?Homosexual conduct is inconsistent with (Dunne?s) Christian practices, beliefs and values, which are protected by the First Amendment,? the lawsuit states.
?I respect people with alternative lifestyles, and we must do that in a civil society,? Dunne said. ?I just have a different opinion that millions of people share with me, and I believe that my opinion should be respected just as much as (pro-gay) opinions. I have no intent in spreading hatred or discrimination.?
In his court documents, Dunne described homosexuality as a ?voluntary human behavior that is changeable.?
?Societal recognition and perpetuation of rampant homosexuality is neither prudent nor wise,? his lawsuit states.
Other attorneys aren’t impressed. The Herald quotes attorney Tom Dacey:
?Lawyers have to answer questions about legal principles they disagree with all the time, and that doesn?t mean we?re endorsing them,? said Dacey, a director of Goulston & Storrs? litigation group. ?You might be somebody who is morally opposed to divorce, but have to interpret the divorce laws of the commonwealth to answer a question about who property is passed to.?
–Mb
…at non-gay (but gay friendly) web sites several days ago. Apparently, the plaintiff Dunne, despite having spent a few years and probably more than a few thousand dollars at New England School of Law, does not comprehend the fact that a law exam is primarily an examination as to whether the examinee can identify the legal issues involved in a question, and, to a substantially lesser extent, whether the examinee knows the current state of the law on each of those issues.
<
p>
It is not an examination as to whether the examinee agrees with the current state of the law or even whether the issues should exist.
<
p>
As an aside, if Dunne’s failure was due to his non-response to this single question, it is probable that he should have failed even if he had responded to the question. Except for NY and CA (where bar exams are notoriously difficult to limit competition), bar exams in most jurisdictions are not exactly difficult.
It does appear that the bar exam has successfully screened out one aspirant who really should not be practicing law. To extend this approach, maybe they should add a yes/no question at the end of the exam along the lines of, “If you fail this exam, would you file a whiny and groundless lawsuit that will underscore your inability to comprehend or administer Mass. General Laws?”
<
p>
The fictional Prof. Kingsfield said that first-year students enter law school with skulls full of mush. Unfortunately, it appears that a few leave law school in the same condition.
is a thinly disguised attempt to keep up the hatred and fear of gay people. Whether his is the act of a lone loon, or whether he has the backing of Massachusetts Family Institute remains to be seen. regardless of this case, or any other stupid law suit people come up with, it is clear we are moving in the direction of equality as a society. This man will eventually take his place on the shelf next to the David Parkers of the world after we have all had a good laugh at how ridiculous his argument is.