Banning Gay Marriage Perpetuates the Human Race?

A federal judge in Nevada, Judge Robert Jones, upheld Nevada's ban on same sex Marriage this week. His justification for the ruling? According to RawStory his reasoning is as follows:

..gay men and lesbians did not qualify for protections under the Constitution’s Equal Protection Clause because recent victories in Maine, Maryland, Minnesota and Washington proved that LGBT people did not face the same level of discrimination as other groups did.

So just because other states have decided to allow same sex marriage, that means that the level of discrimination that same sex couples is not acceptable? Is this guy seriously going to argue that discrimination by some states is somehow less harmful because other states allow same sex marriage? I guess he never heard of the idea of equal protection under the law which is guaranteed by the constitution, which is now being denied by states refusing to allow same sex marriage, ie equal rights in every state, not just some. But that's not the best of it.

Human beings are created through the conjugation of one man and one woman. The percentage of human beings conceived through non-traditional methods is minuscule and adoption, the form of child-rearing in which same-sex couples may typically participate together, is not an alternative means of creating children, but rather a social backstop for when traditional biological families fail. The perpetuation of the human race depends upon traditional procreation between men and women. The institution developed in our society, its predecessor societies, and by nearly all societies on Earth throughout history to solidify, standardize, and legalize the relationship between a man, a woman, and their offspring, is civil marriage between one man and one woman.

Here's where we really get to the crux of the argument, gays can't have kids so their marriage can't be justified by the state, according to Jones decision. Does this mean that heterosexual couples who are sterile should be disallowed from marrying because they cannot propagate the species. Should marriage licenses now be granted based upon the results of sterility tests? I mean that is what this guy is actually saying; that marriage is not legitimate if copulation cannot result in perpetuation of the species.

This guy is just another religious fucking loon who has no business sitting on the bench. It's what you would expect from a George W Bush appointee; someone who's just a fucking stupid, hateful and bigoted as W was.

But the religious thing isn't the real problem here is it? It's this judges inability to rules impartially even though his personal beliefs make him a bigot. There are plenty of judges out there who are capable of setting aside their beliefs and making rulings based upon law even when those rulings go against their personal religious beliefs. This guy, though, is apparently incapable of doing his job and setting aside the nonsense that he believes in his personal life. Seriously, how can any judge say that marriage is solely for propagating the species and expect that this ruling will ever be upheld. There is no legal precedent or even law on the books that says straight couples must be fertile in order to marry. Would this joker really want to livei n a world that enforced such beliefs on straight people, even though he's OK with doing it to same sex couples?

The real problem with this judge, his ruling and his continued position on the bench is that there's little we can do about it. These federal appointees basically get a free ride for life. It doesn't matter if they are bat-shit crazy, bigoted assholes who are incapable of doing the job they are supposed to do. There is no oversight once they are sitting on the bench. They can just run rough-shod over the law and legislate hatred from the bench to deny human rights to the people they are supposed be protecting. The real joke of this is that the right constantly complains about liberal reactionary judges, but the reality is the reactionary judges are the ones who are upholding religious beliefs that have o place on the books as laws in the first place. The judiciary is supposed to be the one impartial part of the government. It is supposed to be the branch of government that balances the executive and legislative branches and makes sure that this type of bullshit never gets through. The judicial branch has failed because this judge is essentially unfit to do his job. Let's just hope the appeal is successful and gets in front of someone who is capable of the impartiality that the job requires, really DEMANDS, of the person doing it. As for Judge Jones, he needs to be removed from the bench or asked to step down so that someone who is capable of doing the job impartially can be put in his place.