Judge's personal life debated after gay ruling

Associated Press ^ | August 6, 2010 | Lisa Leff

[Zakeet]

The federal judge who overturned California's same-sex marriage ban this week is a Republican who once came under fire for his membership to a powerful all-male club that had only recently allowed blacks to join.

But after Chief U.S. Judge Vaughn Walker struck down the voter-approved ban known as Proposition 8, he became something else in the minds of some: a gay activist.

Rumors have circulated for months that Walker is gay, fueled by the blogosphere and a San Francisco Chronicle column that stated his sexual orientation was an "open secret" in legal and gay activism circles.

Walker himself hasn't addressed the speculation, and he did not respond to a request for comment by The Associated Press on Thursday. Lawyers in the case, including those defending the ban, say the judge's sexuality — gay or straight — was not an issue at trial and will not be a factor on appeal.

But that hasn't stopped a public debate that exploded in the wake of the 66-year-old jurist's ruling. Most of the criticism has come from opponents of same-sex marriage.

"Here we have an openly gay federal judge, according to the San Francisco Chronicle, substituting his views for those of the American people and of our Founding Fathers who, I promise you, would be shocked by courts that imagine they have the right to put gay marriage in our Constitution," said Maggie Gallagher, chairwoman of The National Organization for Marriage, a group that helped fund Proposition 8.

In response, the Gay and Lesbian Victory Fund, a political action committee for gay candidates, launched an online petition accusing Gallagher's group of "gay-baiting."

But the debate raises the question: Why is sexuality different from other personal characteristics judges posses? Can a female judge rule on abortion issues? A black judge on civil rights?

[rockinqsranch]

Agree.

[Gasshog]

LOL! Thanks i needed a good chuckle.

[Gasshog]

LOL! Thanks i needed a good chuckle.

[RightFighter]

He bears a striking resemblance to someone...

[Godwin1]

Well, yes. The opinion is nothing more than the judge’s personal opinion that 5000 years of recorded history and tradition count for nothing when weighed against his own post-modern moral relativism. Because the judge believes that unnatural sex acts repugnant to the wholesome imagination are legitimate, he feels authorized to overturn history, tradition and the specifically expressed will of the people of California. The fact that the judge himself is a sexual deviant is quite relevant.

[SeaHawkFan]

This judge made two clearly erroneous rulings in homosexual-related cases and the defense did not disqualify him when they had the chance?

Tells me the defense didn't want to win this case.

[Elsie]

{---}

[happygrl]

"A powerful all-male club

Nambla?

TOUCHE!!!!!!

[happygrl]

Hey, you’re posting on your blog again!

Terrific!

Please post on what they think of 0bama in your side of the world.

[trisham]

:)