Judge overturns California's ban on same-sex marriage

[Dan C]

akpilot wrote:

<quoted text>
Poor Dan, has such a had time admitting he is wrong. Look, he is arguing with the founders now..
"Remember, democracy never lasts long. It soon wastes, exhausts, and murders itself."- John Adams
"Democracy is two wolves and a lamb voting on what to have for lunch. Liberty is a well-armed lamb contesting the vote!"
Benjamin Franklin
"We are a Republican Government, Real liberty is never found in despotism or in the extremes of democracy...it has been observed that a pure democracy if it were practicable would be the most perfect government. Experience has proved that no position is more false than this. The ancient democracies in which the people themselves deliberated never possessed one good feature of government. Their very character was tyranny; their figure deformity."- Alexander Hamilton
"A democracy is nothing more than mob rule, where 51% of the people may take away the rights of the other 49%." Thomas Jefferson
"Democracies have ever been spectacles of turbulence and contention; have ever been found incompatible with personal security or the rights of property; and have in general been as short in their lives as they have been violent in their death."- James Madison
"We may define a republic to be - a government which derives all its powers directly or indirectly from the great body of the people, and is administered by persons holding their offices during pleasure for a limited period, or during good behavior. It is essential to such a government that it be derived from the great body of the society, not from an inconsiderable proportion or a favored class of it: otherwise a handful of tyrannical nobles, exercising their oppressions by a delegation of their powers, might aspire to the rank of republicans and claim for their government the honorable title of republic."- James Madison
"Between a balanced republic and a democracy, the difference is like that between order and chaos."- John Marshall
You were saying Dan??

By the way genius....a republic is a democratic institution by it's makeup.

The Founding Fathers made those comments given they knew an absolute democracy would not work in regards to the protection of individual rights of the citizens it contained.

Perhaps it's too deep for you to understand but that is a fact.

[Dan C]

akpilot wrote:

<quoted text>
My opinion?
Is it your opinion that- Lincoln, slavery, the southern states, and the 13th Amendment are NOT related to the Civil War?

By the way this is yet another lie.

I never stated Lincoln, slavery, the Southern states and the 13th Amendment were not related to the Civil War.

Disagree???

Find the post liar or better yet stick to the subject at hand...gays marrying.

[GodZilla]

Dan C wrote:

<quoted text>
Muskets, cannons, cavalries, brother killing brother over ideology, the decimation of the South, etc. was all related to the Civil War.
Are we discussing gay marriage or are we discussing the Civil War DUMBFUCK.
The inclusiuon of the 13th Amendment was used as an illustration to your dumb as a rock ass in explaining why the Amendments exist.
Now if you're so fucking lost in this topic of same sexed marriages that you want to discuss the fashions women wore in 1862 I suggest you find another thread moron.

And that's called hitting the nail on the head my friend! LoL,Thanks for all you put up with and keeping the thread on track! AK is famous for babbling on about nothing that has to do with the topic,like many others on here like Dandy Randy the douche and Mike who is even worse and is usually off topic with every meaningless post he writes! Mike claims to be for equality but it's funny as the only one's he's ever supported are the bigots and the one's who are against equality! To bad as they've driven off most of the good souls who used to post here!

[Dan C]

GodZilla wrote:

<quoted text>
And that's called hitting the nail on the head my friend! LoL,Thanks for all you put up with and keeping the thread on track! AK is famous for babbling on about nothing that has to do with the topic,like many others on here like Dandy Randy the douche and Mike who is even worse and is usually off topic with every meaningless post he writes! Mike claims to be for equality but it's funny as the only one's he's ever supported are the bigots and the one's who are against equality! To bad as they've driven off most of the good souls who used to post here!

AK is a game player. He'll eventually just start lying as some means of saving face and it will be about then I'll stop responding to his nonsense.

This posting is nothing other than an excercize in having fun. It might be an insight to some of those opposed to gay marriage but little else.

I have more than a few Tea Party friends that are close an dear to me and one thing I've noticed is they don't play games like Mike and AK do. They merely determine a stance in their mind either on religion or something else and will staunchly refuse to effectively argue the subject of same sex marriage based on an opinion and set of reasoning they lodged there like a grape seed jammed in between two teeth.

If our leaders listened to rationale rather than emotional response gays would have been able to be married nationwide back in 2004.

It will happen eventually anyway.

I get tired of dealing with Mike and AK and others myself and will be gone for awhile but this TOPIX is like a bad habit.

I'm beat...gotta sleep given I'll be at work in 6 hours.

Sorry for the wordy posts. And have a good week...myself I'm jazzed we're slapping eight million Christmas lights on the SUV again this year only to drive around and blind people while tempting cops to ticket us.

LOL!!!

[DorN]

It is legal for a gay MAN to marry a atraight WOMAN.
It is also legal for a gay WOMAN to marry a straight MAN.
That does not seem right to me.

[Mike DiRucci]

Dan C wrote:

<quoted text>
Never said that liar.
Next.

Yes you did liar.

"Next". What a jerk!

[Mike DiRucci]

akpilot wrote:

<quoted text>
Where did the founders include "harm" in their idea of personal freedom and liberty?
If you are going to cite the founders, I suggest you not interject your own opinions into their words.
And when the founders spoke of "freedom and liberty" they included PERSONAL RESPONSIBILITY. Your freedom to be you included my freedom to be free from you. But since we have become a society where we will cater to failure, punish success, and pander to those with a hand out- we are a long way from every truly being as free as we once were.

Dan just likes the sound of some words and he thinks it makes him sound smart but it's so silly!: "inherent harm" "a full set of liberties" "our government was formatted" and much more!

I love Dan-speak. It's so dopey!

Funny!

[Mike DiRucci]

Dan C wrote:

<quoted text>
I begin to wonder if you call your own dick a troll at this point.

Do you now? That's a strange fantasy but keep that kind of stuff to yourself Romeo!

Dick a troll. What a perv!

[Mike DiRucci]

Dan C wrote:

<quoted text>
Nah....I'm familiar with Constitution and the introduction of the Amendments by our Founding Fathers in that they knew there would be aspects dealing with the freedoms of Americans that would come up.
Very forward thinking by them.
Lincoln was able to pass the 13th Amendment for instance which abolished slavery.
So no dumbfuck...it's not a matter of me interjecting anything. It's already there and has been acted upon.
As far as freedoms which groups and some individuals clamor for they are reviewed on the basis of harm. Fact.
You really need to go to school one day or at least do a little studying prior to holding your obviouss idiotic opinions which you seem so willing to share in here.
Now there's a group who think having sex with little boys is the best treat out there. And many of them think it should be made legal. They think it should be a right...an allowed freedom. They claim the little boys like it and it only adds to their experience in life.
Now hopefully you're in the same camp I am in that we know it produces harm. Therefore it will never be a freedom the members of NAMBLA (the pedophiles group who thinks little Boy Scouts are a tasty treat) will be able to have because of this.
As far as gays wanting to marry...they should be able to. There is no inherent harm found and it is a freedom a grouping of Americans want.
Now before you go back to playing your sad game of why not polygamy you need to take that up with the government...not me. They determined harm in it. I myself could care less unless those reasons I gave earlier apply.
Kindle. They make Kindles which are online books. Get one. Read a little about the world and especially our nation before spouting off even more ignorance.
Have a good night punk.

Too long and dumb but I suffered through it.

Hey Dan, before you go back to your sad game of why not same sex marriage take it up with the government not me...bla bla bla..

How does that sound bigot? Wanting marriage equality is a "sad game" for polygamists but a noble righteous cause for same sex marriages?

Please explain and justify this dopey bigoted nonsense. We won't wait.

[Mike DiRucci]

Dan C wrote:

<quoted text>
Gee...I don't know about that...it was your internet buddy "Hudson" who talking about jerking off.
He's not MY buddy in here...
LOL!!!

You said his dick was a troll jackass. What was that about?

[Mike DiRucci]

Dan C wrote:

<quoted text>
Err...
...Here's what you stated in the post of which I was referring to;
"So because they are small in number they do not deserve equal rights?
Interesting, in less than a page you have managed to single-handedly dismantle two of your argument's- the argument of equality in marriage rights, and the -a vote of the majority cannot take away the rights of the majority.
Congratulations moron."
Again...no one gives a shit if polygamists get married.
I'll say it again...no one cares if polygamists get married.
Third time since you're fucking stupid...no one cares if polygamists get married.
---Where did I state they should be denied getting married because of their numbers moron.
You lying sack of shit.
I'd bet hard earned money you can't hold a job longer than 3 months because your reasoning is so polluted.
Am I right??
LOL!!!

Now you're changing your tune! Glad our posts made you aware of your bigotry and that you're working on losing it. But come all the way jackass, lose the "I don't give a sh!t" you're not very convincing you support equal rights when you say it like that.

What, now you're Mormon Mike all of a sudden? Too funny!

[Mike DiRucci]

Dan C wrote:

<quoted text>
You never mentioned 'secession'.
You advised of 'succession' dumbfuck.
Your post #169895;
"So you do not believe in the right of succession?
---Go to school, you ignorant moron before entering any more posts....really.
Because as it is you're just being stupid.
Our founders did."

Dan pounces on a typo since he's lost the argument. Priceless!

[Big D]

People, look up the term "democratic republic"

the US is the first example given.

We are both a democracy of the representative type, and a republic.

[Mike DiRucci]

Dan C wrote:

<quoted text>
There are more than ten Amendments to the Constitution. And freedoms are duly argued in regards to harm they may cause.
You sir are a complete fool.

So dumb. But so silly-funny too!

[Mike DiRucci]

Dan C wrote:

<quoted text>
I have no reason to be angry.
I'm not gay.
I instead give you facts and you in turn play games.
You're fast approaching the point of being too worthless and stupid to respond to.

This is the part where Dan suddenly wants to return to his exciting active social life which us losers don't have!

[Mike DiRucci]

Dan C wrote:

<quoted text>
The point behind the Amendments dealt with the fact they were set in motion my foolish friend.
There were never intended to stop at ten and our country was intended to live past the deaths of our Founding Fathers by them.
Rights are determined in part by harm. If they are proven to cause harm then they in turn are rejected.

Amendments "set in motion" another funny Dan-ism! Keep em coming you big dopey galoot! I love it.

Too Funny!

[Mike DiRucci]

akpilot wrote:

<quoted text>
Your right Dan- I cannot identify the elements of a BSAIC civil right.
Perhaps you could explain it to me?

Oh boy! This should be good.

[Mike DiRucci]

Dan C wrote:

<quoted text>
Really.
There are many rebublic formats of government of which some are not wholly based on the democratic format.
Please...you tire me with your stupidity.

"rebublic formats" and "democratic formats" Wow!

Too Funny!

[Mike DiRucci]

Ralphie wrote:

<quoted text>
Where is WasteWater when we need him. ROTFLMAO

You're so silly toots!

"Ralphie"?

Where's Lulu and that dopey parrot?

Fun!

[Mike DiRucci]

Dan C wrote:

<quoted text>
So your wording of 'succession' was actually to mean 'secede'.
Interesting.
Hardly a typo but maybe when you head to the store and ask them where the apples are and you meant oranges it was their fault for the misunderstanding as well.
You're an idiot.

Cut and paste from one of your dopey posts: "There are many rebublic formats of government". What's rebublic?

When you go to the store and ask them bla bla bla...

What a dope!