Judge overturns California's ban on s...

Judge overturns California's ban on same-sex marriage

There are 201851 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.

Dorn

La Puente, CA

#188069 Apr 10, 2013
Pietro Armando wrote:
<quoted text>
Good point. Do the other faiths and atheists get a free "get out of castration card?
I am aware that men fear castration as much as women fear being raped. Castration is a fitting sentence for the crime of rape.
heartandmind

Moline, IL

#188070 Apr 10, 2013
Big D wrote:
<quoted text>
No, not made up, I know them personally.
They are actually the first same sex couple I have heard using terms like that myself... but it certainly didn’t bother me.
The twins are cute :)
My son works for a VERY large global company that is actually considering pulling offices and manufacturing out of states that do not recognize equality for their married employees benefits if the Supreme court does not act decisively on a national scale ( not something I expect them to do )
Surprised me, but they can afford to
Not to worry there will still be a job at Chick Fil A for those states
interesting.

probably a company like google or microsoft. but i'm just guessing. that's pretty foward thinking for them.

what i'm faced with is working for an international company, based in a nordic country, that offers same sex spouse benefits. it also offers it in states that have same sex marriage civil unions recognized. however, where ssm or cu's aren't recognized, they don't. so, since i work in texas, nothing for us.

i do expect that to change once DOMA's ruled upon - and perhaps Prop 8 (depending on how they rule of course - for national recongition or just in CA).
heartandmind

Moline, IL

#188071 Apr 10, 2013
Pietro Armando wrote:
<quoted text>
Interesting situation. So the wife, the female partner, apparently likes everything about a man but not the plumbing? Thus her choice of a female husband?
a person is always more than just their plumbing features.

Since: Dec 09

Knoxville, TN

#188072 Apr 10, 2013
tenn chicken choke wrote:
KINGSPORT, TN (WJHL)- former Mount Carmel Vice-Mayor William Blakely, exposed himself while driving. News Channel 11 had the only reporter in court for Thursday's preliminary hearing in Kingsport.
"I was scared that I was gonna wreck, he was gonna cause me to wreck," witness Deborah Sturgill said.
"It seems that every victim would tell the same story. But I knew all the victims did not know each other," Kingsport Police Detective Terry Christian said.
Personal accounts in Thursday's testimonies started the same - Blakely allegedly waving to get the drivers' attention, then escalating to honking and partially crossing over into the drivers lane.
Each witness testified they were fearful Blakely's driving would cause an accident.
"He was taking his hand, wetting his mouth, and masturbating," Sturgill said.
"At over 90 miles per hour, he had his penis out [the window]... he was masturbating... and that's when it got really, really bad. I wouldn't look over any more, and I wrote his tag number down on my hand, which I believe he noticed, and he exited very quickly," Street said.
Sounds like a disturbed man... This is not the behavior of a mentally intact person, be they straight or gay.

“Vita e' Bella.”

Since: May 12

Location hidden

#188073 Apr 10, 2013
Big D wrote:
<quoted text>
Yes more states have come over every year
Hmmmmmm....32 U.S. states have constituionally defined marriage as a union of one man and one woman, there's only 50 states in the union...so at some point unless there is a change in the constitutional states, or the Supreme Court imposes SSM nationwide, more than half the country will be conjugal husband and wife states. SSM has a limit,
but I live in California, and there are 18,000 legally legitimately married same sex couples here now, the lawsuit against prop 8 is about why other same sex couples are being singled out over the matter of when they wanted to get married
No chance of prop 8 not being overturned, if not by the supreme court than by the next election by ballot measure
The time has come to do the right thing
California proved the people have no say, the constituional process the people followed, the rule of law proved to be a farce. What is the point of having the process, if the result is a federal judge over rules the people of the state?
Xavier Breath

Hoboken, NJ

#188074 Apr 10, 2013
Pietro Armando wrote:
<quoted text>
X Box! How ya doing? Nice selective out of context snippet usage. When did "gay" enter common usage to refer to homosexuality?
You can whine and pout all you like. SSM is here to stay, coming soon to all 50 States. You can either adapt to reality or go extinct.

“Vita e' Bella.”

Since: May 12

Location hidden

#188075 Apr 10, 2013
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Same-sex_marriag...

On the March 7, 2000 primary election, Proposition 22 was adopted by a vote of 61.4% to 38%, thus adding § 308.5 to the Family Code, largely replicating the 1977 enactment. The one-sentence code section explicitly defined the union of a man and a woman as the only valid or recognizable form of marriage in the State of California. Proposition 22 was authored by State Senator William J. Knight, and the measure was dubbed the "Knight initiative" in an attempt to link it to the failed "Briggs Initiative" (Proposition 6 of 1978) that would have banned gays and lesbians from working as teachers in California's public schools. The California Supreme Court invalidated the results of Proposition 22 in 2008.
Xavier Breath

Hoboken, NJ

#188076 Apr 10, 2013
Pietro Armando wrote:
<quoted text>
Hmmmmmm....32 U.S. states have constituionally defined marriage as a union of one man and one woman, there's only 50 states in the union...so at some point unless there is a change in the constitutional states, or the Supreme Court imposes SSM nationwide, more than half the country will be conjugal husband and wife states. SSM has a limit,
<quoted text>
California proved the people have no say, the constituional process the people followed, the rule of law proved to be a farce. What is the point of having the process, if the result is a federal judge over rules the people of the state?
So you think that "the people" can just draw up any ol' petition and vote on it, eh? Are you forgetting about Judicial Review, or did youi never learn it in the first place?

“Vita e' Bella.”

Since: May 12

Location hidden

#188077 Apr 10, 2013
heartandmind wrote:
<quoted text>
a person is always more than just their plumbing features.
Agreed H&M. It does make for an interesting psychological study. If a woman is sexually attracted to another woman, why would she choose a very masculine woman? No disrespect intended, just puzzled. The plumbing has got to be the primary reason. Yes?
Anonymous

Waltham, MA

#188078 Apr 10, 2013
poledancer45 wrote:
<quoted text>hey i just saw where you had been making out with your brother husband .. sad you two leave a nasty oil stain on the concrete in the driveway... next time at least put speedy dry down once your finished
quit pimping out your daughters for wooden nickels! Its just not right! Be a better parent and quit teaching your children how to be dirty $kank$!

“Vita e' Bella.”

Since: May 12

Location hidden

#188079 Apr 10, 2013
Xavier Breath wrote:
<quoted text>
You can whine and pout all you like. SSM is here to stay,
Xbox...sigh...it is what it is, legal in a few states so far.
coming soon to all 50 States.
Time will tell...so far 32 state constitutions say otherwise.
You can either adapt to reality or go extinct.
Oooooooh...a bit of drama queen there. Poly want a cracker?
Xavier Breath

Hoboken, NJ

#188080 Apr 10, 2013
Pietro Armando wrote:
<quoted text>
Hmmmmmm....32 U.S. states have constituionally defined marriage as a union of one man and one woman, there's only 50 states in the union...so at some point unless there is a change in the constitutional states, or the Supreme Court imposes SSM nationwide, more than half the country will be conjugal husband and wife states. SSM has a limit,
Tell me about the Full Faith and Credit Clause.....

How can SCOTUS justify a couple being legally married in one State, but not in another?
Anonymous

Waltham, MA

#188081 Apr 10, 2013
poledancer45 wrote:
<quoted text>is it disel perfume for you today mixed with marlboro smoke... that oughta get your redneck brother fiance excited eeh
No its more like Seneca full flavors and chainsaw oil! Still stinking of whiskey, cheese, and hooker spit!? I'm sure you are!

“Vita e' Bella.”

Since: May 12

Location hidden

#188082 Apr 10, 2013
Xavier Breath wrote:
<quoted text>
So you think that "the people" can just draw up any ol' petition and vote on it, eh? Are you forgetting about Judicial Review, or did youi never learn it in the first place?
No, not all. But as in California, how many time have the people spoken, have voted on a defintion of a relationship that applies to ALL men and women? Whats the point of allowing people to vote on such matters?

Since: Dec 09

Knoxville, TN

#188083 Apr 10, 2013
Pietro Armando wrote:
<quoted text>
No, not all. But as in California, how many time have the people spoken, have voted on a defintion of a relationship that applies to ALL men and women? Whats the point of allowing people to vote on such matters?
I hope you'll study the last question you raise in your post.

What, exactly, is the point of allow people to vote on such matters?

As far as I can tell from looking at the various propositions that have been voted on in CA since the early 70s there has never been such a proposition. It's unprecedented.

Just because a group of people get enough people to sign a petition to put an issue on the ballot does not mean that it should have been there in the first place.

And that was the decision of Judge Walker.
Frankie Rizzo

Union City, CA

#188084 Apr 10, 2013
Pietro Armando wrote:
<quoted text>
Whatever...you're just a bigot...a plain old bigot.
She (Pole Dancer) has a card. Therefore she can be as bigoted as she feels and not be a bigot.

P.S. I don't have a card.
Frankie Rizzo

Union City, CA

#188085 Apr 10, 2013
Pietro Armando wrote:
<quoted text>
No, not all. But as in California, how many time have the people spoken, have voted on a defintion of a relationship that applies to ALL men and women? Whats the point of allowing people to vote on such matters?
Pay no attention to "Xavier Breath" butting in, the big loudmouthed dopey yenta.

He's in Joisey and has absolutely no business butting his 2 cents in California politics. But of course that doesn't stop him from loudly spouting off dumb spiteful nonsense.
Frankie Rizzo

Union City, CA

#188086 Apr 10, 2013
Xavier Breath wrote:
<quoted text>
Tell me about the Full Faith and Credit Clause.....
How can SCOTUS justify a couple being legally married in one State, but not in another?
They don't get to justify it. It's none of their business.
Xavier Breath

Hoboken, NJ

#188087 Apr 10, 2013
Pietro Armando wrote:
<quoted text>
No, not all. But as in California, how many time have the people spoken, have voted on a defintion of a relationship that applies to ALL men and women? Whats the point of allowing people to vote on such matters?
Because it's the California way. Even their own Supreme Court said California should revisit their stupid voter initiative laws. Let them waste their time and money passing unconstitutional laws..... go ahead.....
Xavier Breath

Hoboken, NJ

#188088 Apr 10, 2013
Frankie Rizzo wrote:
<quoted text>
They don't get to justify it. It's none of their business.
Really? None of their business, eh? ahahahahahahahahahahahah

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.

Beverly Hills Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
Car & pedestrian collision? Soon be an app for ... 1 hr Ginnie 1
News Inglewood police investigating apparent murder-... 11 hr GVR 1
News Sexy selfie sinks 'Sam & Cat'? (Apr '14) 19 hr Ariana Grande 4
Seattle’s $15 Minimum Wage Law Came Back To Bit... Mon Joan 1
News The 25 Most Dangerous Cities in the U.S. Are Mo... (Nov '10) Mon eezy reder 20,088
News Car shears fire hydrant in accident at Coldwate... Sun dawgbear 1
Skanky"s Bar coming to Beverly hills Jul 24 Ricky Ray 1
More from around the web

Personal Finance

Beverly Hills Mortgages