in direct relation to how I interpret the law as it is written. I think it isn't unreasonable to suspect a strong degree of non-impartiality in this case. I'm not privy to all the details, nor does it interest me so much that I would spend a great deal of time on it, but on the surface I think that Walker should have recused himself.


    Tim-
    Being gay does not make you biased any more than being black, jewish, or short does. Assumption of bias in the absence of evidence is itself being unreasonable.
    Last edited by Deuce; 06-17-11 at 10:37 PM.
    He touched her over her bra and underpants, she says, and guided her hand to touch him over his underwear
    Quote Originally Posted by Lutherf View Post
    We’ll say what? Something like “nothing happened” ... Yeah, we might say something like that.

  3. #43
    User
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Last Seen
    06-20-11 @ 10:56 AM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    2

    Re: Gay jurist in Proposition 8 case had no legal obligation to remove himself, judge

    "A federal judge on Tuesday refused to invalidate last year's ruling against Proposition 8, deciding the gay jurist who overturned the same-sex marriage ban had no obligation to step aside because of a possible conflict of interest."

    Agreed, this isn't over. He should have said he was a gay transgender man; it might have confused everyone so much they'd all give up.

  4. #44
    Sage
    Hicup's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    Rochester, NY
    Last Seen
    12-07-17 @ 03:18 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Very Conservative
    Posts
    7,846

    Re: Gay jurist in Proposition 8 case had no legal obligation to remove himself, judge

    Quote Originally Posted by Deuce View Post
    Being gay does not make you biased any more than being black, jewish, or short does. Assumption of bias in the absence of evidence is itself being unreasonable.
    What about being radically gay? And.. How does one know?


    Tim-
    “When buying and selling are controlled by legislation, the first things to be bought and sold are legislators.” - P. J. O’Rourke
    “Socialism is great until you run out of someone elses money” Margaret Thatcher

  5. #45
    Educator

    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Last Seen
    07-08-11 @ 01:37 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Slightly Liberal
    Posts
    1,235

    Re: Gay jurist in Proposition 8 case had no legal obligation to remove himself, judge

    Quote Originally Posted by Hicup View Post
    What about being radically gay? And.. How does one know?


    Tim-
    Radically gay? How can you be radically gay? The guy is a homosexual. That's how he was born. That does not mean he cannot impartially rule on legal cases.

  6. #46
    Liberal Fascist For Life!


    Redress's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Georgia
    Last Seen
    Today @ 08:09 PM
    Lean
    Very Liberal
    Posts
    93,339
    Blog Entries
    2

    Re: Gay jurist in Proposition 8 case had no legal obligation to remove himself, judge

    Quote Originally Posted by Hicup View Post
    It may very well turn out that way, Kal. My arguments were in direct relation to how I interpret the law as it is written. I think it isn't unreasonable to suspect a strong degree of non-impartiality in this case. I'm not privy to all the details, nor does it interest me so much that I would spend a great deal of time on it, but on the surface I think that Walker should have recused himself.


    Tim-
    Except you fail to understand the law, and you fail to understand why he did not recuse himself, and you fail to understand why he was upheld in not recusing himself. You seem to think that it's a case that involves somehow gays, and he is gay, so he should not rule. However, this means that since the case involved marriage, a married person could not rule. And since the argument used by those defending Prop 8 was that SSM hurt all marriages, there is actually a clearer conflict of interest if the defense of prop 8 is right, with any married judge.

    What you keep not showing is how this is a conflict of interest, and how it affected his ruling. As long as this is the case, you have no case. Repeating the same thing again and again with no evidence does not make you right.
    We became a great nation not because we are a nation of cynics. We became a great nation because we are a nation of believers - Lindsey Graham

    Quote Originally Posted by Fiddytree View Post
    Uh oh Megyn...your vagina witchcraft is about ready to be exposed.

  7. #47
    Liberal Fascist For Life!


    Redress's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Georgia
    Last Seen
    Today @ 08:09 PM
    Lean
    Very Liberal
    Posts
    93,339
    Blog Entries
    2

    Re: Gay jurist in Proposition 8 case had no legal obligation to remove himself, judge

    Quote Originally Posted by Hicup View Post
    What about being radically gay? And.. How does one know?


    Tim-
    What about being radically strait? How does one know?

    Really, really weak argument.
    We became a great nation not because we are a nation of cynics. We became a great nation because we are a nation of believers - Lindsey Graham

    Quote Originally Posted by Fiddytree View Post
    Uh oh Megyn...your vagina witchcraft is about ready to be exposed.

  8. #48
    Sage
    Hicup's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    Rochester, NY
    Last Seen
    12-07-17 @ 03:18 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Very Conservative
    Posts
    7,846

    Re: Gay jurist in Proposition 8 case had no legal obligation to remove himself, judge

    I'm radically straight.. And why do you spell the word straight, strait? Can you tell I'm radically straight?


    Tim-
    “When buying and selling are controlled by legislation, the first things to be bought and sold are legislators.” - P. J. O’Rourke
    “Socialism is great until you run out of someone elses money” Margaret Thatcher

  9. #49
    Professor xpiher's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Last Seen
    04-23-12 @ 10:33 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    1,993

    Re: Gay jurist in Proposition 8 case had no legal obligation to remove himself, judge

    Quote Originally Posted by 1 Easy Target View Post
    So it is okay for 74 Democrat senators to demand that Clarance Thomas recuse himself from any lawsuits concerning Obama Care because his spouse is a lobbyist on health care issues, but there is no need for the liberal judge to even disclose his potential conflict of interest when sitting in judgement over his right to potentially get married?
    The difference there is that Thomas has experienced finical gain from being biased. Its not likely he would vote differently even if that wasn't the case though. I tell you what, I won't ask him to recuse himself if you don't ask Kagan.

    Quote Originally Posted by Hicup View Post
    Of course there is, hence the feverant debates we've had right here addressing this very point. If it was unreasonable then no one would be talking about it, sheesh? Moreover, beside that point, how could one NOT find it reasonable to find the potential for impartiality? He's ruling on a law that would directly affect his entire life going forward? Is THAT unreasonable? What would a straight judge stand to gain by ruling on gay marriage?


    Tim-
    Your argument doesn't hold because he didn't get married to his partner when prop 8 wasn't in effect, but had been with him for years. There are a lot of gay people, especially in California, who actually pride themselves on the fact that they never intend to get married, legally or other wise, because it is a heterosexual institution, to them.
    Hayek - too liberal for republicans

  10. #50
    Sage
    CriticalThought's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Last Seen
    Today @ 07:25 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    18,131

    Re: Gay jurist in Proposition 8 case had no legal obligation to remove himself, judge

    Quote Originally Posted by xpiher View Post
    Your argument doesn't hold because he didn't get married to his partner when prop 8 wasn't in effect, but had been with him for years. There are a lot of gay people, especially in California, who actually pride themselves on the fact that they never intend to get married, legally or other wise, because it is a heterosexual institution, to them.
    Walker is a libertarian. He made it very apparent during the trial with his questioning that he personally doesn't feel that government should be involved in marriage at all. One of my concerns during the trial was that he would make a ruling based on his personal feelings.

    What I absolutely love about all this is people have absolutely no idea who Walker is. They hear he is gay and make so many assumptions about him and what he believes. I seriously doubt that Walker will ever marry his partner.
    Last edited by CriticalThought; 06-18-11 at 04:48 AM.
    Quote Originally Posted by Bucky View Post
    The economy will improve under this bill. If a few people die, it will be for the betterament of this country.

Page 5 of 6 FirstFirst ... 3456 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •