Prop 8. Decision By Gay Judge Upheld: Why Shouldn't it Be??

A	A gay judge shouldn't rule on proceedings regarding gay rights.

B	Judges are chosen to rule without bias, gay judges handling gay rights cases should not be assumed any exception.

"California federal judge James Ware rejected the claim that former judge Vaughn Walker should have recused himself from hearing the Prop. 8 case because Walker is in a same-sex relationship," according to The Wall Street Journal blog. " Lawyers who represented the backers of Prop. 8, which banned same-sex marriage in California,, contended that Walker should have disclosed he was in a long-term relationship with a gay partner as the judge arguably stood to personally benefit from a ruling overturning Prop. 8."

Should the sexual orientation of any judge, the sex of their partner, or their intent to marry ever have to be divulged in proceedings over gay marriage? Wouldn't that, then, set a precedent that any judge's potential lifestyle choices related to the theme of a particular case could be called into question?

A black judge would have to recuse himself from cases regarding African Americans, divorced white male judges ought not rule in favor of other divorced white males, female judges would be banned from ruling on abortion cases. Or only female judges of child-bearing age-- one can assume we'd have to ask if she has children, how many, under what circumstances and if she is now menopausal and thereby no longer concerned with her own stake in her ruling.

After all, if the gender of a judge's partner and status of one's romantic relationship are crucial information, where does it end?

Casandra Armour

Prop 8. Decision By Gay Judge Upheld: Why Shouldn't it Be??

More public opinion polls: