Ari Ezra Waldman has a good piece up at Towleroad this morning which explains the likely reason why the bigots are appealing Ware’s ruling on their ridiculous notion that Walker should have recused himself because he’s gay. Pointing out that Ware’s decision was a “wholehearted beat down,” Waldman explains the obvious — they have no chance on appeal. But Charles Cooper, attorney to the bigots, likely knows this:
Appeal such a wholehearted beat down? Does he think he will get any more sympathy from a panel of Ninth Circuit judges who have known Judge Walker for years and have, in any event, already invested their court’s own time and effort into this case?
It is hard to imagine Mr. Cooper really thinks he can win. If he does think so, he is simply a bad attorney. But, by filing an appeal, he may be a master strategist. The Prop 8 proponents know that they are fighting a losing battle — their attorneys were inept at trial, failing to offer evidence; they have no real arguments on their side; all three judges on the Ninth Circuit panel to hear the standing and merits were skeptical. The only hope is to delay, to delay same-sex marriage for so long, to frustrate the gay community so much, that we make the first mistake.
Aha! Well then, let’s just not make the first mistake. I mean, we’ve shown over the last few years that pretty much all the brains in this battle are on our side. We can do this! Read Waldman’s whole piece, please.
What I see in this is they are giving republicans one more election where our country is divided and hopefully conquered for more plundering by corporations. Wasn’t Maggie Gallagher hired by the Bush administration years ago? Coincidence?
They can appeal if they like, standing is still the deciding factor. If standing is granted, an appeal will get chewed up in the timeline of the 9th deciding their stance. If standing is not granted we win and an appeal can happen all it wants, it’ll still nose dive. And the ninth isn’t going to stay it’s decision, it can’t. Delay? Nah, that duck don’t quack.
What is the purpose of the delay? Incitement to violence?
Mykelb,
No, it’s all about a damaged over-zealous uninformed ill-managed ego.
PS By-the-by, the religious right are not “Homophobes”. Phobias are fears that people flee from, i.e. spiders heights and flying. The “right” is not demonstrating fleeing gays out of fear. They are engaging. Quite aggressively. Their underlying neurosis is sexual self disgust, not fear. It is therefore not a phobia.
I believe a more accurate descriptive term for the “right” displaying this neuron firing cross-wire, would be HomoNeurotics, a neurosis they suffer and refuse to responsibly address. This term would also describe the ex-gay theme and all aspects attached thereof.
Nope, iDavid, their actions are 100% completely out of fear. It’s the very root of their hatred, and it’s the same reason they’re so anti-woman/anti-reproductive rights: it threatens their patriarchal system and their pedestal.
The purpose of the delay? And the purpose of continued filings of motions? Billable hours, baby. We’re talkin’ attorneys here (or, as I think of them, ‘Satan’s little helpers’).
I call these jackasses homohaters because that is what it boils down to. Hatred of people so virulent that one will even harm gay people physically or in the case of the ProtectMarriage jackasses, to find any way to delay justice to GLBT people.
Evan,
Disgust disapproval or the ew factor over gay sex are not fears or phobias. Some people just don’t like it. This is why when one calls anti-gays homophobes, some disagree, because they don’t fear and run, like those with legitimately defined phobias. They will be glad to step right up and kick your a*s. Not because they are scared of you, quite the contrary, they just don’t like you.
If I hate disapprove or am disgusted with my mother-in-law and dis-invite her to dinner, I’m not afraid of her, I don’t have a phobia about her, I just don’t like her. That’s where the anti-gay group stands. They just don’t like us for a myriad of reasons.
Phobias are intense reactions to a stimulus to flee out of fear of harm, not engage over tea and “discuss”. But to your credit, all negative reactions could be considered fear based. But they are categorized nonetheless, i.e. phobias, neurotic behaviors etc.
There are several google articles that criticize the use of the term homophobia to describe anti-gays, because the term in it’s defined form is misused, of which I agree. Just as countries go to war over ideologies, they aren’t called “phobes”. They simply don’t like each others point of view. Big difference between that, and an innate fear response to run from rattle snakes out of fear of death, the true def of a phobia.
Not trying to change the pop-term, but thought it might me of interest. So in essence alone, I respectfully disagree with your take. But whatever term we use doesn’t really matter. We in theory have already won the war. Just waiting for the anti-gay’s white flag to pop up. :)
iDavid, really, I promise you, this is rooted in fear. I will expound later, as I have to run for a while, but I’m dead serious when I say that “phobia” is not only correct, but it is precise.
As a motive for delay, I don’t think we should ignore the money trail, even though the phobia is real. Surely they know that when they lose California (and maybe New York) the game is over. The anti-gay industry is a giant cash-cow, and lots of people are feverishly milking it before it runs dry. For example, the NY Daily News reports that NOM’s Brian Brown is pulling in $172,100-a-year (http://www.nydailynews.com/ny_local/2011/06/12/2011-06-12_taking_aim_at_gay_nups_pour_cash_into_ny_in_defense_of_marriage.html#ixzz1PHPcnlCD).
After the game is over, where will these people find jobs with resumes that show they were last employed as “professional gay-bashers.”
Evan,
Ok.
David