Judge overturns California's ban on s...

Judge overturns California's ban on same-sex marriage

There are 201847 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.

“Crusading Fundies r hilarious!”

Since: Feb 11

Location hidden

#145521 Jun 11, 2012
Frank Rizzo wrote:
<quoted text>
When he gets to about 2-300 words I glaze over.
Based upon the lack of any demonstrated intellectual prowess, we can only assume this is habit you began when you were in the public school system.
Frank Rizzo

Union City, CA

#145522 Jun 11, 2012
Jonah1 wrote:
<quoted text>
Not quite. It's because they are able to see examples of it without a religious value system being applied to it every time it's mentioned. The brainwashing of applying a lable of "good" or "bad" to an inate characteristic has been removed. Thus children are able to experience it free of the bias that others tried to indoctrinate along with it in the past. Children are coming out earlier so they are able to see first hand and talk to their gay peers and question them directly. They don't feel the need to call gay people liars simply because that's what they've been taught to do. The children of today are able to see us and evaluate us on terms other than our sexual orientation. This is something the religious right can't stand. They want people to evaluate us solely on our sex. It's why the fundies in this room are constantly bringing up butts and ass sex. Because that is what they would like the sum of us to be. They would like all aspects of our humanity eliminated so that they can talk about our sex. Children today, with all the social networking and diversity around them, aren't buying that schtick any more. They know us earlier so they are able to reach conclusions about us based on their experience, not on gobbeldy gook created by people like you.
If you left out all that hate and anger, it would be an excellent post.

And you spelled "schtick" correctly! A Georgia cracker using Yiddish! You can thank Frank Rizzo! YUK!YUK!YUK!
Dan

Roseville, CA

#145523 Jun 11, 2012
Frank Rizzo wrote:
<quoted text>
"snyper"
ROFLMFAO!!!!
YUK!YUK!YUK!
I see nothing's changed. You're still an ignorant putz with no real discussion only a need to speak your disdain of others.

“Crusading Fundies r hilarious!”

Since: Feb 11

Location hidden

#145524 Jun 11, 2012
thisGuy wrote:
<quoted text>
"There's no correlation."
-Really? So there's no correlation between rape cases & those who engage in sodomy, considering the amount of cases documented?
Um, where was rape mentioned? You discussed drub abuse, why are you bringing rape into this? Oh, that's right, you can't stay focused on one argument because you're too busy trying to shove every anti-gay rhetorical talking point you know into every post you make.

Um, no dear, there is no direct correlation between rape and sodomy. They are two completely different acts. The majority of sodomy, just like the majority of vaginal/penile sex is consentual. But types of course can also be forced through rape, but there is no direct correlation between rape and "those that engage in sodomy". And just to clarify, the vast majority of people engaging in sodomy are straight people. And of course, they are the people engaging in the vast majority of rapes. Hmmm.
thisGuy wrote:
<quoted text>
That's like saying there's no cases of smoking leading to lung cancer LOL?
No, it isn't. It's just a fact. There is no correlation of sodomy "leading to" rape. If you disagree, then present the research to support your insinuation.
thisGuy wrote:
<quoted text>
What about NAMBLA & all other homosexual organization who parttake in pedophilia? Care to explain, gaytard?
NAMBLA isn't a homosexual organization, its a pedophiliac organization. At last count it had 1,100 members which would represent 0.000001% of the gay community globally. Why don't you get some statistics on heterosexual pedophilies and we'll compare percentages. Anything else about NAMBLA you'd like to know? You fundies sure are interested in it. In fact, many people believe is the religious right that actually keeps their website up and running.

Dan

Roseville, CA

#145525 Jun 11, 2012
Frank Rizzo wrote:
<quoted text>
If you left out all that hate and anger, it would be an excellent post.
And you spelled "schtick" correctly! A Georgia cracker using Yiddish! You can thank Frank Rizzo! YUK!YUK!YUK!
You're not in here for discussion, discovery or even effective argument. You're in here to play the smartass and throw snowballs.

Are you still on the 'if you don't accept polygamy then don't claim you're for same sex marriage' derailment bullshit Frank n' Beans?

“Facts”

Since: May 08

Location hidden

#145526 Jun 11, 2012
Pam Jordan wrote:
<quoted text>
common law marriages are often seen by the courts as valid marriages however. many parties involved in these types of marriages make discovery of this during the determination of assets upon divorce.
With no marriage certificate in a court of law they are ruled a civil union.........LOL

“Crusading Fundies r hilarious!”

Since: Feb 11

Location hidden

#145527 Jun 11, 2012
thisGuy wrote:
<quoted text>
-Homosexuality causes harm---if you count the amount of anal cancer cases involving gay men, & should therefore logically be disgusted.
Anal cancer occurs in both heterosexuals and homosexuals. And in neither case is it a result of one's sexual orientation. Feel free to try again.
thisGuy wrote:
<quoted text>
-Pathologists & doctors who document on the amount of STD rates would disagree with you.
No, they don't. No pathologist or doctor would ever state that STD rates are a result of our sexual orientation. They would and do state that it is a result of lack of education on how to prevent them. Mostly because gay people aren't given any type of proper sexual orientation like most straight people are. STD's are not a result of sexual orientation, they are the result of unsafe sex (straight or gay). Feel free to try again.
thisGuy wrote:
<quoted text>
Second, the way you gays have "sex" makes no fucking sense whatsoever!
For you. You aren't required to have sex the way we do. Quite frankly, it's obvious from your posts that you have no idea how we have sex, you only have an image you've been taught to have. This is never more evident when religitards like yourself always pretend that only males are gay. That's alway a sure way to pick out the truly bigoted.
thisGuy wrote:
<quoted text>
Plus it's disgusting. Fudge packing isn't a normal behavior, 98% of the human population agrees.
That's your opinion. And your statistic is completely made up. "38.2 percent of men between 20 and 39 and 32.6 percent of women ages 18 to 44 engage in heterosexual anal sex."
http://nymag.com/nightlife/mating/25988/

Given the ratio of straights to gays if we use a common ratio of stating that gay men represent 4% of the population (we know you fundies love to say 2%, but I'm trying to be overly fair for you dear), and assuming that ALL gay men engage in anal sex (which also isn't true, but you fundies love to pretend otherwise, so we'll endulge you), that would mean that.....

Current population of 7,019,230,805 on the planet. For simplicities sake we will pretend it is an equal male/female ratio (even though its more like 51/49).

That means that there are:

140,384,616 gay men having anal sex.
1,287,046,160 straight men having anal sex.
1,098,369,236 straight women having anal sex.

Seems to me, if your real hang up is anal sex, you've picked the wrong group of people to address.
thisGuy wrote:
<quoted text>
-So being disgusted by a behavior is "deviant" now?
When said behavior is consentual and causes no harm to individuals or society, YES, being disgusted by it is deviant. When said behavior is not forced upon you or required of you, or asked of you, YES, being disgusted by it is deviant. Your obsession with gays and their sex is deviant. Any other stupid questions.
thisGuy wrote:
<quoted text>
Gee...even kids are disgusted by the sight of their parents having sex...that's alot of devious kids LOL.
Kids are also disgusted by broccoli and they eat their own boogers. What's your point?

“Crusading Fundies r hilarious!”

Since: Feb 11

Location hidden

#145528 Jun 11, 2012
Continuing with the nonsense of thisGuy
thisGuy wrote:
<quoted text>
I'm sorry, but since when was it devious to disagree with your buttsex? Please explain, gaytard.
Around the time you came to the conclusion that you were entitled to even have an opinion about it at all. And the word was deviant, not devious. They are two seperate things. You might consider investing in a dictionary.
thisGuy wrote:
<quoted text>
"Homosexuality isn't something that can be "exposed" moron."
-Really gaytard? So perverts aren't exposing their homosexuality with gay parades? Cool Story Bro.
Damn you are stupid. Homosexuality is an inate characteristic. It can't be "exposed" any more than one's handidness can be exposed.

You fundies sure are obsessed with our Parades though. Damn, to hear you people talk you'd think we hold one every day of the year. Tell me thisGuy, considering the large number of straight people that attend Gay Pride parades, are THEY "exposing" their homosexuality too? How do you distinguish? LOL!!! What a moron. The only thing being "exposed" at a Pride Parade is....."pride".
thisGuy wrote:
<quoted text>
-People expose their feelings all the time, even murderers & pedophiles, so what fucking sense does that make?
Murder and pedophilia are actions not feeling you fool.
thisGuy wrote:
<quoted text>
-Straights don't have parades & dress as whores for their "equality".
We don't dress up for our "equality" either. As for straights and parades and dessing as whores, I would invite you to google "Mardis Gras", "spring break", and "girls gone wild". When you're done with those I can give you a myriad of other google searches to prove your last staement to be 100% false.
thisGuy wrote:
<quoted text>
Normal people actually keep their deviousness behind closed doors where it belongs. Ashame you homos don't do the same for your perverted urges.
Please see above.
thisGuy wrote:
<quoted text>
-Seems to me like you are trying to redefine the definition of a marriage, judging by the amount of religious-bashing I see on this thread.
If it "seemed to you" that we were trying to redefine marriage, you be able to demonstrate this redefinition. But you can't.

Religious bashing?? LOL!! Yes, you and your made up persecutions. Please feel free to point out this "religious bashing"!!! When you do, please indicate who initiated discussion of religious doctrines on a public forum that has nothing to do with religion!!!

Why don't you take a rest and use some time to see if you can properly figure out how to reply with proper quotations.

“Facts”

Since: May 08

Location hidden

#145529 Jun 11, 2012
Jonah1 wrote:
<quoted text>
Anal cancer occurs in both heterosexuals and homosexuals. And in neither case is it a result of one's sexual orientation. Feel free to try again.
<quoted text> No, they don't. No pathologist or doctor would ever state that STD rates are a result of our sexual orientation. They would and do state that it is a result of lack of education on how to prevent them. Mostly because gay people aren't given any type of proper sexual orientation like most straight people are. STD's are not a result of sexual orientation, they are the result of unsafe sex (straight or gay). Feel free to try again.
<quoted text>
For you. You aren't required to have sex the way we do. Quite frankly, it's obvious from your posts that you have no idea how we have sex, you only have an image you've been taught to have. This is never more evident when religitards like yourself always pretend that only males are gay. That's alway a sure way to pick out the truly bigoted.
<quoted text>
That's your opinion. And your statistic is completely made up. "38.2 percent of men between 20 and 39 and 32.6 percent of women ages 18 to 44 engage in heterosexual anal sex."
http://nymag.com/nightlife/mating/25988/
Given the ratio of straights to gays if we use a common ratio of stating that gay men represent 4% of the population (we know you fundies love to say 2%, but I'm trying to be overly fair for you dear), and assuming that ALL gay men engage in anal sex (which also isn't true, but you fundies love to pretend otherwise, so we'll endulge you), that would mean that.....
Current population of 7,019,230,805 on the planet. For simplicities sake we will pretend it is an equal male/female ratio (even though its more like 51/49).
That means that there are:
140,384,616 gay men having anal sex.
1,287,046,160 straight men having anal sex.
1,098,369,236 straight women having anal sex.
Seems to me, if your real hang up is anal sex, you've picked the wrong group of people to address.
<quoted text>
When said behavior is consentual and causes no harm to individuals or society, YES, being disgusted by it is deviant. When said behavior is not forced upon you or required of you, or asked of you, YES, being disgusted by it is deviant. Your obsession with gays and their sex is deviant. Any other stupid questions.
<quoted text>
Kids are also disgusted by broccoli and they eat their own boogers. What's your point?
The rates of STD's and drug and alcohol addiction are far higher in the gay population.

Along with other self distractive behaviors.......
Frank Rizzo

Union City, CA

#145530 Jun 11, 2012
Dan wrote:
<quoted text>
You're not in here for discussion, discovery or even effective argument. You're in here to play the smartass and throw snowballs.
Are you still on the 'if you don't accept polygamy then don't claim you're for same sex marriage' derailment bullshit Frank n' Beans?
I'm here to discuss marriage equality. You are not.

Trolls like you make it difficult to impossible, hence the "snowballs".

Boy, do you have my message mangled, you don't even understand it. No wonder your responses are so dumb. But dumb is funny, death threats are not, so I am done responding to you Dan.

Unless I just can't resist! YUK!YUK!YUK!
RiccardoFire

Sacramento, CA

#145531 Jun 11, 2012
Dan wrote:
<quoted text>
You're not in here for discussion, discovery or even effective argument. You're in here to play the smartass and throw snowballs.
Are you still on the 'if you don't accept polygamy then don't claim you're for same sex marriage' derailment bullshit Frank n' Beans?
So all your insults and threat are just a cover for an actual discussion, discovery or argument? What is left to argue? What do you expect to happen that one side will say the other side won, what did they win? Is anyone allowed to have a different opinion on SSM even if they are Not against gay people? Or does that mean they are fair game to call them names?

“Crusading Fundies r hilarious!”

Since: Feb 11

Location hidden

#145532 Jun 11, 2012
KiMare wrote:
<quoted text>
The next best alternative is a healthy foster/adoptive home with both genders represented as parents.
You seem to be under the impression that this statement automatically makes any other scenerio un-healthy. It's an insinuation that you use constantly, and one that is completely false.
KiMare wrote:
<quoted text>
You are hardly a unbiased or qualified person to determine whether gender diversity is a distinction of marriage.
So you mean she's just like you? LOL!!!! Oh, and gender diversity is not a "distinction" of marriage. It's just a bunch of gobbeldy gook rhetoric created by anti-gay factions and repeated by bigots like yourself. It's COMPLETELY MEANINGLESS.
KiMare wrote:
<quoted text>
It simply is a historical and cultural fact. There is nothing you can do about it.
Arguing history and culture is the argument of fools. Please look up "logical fallicy" sometime.
KiMare wrote:
<quoted text>You turn around and finally admit that the fruit of children and gender diversity have always been a part of marriage. Thank you.
Get your own identity.
The fruit of children has NOT always been a part of marriages. There have been marriages that have not born fruit since the inception of the institution itself.

Children are not a requirement of marriage.

Gay couples often have children. These children should have the same legal protections as those of straight couples, regardless the bigoted origin issues that you keep throwing out there.

“Crusading Fundies r hilarious!”

Since: Feb 11

Location hidden

#145533 Jun 11, 2012
KiMare wrote:
<quoted text>
96% of marriages in the world involve biological children.
NO, they don't. That is a statistic that you have completely made up. And one that is completely irrelevant.
KiMare wrote:
<quoted text>
4% puts the exception in the category of genetic defect just like GLBT, right?
GLBT isn't a genetic defect. And children still aren't a requirement of marriage. They never will be.

But please, do keep harping on about "the children"!!! Nothing demonstrates what a complete buffoon you are more than that!!

“Crusading Fundies r hilarious!”

Since: Feb 11

Location hidden

#145534 Jun 11, 2012
KiMare wrote:
<quoted text>
You confuse distinguish with discriminate
Distinguishment that is made with the intention of treating one group differently is the very definition of discrimination you moron. LOL!!!!
KiMare wrote:
<quoted text>
just like you do marriage with gay unions.
no one has been discussing gay unions, we are discussing our marriages. But don't let that stop you from your continued childish rhetoric!!
Dan

Roseville, CA

#145535 Jun 11, 2012
Frank Rizzo wrote:
<quoted text>
I'm here to discuss marriage equality. You are not.
Trolls like you make it difficult to impossible, hence the "snowballs".
Boy, do you have my message mangled, you don't even understand it. No wonder your responses are so dumb. But dumb is funny, death threats are not, so I am done responding to you Dan.
Unless I just can't resist! YUK!YUK!YUK!
'Trolls' are in these threads only to start trouble.

Like asshats who want to interject polygamy into a discussion on gay marriage.

And now it's "death threats"....LOL!!!!

YOU'RE AN IDIOT. If I told you other common sense items like don't stick your hand down a running garbage disposal because you might just pull back a bloodied stump you'd probably claims I threatened you there as well.

LOL!!!!

“Crusading Fundies r hilarious!”

Since: Feb 11

Location hidden

#145536 Jun 11, 2012
Pam Jordan wrote:
<quoted text>
there is nothing more to say given you still have not proven your position.
Nor will he, ever.

“Crusading Fundies r hilarious!”

Since: Feb 11

Location hidden

#145539 Jun 11, 2012
KiMare wrote:
KiMare wrote:
<quoted text>
That's funny, I've made a living doing so for over 30 years.
I prefer family dynamics and reality therapy. They work.
You might recognize the three R's: realism, responsibility, and right-and-wrong in my responses.
Smile.
<quoted text>
I'm glad to hear you were not alone, even though silent assassin recognized that you were so far ahead of them in that incompetence that it made you look like you were in a class by yourself.
Realism is never anything but reality. It is denial that has the limp wrist, which is why we gays are so prone to it.
Responsibility doesn't fall through cracks and commit anal abuse, that is irresponsible AND a example of a moral wrong.
Can some one say "fundie butt-obsessed whacktard"?!! Smile.
RiccardoFire

Sacramento, CA

#145540 Jun 11, 2012
Dan wrote:
<quoted text>
'Trolls' are in these threads only to start trouble.
Like asshats who want to interject polygamy into a discussion on gay marriage.
And now it's "death threats"....LOL!!!!
YOU'RE AN IDIOT. If I told you other common sense items like don't stick your hand down a running garbage disposal because you might just pull back a bloodied stump you'd probably claims I threatened you there as well.
LOL!!!!
Maybe I was born to have 3 wives, are u a bigot or something, why do u deny my civil rights asshat!
THE FATHER

Buffalo, NY

#145541 Jun 11, 2012
Cyberbullies beware:
TOLLES, CHRIS CEO TOPIX LLC
You're not as anonymous as you think

A Lady posted a message of support on Facebook about her favorite contestant on The X Factor talent competition, she found herself the victim of incessant and constant torment from anonymous cyberbullies. But rather than take the abuse sitting down, She decided to fight, taking her assailants to court. And she won.
In her suit, she claimed to have been the victim of a number of slanderous, malicious attacks. Her attackers created a page on the social network that branded the Brighton, U.K. woman as a drug dealer and a pedophile. The court ruled that Facebook must turn over the names, email addresses, and IP information of the trolls who tormented her.
For its part, Facebook is not expected to fight the court order. The company will comply as soon as it is officially served papers by the court, explaining in a statement that, "we respect our legal obligations and work with law enforcement to ensure that such people are brought to justice."

_$$$$$$$$_

Chris Tolles CEO Topix LLC
Based in Palo Alto, Calif., Topix LLC is a privately held company with investment from Gannett Co., Inc.(NYSE: GCI), The McClatchy Company (NYSE: MNI) and Tribune Company.
WOW

"I hate to even respond because I know it fuels his crazy little mind, and I have no idea who this Joe is, but the freedom of speech only goes so far. To accuse someone of molesting their child on a public forum multiple times daily is most definitely a crime. And CO...you can rysoflyao...but you are the ONLY one who sounds like a dumb hillbilly. And trust me, I am far from anything else you have ever called me on other posts you know nothing about. In fact, you WILL be quite surprised to find out just who and what I am, as I am pursuing this. Very soon, we will all be rofloao! And at that point I will gladly let you know who I am, as well as let all these people know who you are and what jail cell you can be found in."

SEE topix.com/13340

o
O/
0
L
Dan

Roseville, CA

#145542 Jun 11, 2012
RiccardoFire wrote:
<quoted text>So all your insults and threat are just a cover for an actual discussion, discovery or argument? What is left to argue? What do you expect to happen that one side will say the other side won, what did they win? Is anyone allowed to have a different opinion on SSM even if they are Not against gay people? Or does that mean they are fair game to call them names?
I was responding to the troll Frank Rizzo who now claims he's for gay marriage if gays will accept polygamy albeit it's an entrely different subject.

Frank Rizzo a troll who's only input in these threads is to try and derail the conversations about gay marriage.

Frank Rizzo who if he were concerned with polygamy would have had vested interested in it yet does not.

Frank Rizzo who only argues with those for gay marriage and never for those against it yet he claims he believes in gay marriage.

And if I think Frank Rizzo is a hypocritical bullshitting troll like yourself then it's my opinion.

Help?

LOL!!!

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.

Clayton Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
News Santana-inspired Maria Maria restaurant in Mill... (Apr '10) 4 hr soledad 100
Local Politics Do you approve of Ed James as City Manager? 22 hr bee 1
News Woman Accused of ID Theft, Registering Fraudule... (May '08) Tue Local reporter 28
The Ghost Town of Benninton Furnace Tue kara 1
News Hero of the Hudson pilot sues over Paradise rea... (Feb '11) Feb 7 ok 10
News How Many People Receive Food Stamps In Danville... (Aug '13) Feb 7 ok 6
Local Politics Do you approve of Laura M. Hoffmeister as Mayor? Feb 6 g 4
More from around the web

Personal Finance

Clayton Mortgages