SF Judge Is Not Allowing Discredited Anti-Gay Evidence To Be Challenged

[justin899]

The judge who will decide the constitutionality of California's ban on same-sex marriage has refused to let San Francisco submit expert studies to counter their opponents' authorities, who contend that children need opposite- sex parents and that homosexuals can be cured.

The city fears that the presence of those declarations, without opposing evidence, might be used by an appellate court to justify the state's definition of marriage as a union between a man and a woman, a city lawyer said Monday.

http://sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2004/12/28/BAGT0AHU9B1.DTL

Yes, you read that right. The judge is allowing same-sex marriage opponents to put "evidence" (which has been refuted since the 1970s) in the record which says that gays have a "mental disorder" and can be "cured," but he is not allowing the other side to introduce evidence that challenges those claims (which are nothing more than lies).

As the article states the appellate court can later use the unchallenged evidence to decide the case so it IS important to have the (long disputed) "evidence" from marriage equality foes challenged in the record.

[BeeBee]

1. I've been scratching my head ever since I heard that...

:wtf:

[MissBrooks]

2. I had to read that five times to believe it.

[arcane1]

3. appointed to the bench by Gov. Pete Wilson in 1996

I suppose that explains this a litlle

but not much!

:wtf:

[sans qualia]

4. Oy

oy oy oy oy oy oy oy. Oy!

[EC]

5. God, I just wish

Scientist would hurry up and find a gene or something, my daughter is gay and all the bashing that has increased is really worrying me... I don't get it...you ask a straight man if he would have sex with another man just for kicks they usually respond with oh God no, so then you ask them why do they think other men would, they usually say I don't know, so I ask them do you think it could be because they were born that way, or else wouldn't the thought of it make them just as repulsed as it does you? Well, yeah I guess...:think: So, I ask them, do you really think someone would choose that way of life, knowing they could be beaten, killed, called all kinds of names, excluded from society, etc, etc. Why would anyone just choose that? I guess they think gays just do it for attention, or are sick or something, but there have been gays throughout history and many of them...so those reasons are whacked, totally stupid...

These people are idiots and cannot form thoughts on their own, this is going to be a real problem with education the way it is, teaching to the test instead of cognitive thought and problem solving...just makes me so mad...:mad:

[BeeBee]

7. Well put.

Your daughter is lucky to have you as a mom.
:toast:

[EC]

8. Thanks

she says that quite often...fact is I'm very proud of my daughter...not because she's gay...because she is truly an altruist..

[zoeb]

6. I could believe that if it were happening in KY...

but in Kaleeefornia:shrug:

I can say that cause I'm from KY. lol

[Elise]

9. Will you people

stop generalizing already?

There are good and bad people in both KY & CA.

The difference is that CA does have a great appeals system and this idiot judge is likely to be reversed.

[Rowdyboy]

10. As a southern Episcopalian male, I would be thrilled for the generalizing,

or stereotyping as I call it, to stop. The hateful anti-southern, anti-all religions threads NEVER end, and rarely let up. Occasionally, its nice for us red-staters to be able to point out irrational/hateful/stupid behavior by a blue-stater just so we remember that we're not the only ones with idiots in office, that we're all in the same boat, and that blindly accepting stereotypes is not the same for actual learning.

I agree with your premise, but I understand the posters frustrations.

[BeeBee]

11. Scratching my head again....

I don't get it. Every post on this thread (except for Zoeb's (who is from the Kentucky))has dealt with the hypocrisy and unfairness of this decision. Now, suddenly, it has turned into a red vs. blue/North vs. South debate. Where did that come from?

:shrug:

[Rowdyboy]

12. It rises from the fact that, in many threads, when something ugly occurs

in the south, all southerners (liberal and conservative alike) are blamed. When something ugly happens in Ohio, or California, or Michigan, the blame seems to rest only on the shoulders of the individuals who committed the outrage, not the greater community.

There's a double standard at work on DU and many people resent it. When one southerner acts like a ass-we are all stereotyped as evil incarnate. When westerners/farm belt/rust belt/Yankees etc act like asses, ONLY the guilty individual appears to be at fault. Thats just not fair, and we southern Democrats become naturally defensive.

Thats why

[BeeBee]

13. Thank you for clarifying...

I grew up in a very conservative part of Utah but now live in a very liberal part of California. Here in DU, I find myself often defending the State of Utah in general and the Mormon religion in particular. Not because I think they are completely without fault, but that they are often unfairly generalized.

From his post, I personally didn't take Zoeb's remarks as a slam against southern states, but more as an expression of amazement that in San Francisco (of all places) this type of unfairness could still exist.

I know that I, for one, will try not to generalize in this way in the future.