For the very same reason that heterosexual judges are not removed from cases sexuality.
And because they could not find an asexual federal judge to take the case.
For the very same reason that heterosexual judges are not removed from cases due to their sexuality.
Wrong! Any judge that stand to gain personally in the outcome of the trial should be removed from the case.
“Q: Unbelievable! Why was this guy not removed from this case?
“A: For the very same reason that heterosexual judges are not removed from cases sexuality.”
Let’s translate:
“Q: Why wasn’t this man, who suffers from same-sex attraction disorder, removed from a case involving the legitimization of that disorder as normal and healthy, when his status as one who suffers from that disorder obviously must and clearly does (given his past behavior) prejudice him in favor of the plaintiffs?”
“A: For the same reason healthy men who have no vested interest in the outcome of a case are not removed from those cases.”
That makes a lot of sense.
Another reason to remove him, of course, is that people who suffer from mental disorders cannot be trusted to think rationally and reason correctly. Oh, sometimes they do, sure, but then (as you can see from the writings of Camile Paglia and every person who suffers from SSAD) something comes along that tweaks their disorder, and off they shoot into irrationality.
He should be removed because no one who suffers from SSAD should *ever* be placed in a position of responsibility, in the private sector or the public.
This is clearly bias. Homosexual ‘marriage’ is fully illegal in California. So the correct analogy would be to have convicted thief judge sitting over the case of a thief. How can a homo judge make a correct decision over an illegal act if he himself is immersed in the lifestyle? Total liberal insanity!