Logic Be Damned - on California's Proposition 8

Logic has never been a strong suit for Republicans and their complaint on the trial judge, U.S. District Judge Vaughn Walker, who ruled last year that the California's Proposition 8 ballot initiative denying marriage rights to same-sex couples was unconstitutional.

They claimed that Judge Walker should have disqualified himself to preside the trial because he was gay and have been in a long term relationship and his unconstitutional finding of Proposition 8, which stripped away the same-sex couples' constitutional rights to marry legally in California, would benefit Judge himself.

If Judge Walker did disqualify himself for being gay, then who could step in? A heterosexual individual? Then that person might be benefit from upholding the Proposition, therefore he/she should be disqualified as well, if the Proposition 8's supporters logic stands.

That leaves us only avowed asexual individuals. But even asexual persons are mostly not avert from forming a long-lasting relationship, therefore, they are suspicious as well.

If we replace Judge Walker with a heterosexual person, on the assumption that heterosexuals would not benefit from the Proposition, then what was the purpose of the Proposition? It would not benefit any group of people, and only harm another, the minority. There you go, it sounds discriminatory to me.



Companion © Matthew Felix Sun