« Go back a post || Return to G-A-Y homepage || Haul tail to next post »
08/13/2010
It really is Friday the 13th: We're admitting MassResistance is right about something
The Liberty Counsel was first. Then it was Chuck Colson. Now MassResistance is joining the chorus of anti-LGBT voices who are willing to say, quite correctly, that the Alliance Defense Fund argued a very shitty pro-Prop 8 case:
We had been hearing rumors about this for a while: Now it's being revealed that probably the biggest factor was the unbelievably incompetent and un-aggressive way that the lawyers on our side -- i.e., the Alliance Defense Fund (ADF) -- conducted the case.
During the case we had been hearing complaints that ADF was refusing to consider using the medical and psychological dangers and moral issues surrounding homosexuality as an argument. And that they had refused to allow the much more aggressive pro-family law group Liberty Counsel to be involved with the case.
Apparently ADF's handling of the case was so bad that the judge -- the gay judge -- chided ADF for the lack of evidence they presented!
...
You cannot expect a judge to manufacture reasons why your side should win. You have to present the arguments yourself and make a strong case for them. Apparently, ADF did none of that and was shocked -- shocked -- when they got their head handed to them.
...
As we write this, we've seen almost nothing about this in the conservative media (and of course nothing at all in the mainstream media). Why not? To be blunt, it's because Alliance Defense Fund is big and influential -- and well-heeled. The usual conservative media doesn't want to get on their bad side. And exposing this -- especially the way it really ought to be exposed -- would certainly antagonize ADF. In other words, institutional cowardice isn't limited to the Left.
What they're NOT telling you about last week's Prop 8 judicial ruling! [MassResistance]
Now, we're firmly convinced that our side would have won no matter what the opposition argued, just as long as we had a fair-minded judge who cared about the facts. We're confident in our arguments, and we're confident in our team.
But at the same time: It's simply undeniable that the ADF did their side no favors. We who were closely following the trial totally expected to get our opposition's A-game, even as tinged with B.S. as that game most certainly would be. But instead, they gave us (and more importantly, Olsen and Boies) a showing that, quite frankly, sounded at times like a j/k.
Of course the more mainstream "pro-family" crowd was reluctant to include the Liberty Counsel, Randy Thomasson, and those who more fully and unabashedly bend towards MassResistance's fringier direction. It's the same thing our opposition does in every election cycle where gay rights are put to a vote: They hide those who they deem to be the potential liabilities within their movement so that they can work a more publicly palatable image. It's no surprise that they did it here. But the thing is now, after such a publicly lacking loss with so few witnesses, it would seem that the opposition movement has no choice but to start thinking about what, if anything, they can do to improve their equality-robbing chances. They can't pin it on "liberal, gay activist™" Vaughn Walker forever: At some point they have to look at the entire body of human beings who are fighting on their side, and ask why the Prop 8 proponents had so many willing, potential, would-be allies rarin' to go on this trial, yet seemingly considered so many of them (Liberty Counsel, Thomasson, etc.) to be political non-starters. And if it's simply because they know that witness stands are much more stakes-heightened venues where both perjury and embarrassment are in play in ways dissimilar from their usual venues, then they need to ask if maybe, just maybe, their "pro-family" alliance is not really as aligned for the same purposes as they claim it to be.
Your thoughts
comments powered by Disqus
