Judge overturns California's ban on same-sex marriage

[Frankie RIzzo]

Jazybird58 wrote:

<quoted text>No fluck stick I said I don't care if you want to have 5 wives or marry your brother. I never agreed with your silly arse. Gawd your stooopid

I don't want five wives or to marry my brother. I want to discuss equal rights.

Do you want to marry a man? If not why are you arguing for same sex marriage?

Don't be so stupid.

[Jazybird58]

Frankie RIzzo wrote:

<quoted text>
No I don't.
You have to try and understand Fruitloops, when we talk of marriage equality, it is understood we are talking about COMMITTED CONSENSUAL ADULTS. In every case of opposite sex, same sex, incest and poly marriage. Get it? Got it? Good!

It seems that you are wrong again. I posted a link to Warren Jeffs. Had you opened it and read the article. You would see that you are wrong. The dude was marring 12 and 15 year old girls off.

[Jazybird58]

Big D wrote:

<quoted text>
The part that made me laugh is when he went from Poly to Incest, animals are next on the agenda of course.
Very stereotypical and comical argument train on a pre-defined path

LOl, trees to follow

[Frankie RIzzo]

Jazybird58 wrote:

<quoted text>What Have I done? Well lets see I contacted, my state representatives and told them why same sex marriage should be allowed in my state, as many others have done. I posted the results yesterday. As far as hiring a lawyer, no need its already been done.As far as SCOTUS, the case is before them.
Now comes the hard question, other than posting here, what have you done to promote polygamy? My guess would be nothing. You're a POE

I'm real proud of you Fruitloops! Real proud.

I can discuss marriage equality without your permission. Glad it makes you mad.

Censorship sucks.

[Jazybird58]

Frankie RIzzo wrote:

<quoted text>
I don't want five wives or to marry my brother. I want to discuss equal rights.
Do you want to marry a man? If not why are you arguing for same sex marriage?
Don't be so stupid.

I am trying, its a shame you wont.

[Jazybird58]

Frankie RIzzo wrote:

<quoted text>
I'm real proud of you Fruitloops! Real proud.
I can discuss marriage equality without your permission. Glad it makes you mad.
Censorship sucks.

Aww , did you not like my answer? So what have you done to help your cause???? I know sit on your lazy azz and spam Topix

[Frankie RIzzo]

Big D wrote:

<quoted text>
But he is not the public image of same sex marriage, never was.
Dahmer was not using same sex marriage as an excuse to commit his crimes.
I get it that you don’t understand the difference, but everyone else here does.

What I understand is that you are ignorant.

You are trying to tell me that polygamy has a bad and that is justified. Ignorance and bigotry plain and simple.

[Big D]

Jazybird58 wrote:

<quoted text>LOl, trees to follow

He said Dogs, I was expecting Goats as that is what the "arguments against same sex" pamphlet calls for

[Frankie RIzzo]

Big D wrote:

<quoted text>
I talked to your sister, she doesnt want to marry you

And I don't want to marry her, I just want to discuss the right to marry her. Too bad you don't understand the difference.

[Frankie RIzzo]

Big D wrote:

<quoted text>
Oh no mistake, you would not follow that path so precisely defined for so long. Granted it is no surprise, falling that path means you don’t have to actually think for yourself at all.

?

[Frankie RIzzo]

Jazybird58 wrote:

<quoted text>It seems that you are wrong again. I posted a link to Warren Jeffs. Had you opened it and read the article. You would see that you are wrong. The dude was marring 12 and 15 year old girls off.

So that means to you that the other few million poly marriages around the world should be made illegal?

"Cool beans" fruitcake!

[Frankie RIzzo]

Necessary repeat of disclaimer, for the dopes who forgot again-

You have to try and understand, when I talk of marriage equality, it is understood I am talking about COMMITTED CONSENSUAL ADULTS.

In every case of opposite sex, same sex, incest and poly marriage. Get it? Got it? Good!

[Frankie RIzzo]

Jazybird58 wrote:

<quoted text>I am trying, its a shame you wont.

Perhaps you will direct me to one of those posts where you discussed marriage equality. All I see is dopey troll.

[Frankie RIzzo]

Jazybird58 wrote:

<quoted text>Aww , did you not like my answer? So what have you done to help your cause???? I know sit on your lazy azz and spam Topix

Ever since I began researching the topic of polygamy, I have been bothered by the idea that this practice is justifiably criminalized because it is associated with the ills of child exploitation, abuse of women and children, etc.

But, within the criminal code, we have clear and specific provisions to target these offences, which are clearly harmful, and which any reasonable person considers intolerable and deserving of criminal sanction. So why does the law banning polygamy remain, a provision which, by the way, is almost never invoked and when it has been used, has led to few convictions that carried relatively minimal sentences?

If someone commits a crime, prosecute the hell out of them NO MATTER THE TYPE OF MARRIAGE THEY CHOOSE.

[Snappy]

Will the pencil lipped fool from out of town who keeps posting snap-poola, shut up

[Frankie RIzzo]

Jazybird58 wrote:

<quoted text>LOl, trees to follow

Remember when they used that against same sex marriage fruitcake? You are the civil rights champion of us all, you must remember that. It was stupid then, remember? It still is.

[Frankie RIzzo]

Ever since I began researching the topic of polygamy, I have been bothered by the idea that this practice is justifiably criminalized because it is associated with the ills of child exploitation, abuse of women and children, etc.

But, within the criminal code, we have clear and specific provisions to target these offences, which are clearly harmful, and which any reasonable person considers intolerable and deserving of criminal sanction. So why does the law banning polygamy remain, a provision which, by the way, is almost never invoked and when it has been used, has led to few convictions that carried relatively minimal sentences?

If someone commits a crime, prosecute the hell out of them NO MATTER THE TYPE OF MARRIAGE THEY CHOOSE.

Perhaps I need to explain this to you clowns in simpler terms. It means we have perfectly good laws against the crimes you fear are associated with polygamy. Therefore why is polygamy illegal?

[Big D]

Frankie RIzzo wrote:

Necessary repeat of disclaimer, for the dopes who forgot again-
You have to try and understand, when I talk of marriage equality, it is understood I am talking about COMMITTED CONSENSUAL ADULTS.
In every case of opposite sex, same sex, incest and poly marriage. Get it? Got it? Good!

and the decline of the influence of religion in America that made it possible.

[Big D]

Frankie RIzzo wrote:

<quoted text>
And I don't want to marry her, I just want to discuss the right to marry her. Too bad you don't understand the difference.

I dont thinkg your dog does either

[Big D]

Frankie RIzzo wrote:

<quoted text>
What I understand is that you are ignorant.
You are trying to tell me that polygamy has a bad and that is justified. Ignorance and bigotry plain and simple.

No I have been trying to tell you that it has an image problem, you don’t want to believe it.

so when you try to get your pet obsession on the ballot you will be facing a very unexpected surprise