How is National Review writer Edward Whelan not admitting that Prop 8 supporters are judgmental authoritarians whose willingness to uncritically accept what they're told means that their arguments are inferior?
Walker's New Year's Eve surprise is a critical step in his evident ongoing effort to turn the lawsuit into a high-profile, culture-transforming, history-making, Scopes-style show trial of Proposition 8's sponsors. Specifically, Walker is rushing to override longstanding prohibitions on televised coverage of federal trials so that he can authorize televised coverage of the Proposition 8 trial. [Actually, there is no such prohibition in the Ninth Circuit. It was overturned a month ago by a Reagan appointee. -ed] Televised coverage would generate much greater publicity for ringmaster Walker's circus. And, whether Walker desires the effect or is somehow blind to it, televised coverage would surely also heighten the prospect that witnesses and attorneys supporting Proposition 8 would face harassment, intimidation, and abuse.
In his eagerness to stack the deck against Proposition 8 and its defenders, Walker has resorted to procedural shenanigans and outright illegality.
The cameras will show both sides equally, so I don't see the direct link to "stack[ing] the deck against Proposition 8 and its defenders." If anything, it'll do the opposite - the vast majority of harassment, intimidation, and abuse along the lines of sexual orientation is from straight people to gay people. As Prop 8's passage itself proved, there's still a large amount of antipathy towards queer people in California.