The judge's conclusions start on page 109 and it's a great read. I'm very impressed with the argument that the "traditional definition of marriage" is nothing more than the expression of antiquated gender roles, and also that in this case discrimination by sexual orientation is equivalent to discrimination by sex. Both are ideas I've heard before, but not nearly as well articulated as they are in this ruling. Also, I greatly enjoyed the section where the judge went through the proponents' list of state's interests and showed that not only does Prop 8 not support those interests, in most cases it actively harms them.