I think people making the "biased judge" argument should really think it through a little better:
1) Judge is gay, therefore is biased on a gay marriage decision because the decision affects him.
This leads to the question: So, why is a straight judge not going to be biased?
2) A straight judge is not affected by the decision, so is not inherently biased on the issue.
Of course, that just confirms the statement:
3) Straight people are not affected by a gay marriage decision.
Wait. If straight people are not affected... wouldn't that invalidate the idea that gay marriage damages the sanctity of marriage, thereby torpedoing the case against gay marriage? Prop 8's defense was inept, but they weren't stupid. There's a reason they never brought up this point before the trial.
One of you will end up here next!
Interesting how Judge Walker was initially a Reagan appointee, isn't it?
2009-2016: Dissent is the highest form of racism.
2017-? (Probably): Dissent is the highest form of misogyny.
Given the.... depth... of the right's focus on this issue, the prospect of Federal support for gay marriage in all of the U.S. is looking better and better.
I have no doubt that Judge Walker is gay. However, let us add up the facts.
1. He was first nominated by Ronald Reagan.
2. His first nomination was defeated by Nancy Pelosi.
3. He was later confirmed by George Bush.
4. His confirmation was challenged by just about every gay rights group in California because he represented the Olympics against the Gay Olympics in a trademark case.
5. He is Republican.
6. His position on marriage has historically been that the government has no place in it.
So I welcome the far right making an issue out of him being gay. It really shows how weak their case against same sex marriage is when they would rather make baseless attacks against a judge than to go after the substance of his ruling.