Comments on: The man who will judge Judge Walker

By: Everett

Everett — Fri, 29 Apr 2011 22:10:03 +0000

Am I the only one perplexed by how a man can go around telling people more than once that he was the James Ware that had his brother killed right in front of him by racists, when in fact he wasn’t?

How the heck does he get confused as to whether he actually experienced such a horrific and traumatic event? It boggles my mind.

BTW, I’m NOT bashing the man. I just have no idea how a person can go around telling a story several times to several audiences that a hate crime occurred right in front of your eyes when you were kid, when in fact that never happened.

By: AlexH

AlexH — Fri, 29 Apr 2011 21:55:03 +0000

Like Chris said above, if the argument that Judge Walker should’ve recused himself because of his being gay and in a relationship, then it could be argued that a heterosexual judge would also be biased since there’s something to gain (according to the Prop 8 argument which is “protection of marriage”). It’s a ridiculous argument.

And just to be clear, Ware claimed to be the same Ware whose brother was shot dead even though he wasn’t?

If that’s the case, why would someone of his intelligence lie about a thing like that? Something that can be proved or disproved as fact, rather easily.

What kind of person would do that?

By: Timothy Kincaid

Timothy Kincaid — Fri, 29 Apr 2011 18:47:42 +0000

David Brian Holt,

Thank you for your comment and it is encouraging.

I don’t bring up his error to humiliate the man, but rather to ponder whether having gone through such an ordeal will lead him to be less exacting when it comes time to judge Judge Walker.

By: Timothy Kincaid

Timothy Kincaid — Fri, 29 Apr 2011 18:45:44 +0000

Lymis,

Good points.

By: Richard Rush

Richard Rush — Fri, 29 Apr 2011 17:18:58 +0000

David Brian,

I really don’t like that you are bringing up his past like this.

If Timothy hadn’t brought up his past, our enemies surely would have, and then our side would be accused of deliberately attempting to hide it. Better to bring it out up front, I think.

By: David Brian Holt

David Brian Holt — Fri, 29 Apr 2011 17:04:26 +0000

Judge Ware was my civil procedure professor in law school. I really don’t like that you are bringing up his past like this. The man has apologized repeatedly. Additionally, I’ve spoken with him about Prop. 8 and he talked about it in class. He fully believes in equality. :)

By: Priya Lynn

Priya Lynn — Fri, 29 Apr 2011 16:27:13 +0000

Lymis, by that logic a bisexual person could judge because they’d have no built in bias either way.

By: Lymis

Lymis — Fri, 29 Apr 2011 15:53:04 +0000

Your article is well written and repeats some common ideas, but really, doesn’t go far enough in following the logic.

You correctly state that this logic would mean an African-American judge couldn’t hear a case on racial discrimination because he or she might be a victim of racial discrimination at some later point, but ignores that white people have a race, too. A white person’s ability TO discriminate based on race would be affected by an anti-discrimination case, and it might increase the number of qualified applicants he might compete against later in he career.

A female judge might be conscious of the fact that sexual discrimination could be aimed at her, but a male judge might well be conscious of all the behaviors he had taken for granted as acceptable or at least that he could get away with, and be aware that ruling against sexual discrimination could adversely affect him personally at some point.

So, not only would this logic mean that no member of a racial minority could judge, it means that no person of ANY race could judge, no person of ANY gender could judge, no person of ANY (or even no) religion could judge, and as has been pointed out, no member of ANY sexual orientation could judge.

By: Laura

Laura — Fri, 29 Apr 2011 15:26:04 +0000

I had the same thought as Bryan. Aren’t they admitting that gays are missing out on some benefits that marriage would provide? During the trial it seemed like they were making the case that California DPs were no different than marriages. But here, you have them now making the case that Judge Walker will benefit from the outcome.

How can they have it both ways?

By: enough already

enough already — Fri, 29 Apr 2011 11:09:18 +0000

Hopefully, presently, for your convenience, “impact” used as a verb….

German is losing the genitive case, it’s like English is losing the subjunctive (that was a joke, for the humorless among us).

Living languages evolve. Dead languages don’t.