Are You Listening to Judge Walker, Washington State Justices Johnson and Sanders?

Comments

1
Judge Walker. Vaughn's his first name.
2
@1: Gah! Typing too fast. Fixed.
3
That "(Lamb)" he kept citing is Michael Lamb, chairman of the department of social and developmental psychology at Cambridge, who testified very very nicely indeed at trial.
4
enjoy.
while it lasts.....
5
If this decision shows us anything, it's the importance of election fair and impartial justices to the bench. Donate to the Equal Rights Washington PAC this week and your contribution will be matched by a generous donor! ERW PAC is dedicated to electing fair and impartial judges and pro-equality legislators. https://equalityfederation.salsalabs.com…

Also, Celebrate the Prop 8 victory by letting your elected leaders know you support Marriage Equality, and ask your friends to do the same! http://equalityfederation.salsalabs.com/…
6
If this decision shows us anything, it's the importance of election fair and impartial justices to the bench. Donate to the Equal Rights Washington PAC this week and your contribution will be matched by a generous donor! ERW PAC is dedicated to electing fair and impartial judges and pro-equality legislators.
https://equalityfederation.salsalabs.com…

Also, Celebrate the Prop 8 victory by letting your elected leaders know you support Marriage Equality, and ask your friends to do the same! http://equalityfederation.salsalabs.com/…
7
oops. sorry for the double post. well, it is important enough to repeat... :)
8
I was really hoping the Judge would just say, "Marriage has absolutely nothing to do with children. Marriage is between two consenting adults. One does not need to be married in order to have children."

Someday, I may be married, but chances are, I will never have children. And I'm a straight man.

But hey, way to fucking go California!
9
Memo to th 9th Circuit,

Stop using courier, that is the only thing wrong with your decision.
10
Favorite part so far: On page 61, Walker cites Scalia's dissenting opinion in Lawrence v. Texas, wherein Scalia argued against the decriminalization of homosexual conduct on the grounds that it would remove the state's justification for denying gays the right to marry, in support of his finding that marriage is not about procreation. Oh snap!
11
But @9, nothing screams "WordPerfect and an HP LaserJet III" quite like Courier. I wonder if they're still actually using WordPerfect. I know that long after Microsoft Word became dominant, it was still popular with law offices and abstractors and courts (and for good reason).

If they are using WordPerfect, there's just a little irony since WordPerfect was originally written by Mormons (no, really), though it's now owned by Corel, based in the land of gay marriage (aka Canada).
12
Why can't WA have judges with a grasp of basic reasoning and logic?
13
Playing devil's advocate for a moment (which I understand and fully accept is evil), couldn't someone argue that children in gay & lesbian households are likelier to be poorly-adjusted because lesbians and to a lesser extent gays are more likely to be poor?
14
@13: My one ultra-conservative friend made a similar argument a few years back. Should we therefore ban blacks or Hispanics from marrying?
15
"The genetic relationship between a parent and a child is not related to a child's adjustment outcomes."

Ok, playing devil's advocate here for a second: there IS substantial evidence showing that children genetically unrelated to their parents (adopted and foster homed kids) are much more likely to be abused.

I don't know of any studies that have controlled for genetic relatedness specifically among gay and lesbian couples (i.e. comparing adjustment outcomes between adopted children of gay parents with those who are genetically related to one (gay/lesbian parent), but it's worth noting. Not that marriage has anything to do with parenting.

I'm in full support of everything Judge Walker is saying but he needs to stick to the facts.