Judge overturns California's ban on s...

Judge overturns California's ban on same-sex marriage

There are 201881 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.

Frankie Rizzo

Hayward, CA

#196476 Jun 17, 2013
Zoro wrote:
<quoted text>None, now go find three of them. Frank you keep bringing up Mormons. Your buddy posted about other religions. If thats the reason, religion, no
So you would deny marriage based on religion. Nice! What a hypocrite.
Frankie Rizzo

Hayward, CA

#196477 Jun 17, 2013
Over 500,000 others (besides religious, Jizzy) identify as polyamorous, and engage in "ethical non-monogamy" — loving, committed, concurrent, consensual relationships with multiple partners.

Why do you wish to deny them marriage equality JBird?
Vulcan

Covina, CA

#196478 Jun 17, 2013
(frankie) I would get that brain cell looked at by the battery company that sold it to you.
Zoro

Rock Island, IL

#196479 Jun 17, 2013
Frankie Rizzo wrote:
Over 500,000 others (besides religious, Jizzy) identify as polyamorous, and engage in "ethical non-monogamy" — loving, committed, concurrent, consensual relationships with multiple partners.
Why do you wish to deny them marriage equality JBird?
Still, the combined impact of Lawrence and Goodridge has opened the door to the question of whether marriage should be extended beyond the traditional male-female union. The primary power for marriage law resides in the states. And that is the way it should be: The question of the institution of marriage?which is a social construct--is best left to the states, which are the laboratories for the general welfare.

Congress only has indirect power over marriage, which is why the opponents of same-sex marriage introduced the FMA. Congress also has attempted to regulate marriage indirectly through court-stripping proposals and the Defense of Marriage Act, either of which may well be unconstitutional. Regardless, the definition of the institution belongs to the states.

There is no single, wise answer as to what will serve society and citizens best in this arena. With each state free -- within the state's own constitutional requirements -- to have its own public debate about what serves society, and what does not, there is the possibility that there will be 50 simultaneous experiments -- and that is much to be encouraged.

The debate will have to range well beyond the religious reasons that have dominated the public debate to date. Marriage implicates the interests of children, the law of inheritance, and legitimacy, among many other issues. As with the law of divorce, the states will learn from their own experiments and mistakes, and from those of other states.

There is no constitutional requirement that marriage exist solely between a man and a woman. To impose that rule across the country would have required a federal constitutional amendment -- such as the Federal Marriage Amendment (which addressed same-sex marriage). But the FMA failed. States have broad latitude to make these complex social decisions -- all the way from keeping their laws as they currently stand, to opening their doors to other types of marriage.

Those who seek to enter into polygamous marriages legally thus should address their arguments not to the courts, but to the state legislatures. If they cannot persuade a majority of their state legislature that they are right, then they properly will have to abide by the law of marriage, established for all. The fact their marriage arrangement is religiously motivated should not alter that outcome.
Frankie Rizzo

Hayward, CA

#196480 Jun 17, 2013
Vulcan wrote:
(frankie) I would get that brain cell looked at by the battery company that sold it to you.
That is called ad hominem grasshopper. Sound it out. Look it up. Ask for help.

Remember! There are no dumb posts. Only dumb-ass posters like yourself.
Zoro

Rock Island, IL

#196481 Jun 17, 2013
Frankie Rizzo wrote:
<quoted text>
Remember! There are no dumb posts. Only dumb-ass posters like yourself.
That is called ad hominem. Look it up. Ask for help.
Frankie Rizzo

Hayward, CA

#196487 Jun 17, 2013
Zoro wrote:
<quoted text>That is called ad hominem. Look it up. Ask for help.
No Jizzy. Pointing out someone's ad hominem is not ad hominem you big silly galoot! But do try again.
Frankie Rizzo

Hayward, CA

#196488 Jun 17, 2013
Zoro wrote:
<quoted text>Still, the combined impact of Lawrence and Goodridge has opened the door to the question of whether marriage should be extended beyond the traditional male-female union. The primary power for marriage law resides in the states. And that is the way it should be: The question of the institution of marriage?which is a social construct--is best left to the states, which are the laboratories for the general welfare.
Congress only has indirect power over marriage, which is why the opponents of same-sex marriage introduced the FMA. Congress also has attempted to regulate marriage indirectly through court-stripping proposals and the Defense of Marriage Act, either of which may well be unconstitutional. Regardless, the definition of the institution belongs to the states.
There is no single, wise answer as to what will serve society and citizens best in this arena. With each state free -- within the state's own constitutional requirements -- to have its own public debate about what serves society, and what does not, there is the possibility that there will be 50 simultaneous experiments -- and that is much to be encouraged.
The debate will have to range well beyond the religious reasons that have dominated the public debate to date. Marriage implicates the interests of children, the law of inheritance, and legitimacy, among many other issues. As with the law of divorce, the states will learn from their own experiments and mistakes, and from those of other states.
There is no constitutional requirement that marriage exist solely between a man and a woman. To impose that rule across the country would have required a federal constitutional amendment -- such as the Federal Marriage Amendment (which addressed same-sex marriage). But the FMA failed. States have broad latitude to make these complex social decisions -- all the way from keeping their laws as they currently stand, to opening their doors to other types of marriage.
Those who seek to enter into polygamous marriages legally thus should address their arguments not to the courts, but to the state legislatures. If they cannot persuade a majority of their state legislature that they are right, then they properly will have to abide by the law of marriage, established for all. The fact their marriage arrangement is religiously motivated should not alter that outcome.
Nice cut and paste Jiz!

See? You can do it! Thank Frankie.
comander bunny

Los Angeles, CA

#196489 Jun 17, 2013
How much cock can a gay guy take up the butt????
Bruno

Redondo Beach, CA

#196490 Jun 17, 2013
comander bunny wrote:
How much cock can a gay guy take up the butt????
Ask Frankie Rizzoto boi, he's an expert.

Since: Dec 09

Knoxville, TN

#196491 Jun 17, 2013
Big D wrote:
<quoted text>
He wants to talk about poly and incest, he doesn’t want to talk about same sex marriage, the religious and bigotry involved in the case or anything else that actually is related to Prop 8. He certainly does not want to talk about the overturn of Prop 8 itself.
Poly and incest are his only interests, he will censor anyone trying to talk about any aspect of Prop 8 that is not about poly or incest ( which of course have absolutely nothing whatsoever to do with Prop 8 )
Someone created a poly thread for him, but he doesn’t post there, as his obsession is to derail same sex marriage topics.
He will attempt to censor anyone discussing the religious influence against same sex marriage or any other aspect that does not have to do with either Poly on Incest
His censorship speaks volumes about his motives.
And he's become quite boring too.

I'm going to play the lotto tomorrow. If I win, I'm going to hire a private investigator to find Frankie. I don't want to hurt him or anything like that. However, I think the world would be a happier place if someone took his keyboard away for a week.

His continuous yammering about incest and polygamy has made this forum into a joke. It's why I won't converse with him anymore.
get outta my neighborhood

Luton, UK

#196492 Jun 17, 2013
veryvermilion wrote:
<quoted text>
His continuous yammering about incest and polygamy has made this forum into a joke.
Then stick around more, Brucie. Lord knows how your body odor livens up the place.
Frankie Rizzo

Hayward, CA

#196493 Jun 17, 2013
veryvermilion wrote:
<quoted text>
And he's become quite boring too.
I'm going to play the lotto tomorrow. If I win, I'm going to hire a private investigator to find Frankie. I don't want to hurt him or anything like that. However, I think the world would be a happier place if someone took his keyboard away for a week.
His continuous yammering about incest and polygamy has made this forum into a joke. It's why I won't converse with him anymore.
Reported! Stalking! Threats! Conspiracy to rob and kidnap! All over a getting bested on a silly Topix thread. Pitiful. Seriously. Lighten up power ranger.
get outta my neighborhood

Luton, UK

#196494 Jun 17, 2013
Frankie Rizzo wrote:
<quoted text>
Reported! Stalking! Threats! Conspiracy to rob and kidnap! All over a getting bested on a silly Topix thread. Pitiful. Seriously. Lighten up power ranger.
You stir an old memory. Wasn't it Rosie O'Donnell,(who I once lovingly and without malice called her The Porcine Manface), who used to soil her jockstrap and say "you've been reported" over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over like a schoolgirl tattletale? Like "Judy" on "Leave It To Beaver"...

What's happened to Porky anywho? Apparently she's...

drum roll, please....

gone to the dogs.

Since: Nov 12

Elk Grove, CA

#196495 Jun 17, 2013
veryvermilion wrote:
<quoted text>
And he's become quite boring too.
I'm going to play the lotto tomorrow. If I win, I'm going to hire a private investigator to find Frankie. I don't want to hurt him or anything like that. However, I think the world would be a happier place if someone took his keyboard away for a week.
His continuous yammering about incest and polygamy has made this forum into a joke. It's why I won't converse with him anymore.
You're probably another idiot that voted for Obama, maybe you can contact him, he seems to know what and where each of us are. The world would be a healthier place if we gave marriage equality to all.

Judged:

10

10

10

Reply »
Report Abuse Judge it!
Frankie Rizzo

Hayward, CA

#196496 Jun 17, 2013
get outta my neighborhood wrote:
<quoted text>
You stir an old memory. Wasn't it Rosie O'Donnell,(who I once lovingly and without malice called her The Porcine Manface), who used to soil her jockstrap and say "you've been reported" over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over like a schoolgirl tattletale? Like "Judy" on "Leave It To Beaver"...
What's happened to Porky anywho? Apparently she's...
drum roll, please....
gone to the dogs.
Yes that's where I learned that "Reported!!" shtick. From Rose_NoHo.

The old broad ain't what she used to be and she was never much to begin with. I think she had a stroke or a medication adjustment or something. Pretty old bag. Pushing 80 I think.

Judged:

10

10

9

Reply »
Report Abuse Judge it!
Frankie Rizzo

Hayward, CA

#196497 Jun 17, 2013
RiccardoFire wrote:
<quoted text>You're probably another idiot that voted for Obama, maybe you can contact him, he seems to know what and where each of us are. The world would be a healthier place if we gave marriage equality to all.
Did you get a load of this jackass veryvermilion wants to hire a P.I. to track me down? Whoa!

Judged:

10

10

10

Reply »
Report Abuse Judge it!
Exide

Covina, CA

#196498 Jun 17, 2013
For all the residents who live near the City of Vernon, California. That have been told that some "Crack Head Judge" has allowed the battery recycling plant "Exide Batteries" to reopen after it was shut down for contaminating the area with Arsenic, Lead and Acids.

Health issues and deaths are attributed to the battery recycling plant in Vernon, California.

The Judge who signed the back to work order for this plant doesn't live anywhere near the dangerous toxic emission either.

The City Manager and Fire Chief of Vernon California lives in Glendora, California he is a good Mormon. Since Latin's live in the surrounding cities etc. just goes to prove the Mormon's don't really care about them at all.
Arandas Jalisco

Bakersfield, CA

#196499 Jun 17, 2013
Wtf you kitting me, omg there is no more morals and values what that heck....!
Whiffles

Covina, CA

#196500 Jun 17, 2013
Whiffles are better when they are hot.

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
News The 25 Most Dangerous Cities in the U.S. Are Mo... (Nov '10) 2 hr TrapMusic 20,608
Review: Fox Moving & Storage, LLC (Sep '15) 4 hr scottJ586 94
"I'm black" She Said to Me by Patricia Louise M... 7 hr Patricia_McGurk 1
News Workers at Olive View-UCLA Medical Center alleg... (May '10) 20 hr Vita-TRP Protein 41
L.A.P.D. S.M.A.R.T. Team uses installed devices... 22 hr All sorts of games 13
News Young filmmakers thank the academy at Student A... Fri Duke for Mayor 1
~+~ Last Post Win's ~+~ (Apr '12) Fri Concerned_American 101

Beverly Hills Jobs

More from around the web

Personal Finance

Beverly Hills Mortgages