Judge overturns California's ban on s...

Judge overturns California's ban on same-sex marriage

There are 201891 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.

American

Irvine, CA

#199788 Jul 2, 2013
Interestingly, Russia just passed legislation making it a crime for adults to indoctrinate children with homosexuality as part of their national plan to build up nuclear families, create national homogeneity, and sobriety. Children will be encouraged to focus their energies on high level math, reading, science, technology etc.. without their curriculum being diluted by divisive sexual deviation content and ethnic studies. They understand you just can't build a good economy and national identity on sexual deviation, addiction, divisiveness, and race symbolism.

That's all self-defeating nonsense. The next generation of Russian children will be moral, well educated, sober achievers while U.S. children are immoral, addicted, and graduating with student loans in a bad economy with degrees filled with divisive nonsense that makes them non competitive in the workforce.

They are on their way up and we are on our way down. Thanks homosexuals for nothing.
Bowser

Long Beach, CA

#199791 Jul 2, 2013
Pietro Armando wrote:
<quoted text>
The people , twice voted, to clearly codify in law, a definition of marriage that existed since the birth of the republic, throughout virtually all of Western Civilization. No one's "rights" were infringed.
Yes, they were. Their right to marry an adult human being of their choosing was denied. And this was over-ruled.
Frankie Rizzo

Hayward, CA

#199792 Jul 2, 2013
I think Ronald should sue this clown impersonating his honey. I will be a witness that indeed he has slandered, trampled on and sullied the poor canine's splendid reputation. Typical oaf. Buffoon. Lout. Galoot.
Zoro

Rock Island, IL

#199793 Jul 2, 2013
Pietro Armando wrote:
<quoted text>
The people , twice voted, to clearly codify in law, a definition of marriage that existed since the birth of the republic, throughout virtually all of Western Civilization. No one's "rights" were infringed.
Sup Paco? Twice the people voted for a unconstitutional law. Dang you people are S-L-O-W

“Vita e' Bella.”

Since: May 12

Location hidden

#199794 Jul 2, 2013
Zoro wrote:
<quoted text>Tell that to the 8-16 year old children. Polygamy won't harm them.
You are advocating that the religious freedom given in the 1st admen. Grants religious freedom. YOU have posted it. Now if we allow Poly based on religious freedom, HOW can we deny them the very right to marry a 9 year old girl???
YOU cant have it both ways. If you support the religious rights as you have said then you support child abuse, rape, you pervert
Any abuse within any relationship, monogamous or polygamous, should be dealt with by any applicable laws. If all the adults involved are consenting, there is no issue. Perhaps you could explain this apparent contradiction in societal attitudes. A man can father several children with several different women, and it has become perfectly acceptable. However, if a man does that, regards the women as his wives, and they, as consenting adults, view him as their husband, society, and the state, views that as unacceptable. Why?
Bowser

Long Beach, CA

#199795 Jul 2, 2013
Guest wrote:
I really love my dog, can I marry him? I also think that I was born alcoholic, can we have an alcoholic parade?
In the eyes of the law, marriage is a contract between 2 adult human beings. So no, you cannot. You may have an alcoholic parade if you obtain the financing and necessary permits.
Frankie Rizzo

Hayward, CA

#199797 Jul 2, 2013
Bowser wrote:
<quoted text>
Bye Frankie.
Bye. Glad you're leaving. You're boring and stupid.

“Vita e' Bella.”

Since: May 12

Location hidden

#199798 Jul 2, 2013
Rosa_Winkel wrote:
<quoted text>
Yes, that's the men from the Greek island of Lesbos.
Thanks for clearing that up.

Since: Nov 12

Elk Grove, CA

#199800 Jul 2, 2013
Bowser wrote:
<quoted text>
People voted on a ballot initiative that was unconstitutional, as it infringed on the rights of others. In the US, we have a system of checks and balances to correct these situations. Sometimes it just takes a while.
Was that the fault of the people that voted? You do understand the outcome of that vote says a lot about how people really feel.

“Vita e' Bella.”

Since: May 12

Location hidden

#199802 Jul 2, 2013
Zoro wrote:
<quoted text>Sup Paco? Twice the people voted for a unconstitutional law. Dang you people are S-L-O-W
Welcome to the People's Republic of Amerikka. Where in the constitution is marriage even mentioned? So if a federal marriage amendment, for the sake of discussion, is added to the constitution, would that be "unconstitutional"?
Bowser

Long Beach, CA

#199803 Jul 2, 2013
Frankie Rizzo wrote:
I think Ronald should sue this clown impersonating his honey. I will be a witness that indeed he has slandered, trampled on and sullied the poor canine's splendid reputation. Typical oaf. Buffoon. Lout. Galoot.
Calm down KiMare / Frankie aka Sybil.
Frankie Rizzo

Hayward, CA

#199804 Jul 2, 2013
Zoro wrote:
<quoted text>Yes I would, as long as religion has no bearing on the law. But we know, thats a lie. The only people who wish Polygamy are doing so based on religion. Then what, child brides???? Frankie you are dead wrong and you know it.
No. you are wrong. Some if not many atheists are polygamists. But thanks for admitting you believe we should deny equal rights based on religion.

Did you see the article on gay polygamy in the Advocate? Those 3 guys aren't religious. I wish them well in their fight for marriage equality. I guess you do too as long as they are not religious?

“Vita e' Bella.”

Since: May 12

Location hidden

#199805 Jul 2, 2013
Bowser wrote:
<quoted text>
Yes, they were. Their right to marry an adult human being of their choosing was denied. And this was over-ruled.
Please point to any state law, where those exact words are contained in any state marriage law? So if a person chooses to marry a sibling, that should be allowed?
Bowser

Long Beach, CA

#199806 Jul 2, 2013
Rock Hudson wrote:
<quoted text>
Do you think that there are many who give a flying f**k what you think?
Back atcha.*smirk*
Frankie Rizzo

Hayward, CA

#199807 Jul 2, 2013
Pietro Armando wrote:
<quoted text>
Welcome to the People's Republic of Amerikka. Where in the constitution is marriage even mentioned? So if a federal marriage amendment, for the sake of discussion, is added to the constitution, would that be "unconstitutional"?
Not if Jizzy liked it.
Bowser

Long Beach, CA

#199808 Jul 2, 2013
Frankie Rizzo wrote:
<quoted text>
Bye. Glad you're leaving. You're boring and stupid.
So you just admitted to being KiMare. LOL. What a dope.
Zoro

Rock Island, IL

#199809 Jul 2, 2013
Pietro Armando wrote:
<quoted text>
Welcome to the People's Republic of Amerikka. Where in the constitution is marriage even mentioned? So if a federal marriage amendment, for the sake of discussion, is added to the constitution, would that be "unconstitutional"?
Wrong Paco, the judge found the law to be in violation of the constitution. The 9th backed him up. Scotus dumped it for lack of standing. Dang you people are S-L-O-W
Frankie Rizzo

Hayward, CA

#199810 Jul 2, 2013
Bowser wrote:
<quoted text>
In the eyes of the law, marriage is a contract between 2 adult human beings. So no, you cannot. You may have an alcoholic parade if you obtain the financing and necessary permits.
It used to be a contract between two people of different gender. We dropped the gender part. Why can't we drop the number part? Why is your version of marriage better than anyone elses version and why should it be the only one allowed?
Frankie Rizzo

Hayward, CA

#199812 Jul 2, 2013
Bowser wrote:
<quoted text>
So you just admitted to being KiMare. LOL. What a dope.
If it makes you feel better, sure fruitcake. That's the way it was.
Bowser

Long Beach, CA

#199813 Jul 2, 2013
Pietro Armando wrote:
<quoted text>
Please point to any state law, where those exact words are contained in any state marriage law? So if a person chooses to marry a sibling, that should be allowed?
You can try to twist this however you want. The Supreme Court ruled.

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.

Brea Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
News Mayor a deeply disturbeda over incident between... 58 min disturbed 1
Dirty Politics in La Mirada 9 hr REAL NEWS SON 1
News Hundreds March In Anaheim, Demand Arrest Of LAP... 11 hr Well Well 11
ssk gangsters (Jan '13) 12 hr Gorilla 180
LMSA Soccer (Feb '10) 12 hr LM Tailgater 7,485
News Bikes, cars struggle to share Coast Highway 12 hr Why waste the Money 1
News Video shows off-duty California cop fire weapon... 14 hr Tony 6

Brea Jobs

More from around the web

Personal Finance

Brea Mortgages