Thursday, August 5, 2010

Prop 8 Ruling - Guest Post by Storyteller Knight

So we're all thrilled about the Prop 8 ruling, and I am SOOOO very excited to present the first ever guest post, written by my awesome friend (and La Campanella Award winner) Storyteller Knight!! So, without further ado, Storyteller Knight!!

Okay, really?
by Storyteller Knight

Happy happy happy that Prop 8 was ruled unconstitutional. But, I'm reading up right now on how the case went down and my reaction is somewhere between O.o and -.-'

So basically the defenders of Prop 8 were like 'God the dictionary* says we're right, so you have to rule based on that'. And the opponents of Prop 8 were like 'here's a mountain of evidence as to why Prop 8 is unconstitutional and discriminatory'. And the judge was like 'defenders of Prop 8, I feel really silly ruling on this case because you really haven't presented one, please give me something.' And the defenders of Prop 8 were like "We don't have to prove anything" (that would be a direct quote, not me paraphrasing).

::sigh:: No longer surprised that Prop 8 was ruled unconstitutional.

Going forward, my gut instinct is that this ruling will hold. Because really? The dictionary? And even if it doesn't, I don't think neither the Appellate Court nor the Supreme Court will be able to rule against Judge Walker's verdict (even if they wanted to) without ordering a new trial, simply because the defenders of Prop 8 did such a piss poor job of presenting their case. They only called two witnesses and one of them was deemed inadmissible because his testimony was inept and contradictory (This guy argued that polygamy fit within his (note- his, not mine, not the judge's, not society's, his) definition of marriage (opposite sex, two people and sexual) because a man only had one ceremony at a time and since he didn't marry all five wives in one ceremony, each marriage is distinct and okay. He also agreed with the opponents of Prop 8 that same sex marriage would reduce prejudice and hate crimes, increase the standard of living and benefit the couples and their children but we shouldn't do it because God the dictionary the institution of marriage wouldn't like it)

It's like a murder trial where the defendant swears up and down that he wasn't at the scene of the crime and he says he's got a million witnesses that place him somewhere else. But he only calls two witnesses. And one of the witnesses testifies that the defendant wasn't actually at this somewhere else. He doesn't know where the defendant was, but he's sure it wasn't at the murder scene. Oh, and defendant totally had motive, means and opportunity to commit the murder, but he didn't do it. Probably. Meanwhile, the prosecution brings forth witnesses who saw the defendant commit the murder, evidence that the gun was his, his fingerprints are on it and present a pretty impressive motive. And then, in closing arguments, the defendant's lawyer says that the judge can't possibly find his client guilty because his picture is in the dictionary next to the definition of 'model citizen.'

No judge, along any step of the appeals can rule this guy not guilty without ordering a new trial demanding that the million people who the defendant claims saw him somewhere else testify. I feel like it's the same thing with the Prop 8 case. Judge Walker did the only thing he could do in ruling Prop 8 unconstitutional, because only one set of evidence was presented to him. Maybe he really believes that Prop 8 was constitutional and maybe he thinks there's mountains of case work and precedent that supports the ban. But he can't rule on any of that, he can only rule on what was presented during the case. And what was presented was the dictionary. And his ruling probably can't be overturned without the stipulation that evidence beyond the dictionary's definition of marriage being between a man and a woman actually be presented.

If I'm wrong here, someone please correct me. But if I am wrong, that's stupid. Because you shouldn't win a case like this simply because God the dictionary the institution of marriage you think you should without ever presenting any evidence as you why you are legally in the right. And the defenders of Prop 8 have yet to do that. And until they do, there is no judge out there (I hope) who will rule in their favor. Even if that judge wrongly believes on a personal level that Prop 8 is legal and constitutional.

So today we should celebrate all the stupid bigots of the world. Cause they actually make progress so much easier. :D

* "You only need to go back to your chambers and pull down any dictionary or book that defines marriage," Cooper told the judge. "You won't find it had anything to do with homosexuality."

Right, dude. Cause the dictionary never changes. -.-'

No comments: