Judge overturns California's ban on s...

Judge overturns California's ban on same-sex marriage

There are 201480 comments on the www.cnn.com story from Aug 4, 2010, titled Judge overturns California's ban on same-sex marriage. In it, www.cnn.com reports that:

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.

Join the discussion below, or Read more at www.cnn.com.

Big D

Modesto, CA

#187632 Apr 8, 2013
Randy -Rock- Hudson wrote:
<quoted text>
Tied to a stake, Yes. For being a Protestant, No. By those same Christians that you knock, so regularly, but I still note your hatred of them, with much less justification than I have. But I do not crusade against them, as you do.
History lesson

Learn why Bloody Mary became the nickname of Queen Mary child of Henry the 8th

She used to burn people that were not Catholic

You are wrong, I defend your ability to believe, I only attack when you try and shove your beliefs down the throats of those that are not of your belief.

Since: Mar 09

Location hidden

#187633 Apr 8, 2013
Randy -Rock- Hudson wrote:
<quoted text>
...Have them previously drawn up, and postdate them. Notarized and the whole 9 yards. Damn, do I have to do all your thinking for you?
Postdated for when?
"I think my aorta will burst on January 25th 2017."
BTW, a Notary is supposed to use the correct date for a document. Most of them won't fudge things. And it'd be a real hoot if that document dated January 24th 2017 was notarised by a person that died in 2015.
Big D

Modesto, CA

#187634 Apr 8, 2013
Randy -Rock- Hudson wrote:
<quoted text>
Those who want homosexual relationships to be redefined as marriages say that many aspects of their relationships are like marriageóhaving sexual play, living together, loving one another, etc.óand therefore they should be allowed to call their relationships marriages and should be recognized in the law as marriage partners. But this cannot be a proper legal matter until the empirical case has been made that a homosexual partnership and a marriage are indistinguishable. Otherwise, the appeal amounts to nothing more than a request that homosexual partners be allowed to call themselves what they want to call themselves regardless of the differences that exist in reality.
I have not heard them say anything that way.

What I have heard them say is they want the same recognition and legal status for their lifetime relationships as others have, as they have the same level of commitment.

There is nothing on the license about particular kinds of sex that you are so obsessed with

I have never once heard a valid reason why they should not be recognized the same, there are 18,000 legally married same sex couples in California right now, certainly has not harmed my marriage.

In what way did it harm yours?
Frankie Rizzo

Hayward, CA

#187635 Apr 8, 2013
Xavier Breath wrote:
<quoted text>
Suggesting that someone commit fraud hardly grants you the moral high ground.
Thank you for stopping by just to share that thought.
Frankie Rizzo

Hayward, CA

#187637 Apr 8, 2013
Big D wrote:
<quoted text>
History lesson
Learn why Bloody Mary became the nickname of Queen Mary child of Henry the 8th
She used to burn people that were not Catholic
You are wrong, I defend your ability to believe, I only attack when you try and shove your beliefs down the throats of those that are not of your belief.
Too dramatic. Comes across very silly. Shoving of stuff down throats, bloody Queen Mary, burning people and such. Tone it down. D minus.
Big D

Modesto, CA

#187644 Apr 8, 2013
Frankie Rizzo wrote:
<quoted text>
Too dramatic. Comes across very silly. Shoving of stuff down throats, bloody Queen Mary, burning people and such. Tone it down. D minus.
Someone else didnít know, again you donít have the context of what you are talking about.

You are like a little child in the back seat that keeps asking questions when you only comprehend about every 5th word said
Big D

Modesto, CA

#187645 Apr 8, 2013
Randy -Rock- Hudson wrote:
<quoted text>
I'm well aware of Bloody Mary, little bit in the family history about her.
Doesn't give me cause to drag the Christians into every tirade, though...
I am not the one draging them in, they are all over this forum and it was thier out of state money that funded the campaign for prop 8

If they dont bring up thier faith.. I wont either
Xavier Breath

West New York, NJ

#187647 Apr 8, 2013
Randy -Rock- Hudson wrote:
<quoted text>
Calling SSSB a "marriage" is a fraud, but that hasn't stopped you, has it?
Have it YOUR way.

Suggesting someone commit a FELONY hardly gives you the moral high ground. I'll even go one step further, punkie Brewster. It's also a safe bet to assume you would cheat on your taxes.
Frankie Rizzo

Hayward, CA

#187648 Apr 8, 2013
Big D wrote:
<quoted text>
Someone else didnít know, again you donít have the context of what you are talking about.
You are like a little child in the back seat that keeps asking questions when you only comprehend about every 5th word said
Thank you for taking the time to share those thoughts.

However they are irrelevant, incorrect and unecessary.
Frankie Rizzo

Hayward, CA

#187649 Apr 8, 2013
Big D wrote:
<quoted text>
I am not the one draging them in, they are all over this forum and it was thier out of state money that funded the campaign for prop 8
If they dont bring up thier faith.. I wont either
Yes. It was you that dragged them in.
Xavier Breath

West New York, NJ

#187651 Apr 8, 2013
Randy -Rock- Hudson wrote:
<quoted text>
That is EXACTLY what they are saying.
That they want the same recognition of their relationships, even though, clearly, they are different.
On the license, No. But, as is the way of logic, if 2 men get married, then, they are engaging in homosexual behavior,
Huh? Do you mean they are having sex, or they are going to the theater? Many married couples have sex. Many unmarried couples have sex. and in your category, many single people have sex.

You have an issue with two men having sex. What's the big deal? Why does this disturb your peace? You come on here to vent, but you don't have to take seriously any criticism of you. Go talk to a psychiatrist and get some feedback.
Frankie Rizzo

Hayward, CA

#187652 Apr 8, 2013
Xavier Breath wrote:
<quoted text>
Have it YOUR way.
Suggesting someone commit a FELONY hardly gives you the moral high ground. I'll even go one step further, punkie Brewster. It's also a safe bet to assume you would cheat on your taxes.
As always, nothing but angry irrelevant ad hominem.

But thank you for stopping by and sharing your thoughts.
Xavier Breath

West New York, NJ

#187653 Apr 8, 2013
Big D wrote:
<quoted text>
Someone else didnít know, again you donít have the context of what you are talking about.
You are like a little child in the back seat that keeps asking questions when you only comprehend about every 5th word said
lol. He's stoned!
Big D

Modesto, CA

#187655 Apr 8, 2013
Frankie Rizzo wrote:
<quoted text>
Yes. It was you that dragged them in.
Nope only responding to them, but we all remember that you are incapable of seeing past posts so .. shrug ... you choose to remain ignorant.

Your choice
Xavier Breath

West New York, NJ

#187656 Apr 8, 2013
Randy -Rock- Hudson wrote:
<quoted text>
I hope that you don't think that one who didn't know was me, did you? LOL Sir, my knowledge of English history is above question, that daughter of Catherine of Aragon, is no hero of mine. I would not have been burnt as a Protestant, I would have been burnt as a witch. Please understand my distinction as to why I would have been burnt.
Also..
"I am not the one draging them in, they are all over this forum and it was thier out of state money that funded the campaign for prop 8
If they dont bring up thier faith.. I wont either"
You, sir, have repeatedly brought them in, out of the blue. Where no mention had been made of them, you have guaranteed their presence. It would seem that as long as you drag them in, you find room to scoff, they are merely your scapegoats. Look up "Scapegoat", please. Better yet...Allow me..
"In modern usage a scapegoat is an individual, group, or country singled out for unmerited negative treatment or blame. A whipping boy or "fall guy" is a form of scapegoat."
They are your "Whipping Boy", another English tradition, although all manner of societies use them. The English honed the use of the "Whipping Boy". We certainly know how to make a go of something, don't we? Did you see how slavery was a global institution, but, boy, what we did for the business, whoowee.......We honed it into unpopularity. I know, how racist of me...Except that slavery knew no racial bounds, until we Americans started to be subjected to "White Guilt", then, all of a sudden, damn.....Let's forget that Brits were slaves of the Romans, shall we? I'll be the Scapegoat, again...
Yes.... do look up the etymology of scapegoat.
heartandmind

Moline, IL

#187657 Apr 8, 2013
Randy -Rock- Hudson wrote:
<quoted text>
Yes, I thought that a simple and clear example would amuse you. Pity. I'd had high hopes for you, but, as you have just demonstrated, you cannot grasp lower skills, such as comprehension of grammatical errors, so why did I think you would grasp anything higher? I fear I will have little luck teaching you anything.
keep trying lil' buddy.

if you're attacking spelling and grammatical errors then you've lost the war. when you understand that, maybe you'll run off to the corner and hush. that way, the rest of the grownups in the room can continue the conversation.

it's ok. someday you'll make it to the grownup's table.
Xavier Breath

West New York, NJ

#187658 Apr 8, 2013
Randy -Rock- Hudson wrote:
It has diminished the meaning of it, dumbed it down to mean "an indiscriminate coupling". A business venture.
I doubt if anyone that is actually married would say that. And it looks like the wedding business is booming. I really doubt if many people would spend SO much money on a one day party, if it was just to celebrate an indiscriminate coupling.

I think you missed your true calling. You should have been a crepehanger.
Big D

Modesto, CA

#187659 Apr 8, 2013
Randy -Rock- Hudson wrote:
<quoted text>
I hope that you don't think that one who didn't know was me, did you? LOL Sir, my knowledge of English history is above question, that daughter of Catherine of Aragon, is no hero of mine. I would not have been burnt as a Protestant, I would have been burnt as a witch. Please understand my distinction as to why I would have been burnt.
Also..
"I am not the one draging them in, they are all over this forum and it was thier out of state money that funded the campaign for prop 8
If they dont bring up thier faith.. I wont either"
You, sir, have repeatedly brought them in, out of the blue. Where no mention had been made of them, you have guaranteed their presence. It would seem that as long as you drag them in, you find room to scoff, they are merely your scapegoats. Look up "Scapegoat", please. Better yet...Allow me..
"In modern usage a scapegoat is an individual, group, or country singled out for unmerited negative treatment or blame. A whipping boy or "fall guy" is a form of scapegoat."
They are your "Whipping Boy", another English tradition, although all manner of societies use them. The English honed the use of the "Whipping Boy". We certainly know how to make a go of something, don't we? Did you see how slavery was a global institution, but, boy, what we did for the business, whoowee.......We honed it into unpopularity. I know, how racist of me...Except that slavery knew no racial bounds, until we Americans started to be subjected to "White Guilt", then, all of a sudden, damn.....Let's forget that Brits were slaves of the Romans, shall we? I'll be the Scapegoat, again...
Thank you for clarifying, they are not scapegoats or whipping boys here as we all know, they are funding the campaigns opposed to equal rights, and they are the ones carrying signs and putting placards on their lawns.

Thank you for clarifying that is not what I am doing

I have not said anything about "white guilt" I said slaves, I didnít say anything about color. You have a problem with white guilt? Ok... I donít.

Yes we had slaves in this country, yes other countries had slaves, yes slaves have been of a variety of races in different times and places.

It is a good example of.... Just because something was historically true... does not make it a good thing.

I donít want to go back to slavery because it used to be common in many cultures

I donít want to go back to burring people at the stake because they believed in this religion or that religion

I donít want to go back to the time when Alcohol was illegal in the US

I donít want to go back to the time when Women were not allowed the vote

and I donít want to go back to the time when marriage was not allowed to same sex couples as it is today, recognized in 12 states ( and one district ) and performed in 10 states and that number is growing every year.

Just because something used to be true, does not make it a good thing.

which is why I give no credit at all to the Historically or Traditional arguments.
Frankie Rizzo

Hayward, CA

#187660 Apr 8, 2013
Xavier Breath wrote:
<quoted text>lol. He's stoned!
Reported! Irrelevant off topic nonsense, angry ad hominem, dopiness, pettiness, conjecture and a joke fail!
Frankie Rizzo

Hayward, CA

#187661 Apr 8, 2013
Big D wrote:
<quoted text>
Thank you for clarifying, they are not scapegoats or whipping boys here as we all know, they are funding the campaigns opposed to equal rights, and they are the ones carrying signs and putting placards on their lawns.
Thank you for clarifying that is not what I am doing
I have not said anything about "white guilt" I said slaves, I didnít say anything about color. You have a problem with white guilt? Ok... I donít.
Yes we had slaves in this country, yes other countries had slaves, yes slaves have been of a variety of races in different times and places.
It is a good example of.... Just because something was historically true... does not make it a good thing.
I donít want to go back to slavery because it used to be common in many cultures
I donít want to go back to burring people at the stake because they believed in this religion or that religion
I donít want to go back to the time when Alcohol was illegal in the US
I donít want to go back to the time when Women were not allowed the vote
and I donít want to go back to the time when marriage was not allowed to same sex couples as it is today, recognized in 12 states ( and one district ) and performed in 10 states and that number is growing every year.
Just because something used to be true, does not make it a good thing.
which is why I give no credit at all to the Historically or Traditional arguments.
Too funny!

How about when a good cigar was a smoke?

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
News Reputed Gang Member Faces New Charges Fri Eye 4 N Eye 2
News Mayor Libby Schaaf helps rescue famous Oakland ... Fri Eye 4 N Eye 2
News Some Oakland churches offer drastic advice: Sto... Fri jbalsak 1
News Race and Beyond: Let's Talk About Race and Poverty (Oct '12) Apr 19 Human 249
News The 25 Most Dangerous Cities in the U.S. Are Mo... (Nov '10) Apr 18 Radio Flyer 3016 21,530
Go Wine Tasting on Treasure Island Apr 17 howefortunate 1
News Richmond Deputy Fatally Shoots Burglary Suspect (Jan '07) Apr 16 A Thought 74

Berkeley Jobs

Personal Finance

Berkeley Mortgages