Judge In SF Gay Marriage Ruling No 'Liberal Activist Judge'

[davidinalameda]

http://www.365gay.com/newscon05/03/031505judgeKramer.htm

Supporters of same-sex marriage found an ally Monday in San Francisco Judge Richard Kramer a Catholic Republican appointed to the bench by a former GOP governor.

"We're certainly feeling the judge's decision is right," said San Francisco Mayor Gavin Newsom, whose city's lawsuit prompted Kramer's ruling that gays and lesbians have the right to marry in California, despite a law and a voter-approved measure declaring marriage to be the exclusive realm of heterosexuals.

Opponents of same-sex marriage immediately declared that 57-year-old Kramer is a judicial activist whose decision was "ludicrous" and "nonsense."

[zbdent]

1. Like that's going to stop the smear of the decision

Facts are like kryptonite to Repukes . . .

Besides, what self-disrespecting Repuglycan is going to look up facts?

[davidinalameda]

2. when you smack them in the face enough times with it

they have to pay attention

[Technowitch]

3. I liked his arguments

- You can't use procreation as a justification, because you can procreate without marriage and be married without procreating (I'd furthe add that any gay/lesbian couple can have kids -- just not with each other!).

- The opponents try to say that 'tradition' is a reason -- well, slavery was traditional for centuries, and it was still wrong.

- We see now their real justification -- biblical christian edicts. They wave their bibles and quote scriptures and say that God is against it. That makes it religious, and what's more not everybody's religion, but THEIRS. There are lots of religions that have no problem with same-sex marriage. However, they demand government backing for THEIR interpretation of what is and isn't a valid marriage. Why else would they keep shouting words like 'sacred' and 'holy'?

I still don't know if we'll win, but this is still encouraging nonetheless.