Active Users:1137 Time:23/11/2024 04:17:54 AM
I should keep my nose out. nossy Send a noteboard - 11/02/2010 12:40:13 PM
But prop 8 seems to be more about heteros than not. Any one of them could have just as much of a conflict of interest, given that their "side" is trying to refuse something that (imo) should be considered a right. Who's to say a hetero judge would make any better (more just or balanced) of a call if he/she firmly believes that homosexual marriage is Wrong?

If he's a good judge, it shouldn't matter either way.
Reply to message
Prop 8 Judge, assigned case by random, turns out to be gay - 11/02/2010 12:13:46 AM 840 Views
Re: Prop 8 Judge, assigned case by random, turns out to be gay *NM* - 11/02/2010 02:47:40 AM 271 Views
Hmm that's a tough one. - 11/02/2010 03:18:54 AM 454 Views
I am not questioning the judge ability to rule fairly. - 11/02/2010 04:21:16 AM 467 Views
I'm betting on 'Uphold', but his orientation probably won't effect the ruling either way - 11/02/2010 04:16:40 AM 442 Views
Why are you betting on Uphold? - 11/02/2010 04:22:03 AM 438 Views
California Supreme Court's ruling - 11/02/2010 05:42:35 AM 510 Views
This is federal court - 11/02/2010 02:22:58 PM 420 Views
Well, well, well, how the turn tables - 11/02/2010 05:00:56 AM 430 Views
Spin it DJ!!! *NM* - 11/02/2010 05:27:38 AM 167 Views
For what it's worth, I think he should recuse himself. - 11/02/2010 09:35:18 AM 464 Views
I should keep my nose out. - 11/02/2010 12:40:13 PM 486 Views
It doesn't automatically touch heterosexuals interests. - 11/02/2010 12:53:50 PM 466 Views
Yeah. - 11/02/2010 02:08:15 PM 415 Views
A lot of recusement is about self preservation, I think. - 15/02/2010 01:05:38 PM 446 Views
It was always going to be appealed. *NM* - 11/02/2010 05:50:45 PM 189 Views
He should recuse himself - 11/02/2010 02:41:24 PM 439 Views
Just for that I'm changing my mind! - 15/02/2010 01:07:29 PM 402 Views

Reply to Message