Into the Judicial closet

Don't let the picture mislead you. Read on.

Linda Greenhouse writes this morning in the NYTimes about  a nice judicial spat about televising the Proposition 8 proceedings in the 9th circuit.  We have always been treated to this kind of still chalk picture as our only way of looking into the abyss that often is our justice system. 

The gay marriage issue is chock full of potential debate. This is obviously a public policy case and not a smith v. jones argument.... and as such there are pro-and op-ponets.  Part of the admonishment for not televising is that there is the potential for harassment of those who are called in as witnesses for and against.  To this there is a point but as such we also cross into a freedom of speech issue as well as no one in this country should ever fear what he says (within well defined limits of course e.g. threatening, fire in the theater and for the past 8 years, no mr. bush i won't sign a loyalty oath to see you in a public place). 

Anyway looking at the straight community's marriage stats, record of child abuse or neglect, faithfulness or "un", and a myriad of other matters, it appears to me anyway that we are trying to hold the gay community to a higher standard than we, the straight community, holds ourselves personally or generally.  I take the "unnatural act" crap as a straw dog argument anyway so let's just not get into that and let those who object to the marriage  issue on that alone just go their own way.

Anyway, this argument and issue will get rich before it dries up and we go about our way.  I've had gay roommates in college, my offspring have lived in gay households as roommate shares, no one I know gives it a thought and frankly I couldn't possibly care less as that is only one side of a person and a private one at that.  I just don't understand the argument and I wish there would be a televised version of it so I could get the points as they are debated in a court setting and under oath. Now that is the point.