Judge overturns California's ban on same-sex marriage

Aug 4, 2010 Full story: www.cnn.com 201,187

A federal judge in California has knocked down the state's voter-approved ban on same-sex marriage, ruling Wednesday that the state's controversial Proposition 8 violates the U.S. Constitution.

Full Story
Big D

Modesto, CA

#180462 Feb 20, 2013
Frankie Rizzo wrote:
<quoted text>
"I don't need to prove it." Yes you do, when you accuse people of crimes, the burden of proof is on you.
The government dropped the case due to lack of evidence and returned the traumatized children to their loving biological parents. Oprah went there and declared it cool. Oprah approved! What the hell more do you want bigot?
The government could have gone in a seized the real criminals, instead they arrested everybody and put their children in the notorious Texas child care system. Nice! But you don't care.
I have net accused anyone of any crimes at all, they were accused ( and convicted ) by the courts. I am just making you aware of it as you seem totally ignorant of the event.

I am not the law ( or Judge Dred )

I donít know why they did it in the order that they did, but I can assume their first concern was to remove the children from a real an imminent threat. Go talk to themÖ that is who you have an issue with. Whining and crying on a forum here will get you nowhere, you have an issue with itÖ go do something about it.

I think we are getting to the base of your desire for polygamy, here you are defending the convicted criminals now.
Frankie Rizzo

Union City, CA

#180463 Feb 20, 2013
Pietro Armando wrote:
<quoted text>
Well Franke....you know what they say....if sex is a pain the the arse...you're doing it the wrong way!
And if it's real messy, you're doing it the right way!
Big D

Modesto, CA

#180464 Feb 20, 2013
Pietro Armando wrote:
Same-sex marriages give polygamy a legal boost
By Valerie Richardson-The Washington Times Sunday, March 20, 2011
The outlook for polygamy hasn't been this good since Abraham took Keturah as his third wife.
Plural marriage remains illegal, but it's undergoing an image upgrade as a result of television shows like HBO's "Big Love" and TLC's "Sister Wives." More significantly, it's getting a legal boost from a strange bedfellow: the success of same-sex marriage.
Gay-rights advocates cringe whenever the connection is made between same-sex and plural marriage, but more than a few legal analysts say the recent gains posted by gay marriage in the courts and state legislatures cannot help but bolster the case for legalized polygamy.
The federal government and most states define marriage as an institution between one man and one woman. If marriage is redefined to include two people of the same sex, the argument goes, then it can be redefined to include more than two people.
Critics reject the polygamy comparison, arguing that marriage's definition as a union of two people remains inviolable. They also dismiss the specter of legalized polygamy as a scare tactic used by the traditional-marriage camp to chill public support for same-sex marriage.
Claiming much deeper roots in human society than gay marriage, plural marriage has been practiced for centuries in nations and cultures across the globe and has ties to both Christianity and Islam. Same-sex marriage is a recent phenomenon confined to the secular West.
"Unlike same-sex marriage, which has no historical roots and is a new frontier ó you can't say the same thing about polygamy," said Austin Nimocks, attorney for the conservative Alliance Defense Fund, which opposes same-sex marriage. "There's a cultural underpinning and support for plural marriage, so one could say the case is actually stronger for plural marriage."
Wayne McCormack, dean of the University of Utah law school, predicted a pro-polygamy legal challenge based on recent court decisions in favor of same-sex marriage is all but inevitable. Five states and the District of Columbia now recognize gay marriage.
"I don't have any doubt we'll see it," said Mr. McCormack. "It's going to play out after same-sex marriage is resolved, but we're going to get new cases."
He pointed to a case now before a Canadian judge testing the national ban on polygamy. British Columbia Chief Justice Robert Bauman is expected to rule later this year on whether anti-polygamy laws violate Canada's constitution. Canada legalized same-sex marriage in 2005.
"What the Canadian court is looking at is whether restrictions against polygamy are a denial of personal liberty," said Mr. McCormack. "They're using the same arguments that we see used here to support gay marriage."
If U.S. courts do eventually legalize plural marriage, there's an excellent chance that the attorney for the plaintiffs will be Brian Barnard,, he has been challenging anti-polygamy laws for decades.
"We haven't been successful, but we think the times are a-coming," said Mr. Barnard, who serves as legal director for the Utah Civil Rights and Liberties Foundation.
At the same time, he said, it won't just happen automatically if and when gay marriage becomes the law of the land. Unlike Canadian courts, which can take up constitutional questions without being presented with a case, the pro-polygamy side will need a case, and so far that's been the problem.
Eight years ago, Mr. Barnard brought a case on behalf of a man and woman who were denied a marriage license because he was already married. The 10th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals rejected their claim
http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2011/mar/...
It might if anyone would take any action with it.... but no one seems to be.
Frankie Rizzo

Union City, CA

#180465 Feb 20, 2013
Big D wrote:
<quoted text>
I have net accused anyone of any crimes at all, they were accused ( and convicted ) by the courts. I am just making you aware of it as you seem totally ignorant of the event.
I am not the law ( or Judge Dred )
I donít know why they did it in the order that they did, but I can assume their first concern was to remove the children from a real an imminent threat. Go talk to themÖ that is who you have an issue with. Whining and crying on a forum here will get you nowhere, you have an issue with itÖ go do something about it.
I think we are getting to the base of your desire for polygamy, here you are defending the convicted criminals now.
How many of the 460 children's parents were convicted jackass? Come on, you're the expert and I know nothing. Tell us. How many?

What we are getting to is the base of your ignorance.
Frankie Rizzo

Union City, CA

#180466 Feb 20, 2013
Big D wrote:
<quoted text>
It might if anyone would take any action with it.... but no one seems to be.
So what? Does that mean as Rose_NoHo says "it's not an equal rights issue, it just isn't"?
Frankie Rizzo

Union City, CA

#180467 Feb 20, 2013
Big D wrote:
<quoted text>
...you have an issue with itÖ go do something about it...
There you go again!

Come on, is that your best argument?
Big D

Modesto, CA

#180468 Feb 20, 2013
Frankie Rizzo wrote:
<quoted text>
There you go again!
Come on, is that your best argument?
I donít have an argument, I donít give a crap about it one way or the other.

I am trying to give you something to do other than to whine about it. Whining here will get nothing whatsoever done about it.
Big D

Modesto, CA

#180469 Feb 20, 2013
Frankie Rizzo wrote:
<quoted text>
How many of the 460 children's parents were convicted jackass? Come on, you're the expert and I know nothing. Tell us. How many?
What we are getting to is the base of your ignorance.
The leader that they collectively had sworn obedience to, to the point that they would give their underage children to older men for sex was convicted of quite a few.
Frankie Rizzo

Union City, CA

#180470 Feb 20, 2013
When the children under 5 realized their mothers would be taken away, the children started crying and screaming, requiring CPS workers to pry many from their mothers.

Nice!
Frankie Rizzo

Union City, CA

#180471 Feb 20, 2013
Big D wrote:
<quoted text>
I have net accused anyone of any crimes at all, they were accused ( and convicted ) by the courts. I am just making you aware of it as you seem totally ignorant of the event....
On May 22, 2008 an appeals court ruled there was not enough evidence at the original hearing that the children were in immediate danger to justify keeping them in state custody. The court added that Judge Walther had abused her discretion by keeping the children in state care. The court ruled, "The department did not present any evidence of danger to the physical health and safety of any male children or any female children who had not reached puberty."[52] The children were to be returned to their families in 10 days. CPS announced they would seek to overturn the decision.[53] On May 29, the Texas Supreme Court declined to issue a mandamus to the Appeals Court, with a result that CPS must return all of the children. The court stated,ďOn the record before us, removal of the children was not warranted.Ē[54] The court also noted that although the children must be returned, "it need not do so without granting other appropriate relief to protect the children."[55]
Frankie Rizzo

Union City, CA

#180472 Feb 20, 2013
Big D wrote:
<quoted text>
The leader that they collectively had sworn obedience to, to the point that they would give their underage children to older men for sex was convicted of quite a few.
Four men were rightfully convicted of despicable crimes.

Jeffry Dahmer was rightfully convicted of despicable crimes. Should we outlaw gay marriage?
Frankie Rizzo

Union City, CA

#180473 Feb 20, 2013
Mental health workers who worked at the shelter testified similarly to state officials, also citing lack of privacy, only military cots for sleeping and poor-quality food, with no communications and threatened arrest if mothers waved to friends. "The CPS workers were openly rude to the mothers and children, yelled at them for trying to wave to friends... threatened them with arrest if they did not stop waving"[85] Workers took notes on everything the "guests" said. In many of the testimonies it was compared it to a prison or concentration camp.

Nice!
Big D

Modesto, CA

#180474 Feb 20, 2013
Frankie Rizzo wrote:
<quoted text>
Four men were rightfully convicted of despicable crimes.
Jeffry Dahmer was rightfully convicted of despicable crimes. Should we outlaw gay marriage?
and here is why you talk about polygamy, how you can relate that to not allowing gay marriage.

Jeffery Dhamer was not involved in a same sex marriage, he didnít use same sex marriage as the "excuse" for his crimes, he is not the face of same sex marriage, never was. In the minds of voters he is just a criminal and has nothing to do whatsoever with same sex marriage.

Not true for your personal hero Warren Jeffs, he IS the public face of polygamy, I donít think he should be, but he is in the minds of a large number of voters. If you would just go out and get your signatures you might realize that.
Frankie Rizzo

Union City, CA

#180475 Feb 20, 2013
Big D wrote:
<quoted text>
and here is why you talk about polygamy, how you can relate that to not allowing gay marriage.
Jeffery Dhamer was not involved in a same sex marriage, he didnít use same sex marriage as the "excuse" for his crimes, he is not the face of same sex marriage, never was. In the minds of voters he is just a criminal and has nothing to do whatsoever with same sex marriage.
Not true for your personal hero Warren Jeffs, he IS the public face of polygamy, I donít think he should be, but he is in the minds of a large number of voters. If you would just go out and get your signatures you might realize that.
No one used polygamy as an excuse for crimes. No matter how you spin it, there is no reason for same sex or poly marriage to be unlawful.

We have perfectly good laws against all the crimes your ignorance can conjure up. Some people in marriages abuse their spouses. Do we ban marriage?

One of the links I submitted and you ignored because you already know everything and I am stupid was of a happy family of 3 men and their 6 children. Are they child molesters too? Should CPS seize their children too?
Frankie Rizzo

Union City, CA

#180476 Feb 20, 2013
Big D wrote:
<quoted text>
and here is why you talk about polygamy, how you can relate that to not allowing gay marriage.
Jeffery Dhamer was not involved in a same sex marriage, he didnít use same sex marriage as the "excuse" for his crimes, he is not the face of same sex marriage, never was. In the minds of voters he is just a criminal and has nothing to do whatsoever with same sex marriage.
Not true for your personal hero Warren Jeffs, he IS the public face of polygamy, I donít think he should be, but he is in the minds of a large number of voters. If you would just go out and get your signatures you might realize that.
There are many Islamic polygamists around the world. Many more than Christian.

Does that give polygamy a bad image in your world too? I guess so.

So far your argument seems to be polygamists are bad. And I should go out and gather signatures because no one cares except they hate it because of the ugly "face of polygamy" or something.
Frankie Rizzo

Union City, CA

#180477 Feb 20, 2013
Big D wrote:
<quoted text>.
Not true for your personal hero Warren Jeffs,
Come on, are you going to start that crap again?

Come back when you have an argument, I've heard all your ad hominem. It's stupid.
SpazzO

Covina, CA

#180478 Feb 20, 2013
SpazzO, how are the crime stats this month?
Big D

Modesto, CA

#180480 Feb 20, 2013
Frankie Rizzo wrote:
<quoted text>
Come on, are you going to start that crap again?
Come back when you have an argument, I've heard all your ad hominem. It's stupid.
What crap, no one can talk about the advances that are in the courts now over same sex marriage because of your obsessive infatuation
Big D

Modesto, CA

#180481 Feb 20, 2013
Frankie Rizzo wrote:
<quoted text>
There are many Islamic polygamists around the world. Many more than Christian.
Does that give polygamy a bad image in your world too? I guess so.
So far your argument seems to be polygamists are bad. And I should go out and gather signatures because no one cares except they hate it because of the ugly "face of polygamy" or something.
I donít have an argument, I am not opposed, I would vote in favor if it ever came up.

I donít think all polygamists are bad, but the bad one are the only ones in the spotlight lately. You should do something about that.

It probably isnít going to come up because no one seems to be working on bringing it up from a legal perspective. We just have people totally obsessed with it that wine and complain but do nothing.
Frankie Rizzo

Union City, CA

#180482 Feb 20, 2013
Sure they have, there was a case in Utah very recently. Just because you don't know about it doesn't mean it didn't happen, you are ignorant of a lot of things.

But why does it matter how many people want it or how many current court cases there are? WHY? Why do keep saying that?

Do we issue equal rights by popularity contest? Do I get to decide on your marriage?

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Berkeley Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
How to Convert Sony Handycam MTS to MP4 on PC/M... 3 min ujinwang3 1
Oakland police protesters smash windows, vandal... 52 min Oakland 2
Jill Marie Abbott (Jun '13) 1 hr friendcoworkerofj... 11
The 25 Most Dangerous Cities in the U.S. Are Mo... (Nov '10) 16 hr Bently 19,568
We'll Find Alien Life in This Lifetime, Scienti... (May '14) 17 hr One way or another 28
Doctor heads to court after online sex sting (Nov '06) Wed Vinegar 16,960
Any sexy black girls attracted to white guys? Wed Russiankoalabear 1

Berkeley News Video

Berkeley Dating
Find my Match
More from around the web

Berkeley People Search

Addresses and phone numbers for FREE

Berkeley News, Events & Info

Click for news, events and info in Berkeley

Personal Finance

Mortgages [ See current mortgage rates ]

NFL Latest News

Updated 3:43 pm PST

NBC Sports 3:43PM
49ers' Crabtree doesn't know what future holds - NBC Sports
NBC Sports 3:54 PM
Derek Carr returns to practice with Raiders - NBC Sports
Bleacher Report 9:05 PM
49ers Potential Cap Casualties for 2015
NBC Sports 4:31 AM
Michael Crabtree can't wait to see what happens this offseason
NBC Sports 7:10 AM
John Harbaugh: Family not pushing brother Jim to Michigan