Judge overturns California's ban on same-sex marriage

Aug 4, 2010 Full story: www.cnn.com 201,187

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.

Full Story
Randy -Rock- Hudson

Wooster, OH

#186784 Apr 5, 2013
veryvermilion wrote:
<quoted text>
Yes... In fact we are trying to convert heterosexuals. But not in the way you intimate.
We are trying to change your minds about homosexuality. We are in a movement to show you that we are equal to you in EVERY way; that we function normally in society just like you do. We are trying to show you that we will not be treated as a group of people who are willing to be hated and vilified out of your ignorance of science and your adherence to archaic religious beliefs.
In short, we're trying to get you to wrap your mind around the fact that we are like you in every way except a small aspect of our lives.
THAT is how we are trying to convert heterosexuals.
Unlike you, we ARE NOT on a mission to attempt to get you to change your attractions.
Get it now?
We already got it. You wish for us to ignore the obvious differences in the relationships. This, we cannot do. Go live your lives. Do not seek that which you do not rate. We are equals, in every Constitutional way. Since the Constitution does not mention SSM, we are equals. We can all vote, own property, own and bear arms, etc. Go and enjoy your rights, as we do.
Randy -Rock- Hudson

Wooster, OH

#186785 Apr 5, 2013
Big D wrote:
<quoted text>
Exactly
what is it about those that oppose same sex marriage that their marriages are so terribly fragile that they are like frightened little children.
My marriage is fine, same sex marriage has not harmed me or my children in any way at all.
Why should it?
"Fragile"? Laughable attempt to feel superior. Your marriage HAS been damaged, you're just too dense to realize it. Must be a little too difficult to notice it, from up on high...
Randys Momma from beyond

Elmwood Park, IL

#186786 Apr 5, 2013
Randy -Rock- Hudson wrote:
<quoted text>
We already got it. You wish for us to ignore the obvious differences in the relationships. This, we cannot do. Go live your lives. Do not seek that which you do not rate. We are equals, in every Constitutional way. Since the Constitution does not mention SSM, we are equals. We can all vote, own property, own and bear arms, etc. Go and enjoy your rights, as we do.
The constitution does not specifically disallow SSM, so it must be legal already.
Randy -Rock- Hudson

Wooster, OH

#186787 Apr 5, 2013
just the facts wrote:
<quoted text>And there you have it. Marriage to you is a sanctioned fluckfest, a god ordained ticket to procreation. Well good for you. My marriage is about sharing my life with my wife. Any one can have sex you moron, and you damn sure don't need to be married to do so. What a sad life you have.
Any gay can share their life with another, without making false claims to a title that they do not rate. You're the sad one. We know about sex, you clot, and it is no basis for a marriage. We know 'bout that, too.
Randy -Rock- Hudson

Wooster, OH

#186788 Apr 5, 2013
Big D wrote:
<quoted text>
Yes.. my wife is my best friend, my closest confidant and harshest critic, the one I share my hopes and dreams with, she is not my property, but my partner in life
I don’t see any reason not to extend that to same sex couples.
Tradition mean nothing to me, traditionally Christians were murdered for entertainment. Just because something was true long ago, does not make it a good thing for today.
"I don’t see any reason not to extend that to same sex couples." Well, we do. And, as per the Christians, they also murdered my lot for no good reason, and I still maintain respect for them. Was not surprised, however, to note X-Box's little hissie fit "Happy dead jew on a stick day", what can one expect, from a fine example of a serious lack of breeding and class, such as he/she/it? I suppose that he/she/it was enthused about it being called "Cesar Chavez Day"...
Randy -Rock- Hudson

Wooster, OH

#186789 Apr 5, 2013
Big D wrote:
<quoted text>
Nope, only rap stars with songs like "slap my bitch up" refer to and thank god publically
How sad, that you have to go back to a song, from 1997, and it was "Smack My Bitch Up"... Which actually meant to "up ones game", not a reference to wife-beating. And, I am surprised that you appear to dislike rappers. Watch out, you'll have Chongo calling you a racist, in no time at all.... Just for the record, it also annoys me when they all thank God for making them winners, as if, LOL, God was micro-managing them...
Randy -Rock- Hudson

Wooster, OH

#186790 Apr 5, 2013
Station wrote:
Call another trash hauling company to haul away D, quick.
:-D
Nice.
At first, I misunderstood you, but have come to appreciate you.
Randy -Rock- Hudson

Wooster, OH

#186791 Apr 5, 2013
heartandmind wrote:
<quoted text>
you cite the witherspoon institute? seriously? to begin with that's a religious based think tank so of course you'll get biased information.
secondly....the study you refer to, in 2012, the Witherspoon Institute drew public attention for having funded a controversial study—called the "New Family Structures Study" (NFSS)—concerning LGBT parenting, conducted by Mark Regnerus, an associate professor of sociology at the University of Texas at Austin - which was found to be severely flawed in an audit conducted by the publisher of the study Social Science Research, and was criticized by major professional scientific institutions and associations as well as other sociologists at the University of Texas. The American Sociological Association formally condemned the NFSS for being invalid in a brief to the United States Supreme Court. The University of Texas conducted an inquiry into the publication and declined to conduct a personal investigation stating that ordinary errors are not considered personal misconduct. Documents from the University of Texas at Austin show that Mark Regnerus requested payment authorizations, for assistance in data analysis, to William Bradford Wilcox, associate professor of sociology at the University of Virginia, a member of the James Madison Society at Princeton University, the director of the National Marriage Project at the University of Virginia, and fellow (at that time) of the Witherspoon Institute. William Bradford Wilcox no longer appears on the official website for the Witherspoon Institute. Although the Witherspoon funding was part of the controversy, these documents show direct involvement in the study by the Witherspoon Institute. The methodology of the study has received criticism.
keep trying lil' buddy.
Here's the pot calling the kettle "Negro. " (Come get some, Chongo) Your side has repeatedly fed us gibberish and propaganda, from your "Whack-a-doodle" sites, and you are calling "foul"? It is to laugh.
Chongo

Wooster, OH

#186794 Apr 5, 2013
Randy -Rock- Hudson wrote:
<quoted text>
Here's the pot calling the kettle "Negro. " (Come get some, Chongo) Your side has repeatedly fed us gibberish and propaganda, from your "Whack-a-doodle" sites, and you are calling "foul"? It is to laugh.
"Racist"! "Hater!" I'm'n'a have yo' ass banned. I'm'na show you, sucka... Oh, wait. Dagnabbit, you haven't made any new registered tags for me to have banned, Geuss I'm a powerless little fluck. I'll just have to smoke some mo' crack... And cackle about clever I is fo' using my Assy McGee picture, they haven't figured out how ugly I is, yet...
Randy -Rock- Hudson

Wooster, OH

#186795 Apr 5, 2013
RiccardoFire wrote:
<quoted text>I take it that you are against having Harvey Milk's name on buildings?
I prefer Anita Bryant...
Randy -Rock- Hudson

Wooster, OH

#186796 Apr 5, 2013
Frankie Rizzo wrote:
<quoted text>
Big D is really against polygamy but cannot express that because it will reveal his hypocrisy.
How does that old cobblers go, again? Oh yeah... "Says he's for it, but knocks anyone that is for it, and defends anyone who is against it"...or some old shit like that....
Randy -Rock- Hudson

Wooster, OH

#186797 Apr 5, 2013
Frankie Rizzo wrote:
<quoted text>
Sure.
No, really... He doesn't personally approve of it, so we must all adjust our value systems, so as to accommodate him... He thinks that what we value is for shit, so we can all clam up, then he will approve. He, and his type, think that 90% of us are all mixed up, so we can throw any mention of religion out of the window, too. But, by cracky, he'll defend us against anyone pushing their beliefs on us, as long as it isn't him that we need defending from....
Randy -Rock- Hudson

Wooster, OH

#186798 Apr 5, 2013
Big D wrote:
<quoted text>
Wrong I would vote in favor of it if it came up
I have tried to point out in the past an issue that will need to be dealt with if this will ever go forward but you are not bright enough to distinguish between support and awareness of a problem.
In the future I won’t refer to it anymore as I don’t want to confuse the village idiot any further
Now, who made any mention of Village X-Box? Leave him alone, he has enough problems, already....

Since: Dec 09

Knoxville, TN

#186799 Apr 5, 2013
Randy -Rock- Hudson wrote:
<quoted text>
We already got it. You wish for us to ignore the obvious differences in the relationships. This, we cannot do. Go live your lives. Do not seek that which you do not rate. We are equals, in every Constitutional way. Since the Constitution does not mention SSM, we are equals. We can all vote, own property, own and bear arms, etc. Go and enjoy your rights, as we do.
The Supreme Court has supported citizen's fundamental rights to marry 14 times since 1888

Here are a few of their comments regarding marriage...

Loving v. Virginia,(1967):“The freedom to marry has long been recognized as one of the vital personal rights essential to the orderly pursuit of happiness by free men.”

Boddie v. Connecticut,(1971):“[M]arriage involves interests of basic importance to our society” and is “a fundamental human relationship.”

Cleveland Board of Education v. LaFleur,(1974)“This Court has long recognized that freedom of personal choice in matters of marriage and family life is one of the liberties protected by the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment.”

Moore v. City of East Cleveland,(1977)(plurality):“[ W]hen the government intrudes on choices concerning family living arrangements, this Court must examine carefully the importance of the governmental interests advanced and the extent to which they are served by the challenged regulation.”

Zablocki v. Redhail,(1978):“[T]he right to marry is of fundamental importance for all individuals.”

Turner v. Safley,(1987):“[T]he decision to marry is a fundamental right” and an “expression of emotional support and public commitment.”

Planned Parenthood of Southeastern Pennsylvania v. Casey,(1992):“These matters, involving the most intimate and personal choices a person may make in a lifetime, choices central to personal dignity and autonomy, are central to the liberty protected by the Fourteenth Amendment. At the heart of liberty is the right to define one’s own concept of existence, of meaning, of the universe, and of the mystery of human life.”

Lawrence v. Texas,(2003):“[O]ur laws and tradition afford constitutional protection to personal decisions relating to marriage, procreation, contraception, family relationships, and education.… Persons in a homosexual relationship may seek autonomy for these purposes, just as heterosexual persons do.”

----------

Only when all unrelated, consenting, adult couples are able to marry the person of their choice will we be fully equal.
Randy -Rock- Hudson

Wooster, OH

#186800 Apr 5, 2013
Jaredb8 wrote:
<quoted text>
So what you are truly saying then is all you are opposed to is the use of a word?? Doesent that seem silly??
Yeah, I hate to agree with you, I smelt the wire in the bush there. It is plenty more, than just the title, that we object to, it's the governmental mandates that we are objecting to. The official implementation of legislated morality that has our hair standing up.
Randy -Rock- Hudson

Wooster, OH

#186801 Apr 5, 2013
Big D wrote:
<quoted text>
That is the entire issue
a word
A word they don’t own, as it relates to dozens of religions and no religion at all. They want to define that word not only for themselves but to force that word upon others not of their religion.
The word scares them to the core of their being.
The rights don’t concern them... it is the word itself that shakes them to their core.
These people are frightened to death over how someone might use that word.
It is really pathetic when you think about it.
Nice try. We are not forcing the definition of that word, you are chiseling it open, to all. Reducing its meaning, by allowing any to lay claim to it, like allowing all the illegal aliens (I refuse to call them "Guest Workers") to call themselves "American Citizens". Wrong move, there, pal. And, using the word "scares". A little too much, LOL, we are not scared, do not attempt to feel superior through such childish means... Did it make you feel all big, bad and strong? Pictured us all in the corner, cowering? LOL. Thanks for the laugh.
Randy -Rock- Hudson

Wooster, OH

#186802 Apr 5, 2013
Big D wrote:
<quoted text>
You are wrong thinking that all those in poly marriages are criminals, they are not.
Umm... He doesn't. You said that, not him. I remember you saying that, months ago. Blanket job. And we pointed out that it was the same argument that your side had objected to, when it was used against the gays. Remember? I know that you do. Silly "Super Big D". And, what was it that you threatened to have Riccardo arrested for, if he spoke at a school? I must have missed your response.....
Randy -Rock- Hudson

Wooster, OH

#186803 Apr 5, 2013
Big D wrote:
<quoted text>
Not true in 11 states one district, and 17 nations ( I think, they are converting so fast it is hard to keep track )
12 states if you consider that California has 18,000 legally married same sex couples
More to follow
Boy, oh, boy. According to you, the number is rising so fast, that by the end of the night, all of America will support it. I'll expect the whole of my neighborhood to burn a cross on my lawn, because I am against it.

Since: Dec 09

Knoxville, TN

#186804 Apr 5, 2013
Randy -Rock- Hudson wrote:
<quoted text>
Ahh. You DO admit to having "special needs", then? Good. And you DO admit that "coming out" is a "special effort"? Good. Your need doesn't include any obligation, on my part, to have to listen to it. Keep it to yourselves, and tote your own loads. Used to be, in order to unburden oneself, one had to go to a psychiatrist, and pay large money to someone to listen to this type of self-indulgent whining. Now, it is publicity stunts and propaganda.
"Self-indulgent whining?" Why do you have to be so insulting?

Look, you may not think that we have the constitutional right to marry, but the last time I looked we sure as hell have the right to free speech.

Should the blacks have kept their issues to themselves? Should they have forgone public demonstrations and sought the help of their therapists?

What about women? Maybe they should have just bucked up and kept quiet too.

I'm sorry that you're disturbed by homosexuality. But that is your issue--not mine.

Man up and stop complaining. If you don't want to hear about us, by all means stop coming to this site. Don't watch television. Stop reading the newspapers.

But we're not going to drop our voices for your convenience.

As long as folks like you continue to believe that we are less equal than you, we're going to keep talking, and marching, and protesting, and suing.

We will have our voices heard by those who make decisions about our lives. We will politely request equality. But when it's refused, we will demand it.

Damn man; how can you honestly believe that gays are inferior to straights? How is that possible? This is the 21st Century!

Science has already declared us to be normal. Medicine took us off the list of disorders FORTY YEARS AGO!

You've had ample time to wrap your head around this fact.

I am a tax paying, law abiding citizen of the United States. There's no law against me seeking the rights that I believe I'm entitled to.
Randy -Rock- Hudson

Wooster, OH

#186805 Apr 5, 2013
Jaredb8 wrote:
<quoted text>
Not at all. We want equality. Just as blacks had their own bathrooms, drinking fountains etc. yes they had their own bathrooms and water to drink but they also just wanted equality. Just as you want to say we can have civil unions we want marriage. It's the same principal. 40 years from now you will look just as stupid as those that were for their civil rights.
I learned this in 1st grade, hope it helps:
Principle ends in "le", just like ru"le"..."the principal has a principle"
And...
Principal ends in "pal", "the princi"pal" is my pal".
Don't say that I never helped ya...
:-D

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.

Crows Landing Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
Lost keys Dec 18 Ugiftedgirl 1
For your information. F y I Dec 18 Ugiftedgirl 1
Lost or misplaced keys Dec 18 Ugiftedgirl 2
room for rent Dec 5 nik_James 1
do not move to the city of patterson!!!!!!!!!!!... (Apr '10) Nov 30 yo mama 7
Rooftop burglaries Nov '14 Kisskathis 2
Will the water last in California? Nov '14 fish294 1
Crows Landing Dating
Find my Match
More from around the web

Crows Landing People Search

Addresses and phone numbers for FREE

Crows Landing News, Events & Info

Click for news, events and info in Crows Landing

Personal Finance

Mortgages [ See current mortgage rates ]

NFL Latest News

Updated 3:25 pm PST