Pro-family activism that makes a difference!

What they're NOT telling you about last week's Prop 8 judicial ruling!

Yes, this will anger you . . .

POSTED: Aug 12, 2010

By now most of you have followed much of the fallout from last week's absurd judicial ruling in California where a single judge overturned the Proposition 8 constitutional amendment defining marriage as one man and one woman.

Looking back, it seems like the perfect storm. We had (1) a case presided over by an "out" homosexual activist federal judge who clearly had a point of view; (2) a team of aggressive pro-gay lawyers who had been quite public about their strategy to use every outrageous legal argument they could find; and (3) a recent history of pro-gay rulings using "rational basis" reasoning, tortured uses of the "equal protection" clause, references to foreign law, and other offensive post-constitutional substitutions for normal judicial practice.

But an even bigger problem

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!

Here's from Liberty Counsel's press release on the matter, that really opens things up:

Although Liberty Counsel has defended the marriage laws in California since the battle began in 2004, the Alliance Defense Fund, representing the Prop 8 initiative, opposed Liberty Counsel's attempt to intervene on behalf of Campaign for California Families. The California Attorney General did not oppose Liberty Counsel's intervention, but ADF did. Liberty Counsel sought to provide additional defense to Prop 8 because of concern that the case was not being adequately defended. After ADF actively opposed Liberty Counsel, ADF presented only two witnesses at trial, following the 15 witnesses presented by those who challenged the amendment. Even Judge Walker commented that he was concerned by the lack of evidence presented by ADF on behalf of Prop 8. Liberty Counsel will file an amicus brief at the court of appeals in defense of Prop 8.

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.

Read the judge's ruling HERE.

Why aren't you reading about this in the conservative media?

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.

The best third-party writing on this we've seen on this is by liberal Andrew Cohen in the left-wing "Politics Daily" blog. Cohen sat through the whole thing, and although he's a nasty, annoying leftist he writes a refrishingly honest article about this problem. See Cohen's article: Prop 8 Ruling: Same-Sex Marriage Foes Conduct Post-Mortem

A terrible problem for the conservative movement

This is a huge problem in the conservative movement. This case represents the tip of an iceberg that's been crippling us terribly for decades: a reluctance to address the underlying issue of homosexuality itself -- the behavior, its associated health risks, and the profound moral issues. This is not just about the definition of marriage or children needing both a mother and a father. And it ultimately requires lawyers to confront the persistent myth that homosexuals are "born gay."

We saw it personally in the Suzi Landolphi sex-ed case in the 1990's, the Fistgate case, the David Parker case, and so many others that should have been hit out of the park but were botched by bumbling, spineless conservative lawyers.

And this will continue to cause untold damage down the line unless somehow we can find more lawyers with at least a modicum of backbone, not to mention intelligence and aggressiveness.

NOTE: ADF was contacted earlier this week asking for an answer to Liberty Counsel's charges. At this writing there has been no response.