SACRAMENTO, CA - As the parties and rallies begin to wind down after what the gay and *** community called a victory Wednesday in the battle against a same-sex marriage ban in California, several debates were already beginning.
One centered around whether federal Judge Vaughn Walker, an openly gay man, was able to remain unbiased when he decided to overturn the California voter passed Proposition 8.
"The judge's ruling is not worth the paper that it's printed on," said Randy Thomasson outside the State Capitol on Wednesday. Thomasson, who has been fighting to keep marriage between a man and woman for years, accused Walker of pushing his own agenda.
"He (Walker) loaded up biased questions. He dealt with feelings. He tossed around the word discrimination. He didn't deal with what the Constitution said. He dealt with what some liberal judges, his friends of his, said," Thomasson said.
Many of those against Prop 8 completely disagree.
"It's about same-sex marrage and judges are appointed to be non-partisan when it comes to things like that. They are im-partial. That is what they do," said Wendy Rae Hill, executive director of the Sacramento Gay and *** Center. "He actually made adjudication on each and every witness and on their credibility, on the evidence that was presented. He did exactly what any judge should do," she said.
Some who have remained neutral on the issue have spoken out against questioning Walker's motive.
"No one would possibly raise this issue regarding a heterosexual judge suggesting a heterosexual judge brings a bias and couldn't rule. No one would ever raise that issue, right?" McGeorge law professor Larry Levine said.
Levine said Walker gave advocates of Prop 8 plenty of opportunities to defend their stance and provide evidence of how same-sex marriage hurts society. Levine said in Walker's ruling, the judge said they couldn't make the negative effects clear.
To take it a step further, Levine said accusing a federal judge of bias is offensive and could begin a slippery slope.
"That would apply to judges of color. That would apply to judge's who have a religion outside the predominant religion in the country," he said. "We just can't allow that to happen."
Of course, all sides concede that in the long run, the argument will most likely be moot. Appeals have already been filed and the Prop 8 challenge will likely move to the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals and potentially to the United States Supreme Court.
Sic semper tyrannis
~War is Peace~Freedom is Slavery~Ignorance is Strength~ George Orwell "1984"
