Everything You Need To Know About Today’s Prop 8 Proceedings In One Little Post

Share on Facebook0Tweet about this on TwitterShare on Google+0Share on Reddit0Share on Tumblr0Email this to someone

(Day 6) Here are two short excerpts from today’s proceedings (transcripts courtesy of Firedoglake) that explain everything you need to know. Don’t worry, there will still be a full, detailed roundup later tonight.

From the cross-examination with Mayor Jerry Sanders:

R: At that time you supported civil unions?

S: Yes

R: Did you think that was hostile to G&L community?

S: No

R: Did you think your position communicated hatred?

S: I did not believe I did, but I now know it was grounded in prejudice.

R: You believed civil unions was a moral perspective and reasonable?

S: Yes, but grounded in prejudice.

R: You do believe people who oppose marriage for G&L are motivated by animus or hatred or ignorance?

S: I believe it’s grounded in prejudice.

R: That means treating a class of people differently, right?

R: Do you believe people voted for Prop 8 because they thought civil unions were a reasonable alternative?

R: (depo, page 68, line 4) Do you think it’s possible that someone could vote for Prop 8 because it’s a fair and reasonable alternative? You answered yes. You said you participated in NO on 8 so that it would be defeated. Did you encounter people who thought civil unions were reasonable?

S: Yes, and they weren’t hatred, but it was rooted in prejudice.

R: You didn’t hold that view in 2005

S: No I didn’t.

R: And your electoral base thought civil unions were reasonable?

S: They don’t have to have animus and hatred, but it’s still rooted in prejudice.

And, the final three questions of the day asked of Dr. Lee Badgett:

Boies: Did any question Mr. Cooper ask you go to the heart of the matter about whether or not gay couples are harmed by not being able to marry?

Badgett: No, I have not changed our opinion based on our discussion.

Boies: Was there anything he showed you or discussed with you that was inconsistent with your conclusion that the children of gay or lesbian couples would be hurt by their parents not being able to marry.

Badgett: I don’t think we discussed that at all, so no.

Boies: Was there anything he showed you or discussed with you that was inconsistent with your conclusion that the institution of marriage would be harmed?

Badgett: No I have seen no evidence that there would be any harm to the institution of marriage.

Boies: No further questions.

It doesn’t have to be animus to be prejudice.

The defense could not spin the numbers in any way that supports their claim.

Yay for day 6!

Share on Facebook0Tweet about this on TwitterShare on Google+0Share on Reddit0Share on Tumblr0Email this to someone
Back to Top | Scroll down for Comments!

Write a Comment