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

Since: Mar 12

Milwaukee

#185998 Apr 1, 2013
Country-Girl22 wrote:
<quoted text>Please, teach us your ways oh great Jared! Your words of wisdom are those to live by!;)
Thank you!!
Big D

Modesto, CA

#185999 Apr 1, 2013
Pietro Armando wrote:
<quoted text>
Nice try. Individual couples who cannot or choose not, to bear children, don't invalidate the premise as a whole. Do you have an alternative theory as to why marriage developed, and there's not a cross cultural cross time sustained ssm structure with deep seated roots?
Very lame try

If it applies to same sex couples it applies to older couples or vets with injuries or even those that choose not to have children.

This argument was already laughed out of the supreme court, do you think you will do better than the lawyers there did?
It is a dead argument, already put in its proper place ( the trash receptacle ) by the courts.

There is no requirement for a marriage license to have the intention or even ability to have children.

I donít care about divorce or annulment, you can have your marriage dissolved for absolutely no reason at all if either party wants a divorce, we are talking about requirements for a marriage license only.

Since: Dec 09

Knoxville, TN

#186000 Apr 1, 2013
Pietro Armando wrote:
<quoted text>
Nice try. Individual couples who cannot or choose not, to bear children, don't invalidate the premise as a whole. Do you have an alternative theory as to why marriage developed, and there's not a cross cultural cross time sustained ssm structure with deep seated roots?
You know, just because something isn't openly discussed in history does not mean it didn't take place. There is an 11,600 year old drawing on a cave in Sicily that depicts homosexuality.

You won't likely find that in a traditional history book.

But given the age, I believe it qualifies as an example of how homosexual behavior has "deep seated roots" in the society of mankind.

Other depictions have been found that are 9,000 years old and over 4,000 years old.

Keep in mind that the Jewish race is believed to be about 3,800 years old.

So homosexuality was in place LONG before the name Yahweh was ever uttered from someone's lips.

Have I proven my point?
Frankie Rizzo

Union City, CA

#186001 Apr 1, 2013
Dorn wrote:
<quoted text>
Johnny Cochran was an excellent lawyer who kept an innocent man from being framed for murder.
Too funny!

He was an excellent lawyer. But OJ is GUILTY as charged. The glove fit.
Frankie Rizzo

Union City, CA

#186002 Apr 1, 2013
Big D wrote:
<quoted text>
Did your imaginary playmate tell you this? Or do you think you are psychic?
Here we go again. She didn't mention God in the post you responded to. YOU DID dummy. And then you whine about people posting religious stuff.

You're OFF TOPIC. Go start a GOD thread.
Frankie Rizzo

Union City, CA

#186003 Apr 1, 2013
Big D wrote:
<quoted text>
Very lame try
If it applies to same sex couples it applies to older couples or vets with injuries or even those that choose not to have children.
This argument was already laughed out of the supreme court, do you think you will do better than the lawyers there did?
It is a dead argument, already put in its proper place ( the trash receptacle ) by the courts.
There is no requirement for a marriage license to have the intention or even ability to have children.
I donít care about divorce or annulment, you can have your marriage dissolved for absolutely no reason at all if either party wants a divorce, we are talking about requirements for a marriage license only.
They didn't laugh the argument out of court. They politely laughed at the lame joke about older people procreating.

Since: Dec 09

Knoxville, TN

#186004 Apr 1, 2013
Pietro Armando wrote:
<quoted text>
Waitaminit VV. SSM advocates often stress marriage is about love, yet do not argue the state annul marriages of couples who are no longer "in love", or require a "love test", prior to issuance of a marriage license. Why?
Because the reason that two people get married is none of the state's buisness.

That's been our argument all along. You guys are the ones who keep saying that marriage is about child rearing. Yet the state does not mandate child rearing in order to obtain a license and get married.

It would be just as ridiculous for the state to insist that everyone who gets married must be in love.

As I've pointed out to Kimare, there are dozens of reasons that people get married. Some get married because of an unplanned pregnancy. Some get married in order to gain stability. Some get married for money. Some get married based on the looks of their spouse. Some get married in order to increase their station in life (i.e. a poor man marries into a wealthy family). Some get married out of love. Some get married for the purpose of creating a family.

Nobody knows the real reason every single person gets married.

And the state has never set limits as to "why" someone can get married. Well, the only limit I can think of is that the the state will not allow someone to marry who is already married to someone else. You must first go through a divorce. Then you can get married.

Bottom line, the state will never mandate that offspring must be planned prior to a marriage. And the state will never mandate that deep and unabiding love exist throughout a marriage.

As far as I know, the words "children" or "love" aren't mentioned on any marriage license.
Frankie Rizzo

Union City, CA

#186005 Apr 1, 2013
Country-Girl22 wrote:
<quoted text>I am having fun:)
Good! Big D's not. He's pissed off about other people's religion.
Big D

Modesto, CA

#186006 Apr 1, 2013
Frankie Rizzo wrote:
<quoted text>
They didn't laugh the argument out of court. They politely laughed at the lame joke about older people procreating.
LOL so you think this is your big ticket to defeat Same Sex marriage, I will let all the other people that cannot or intend not to have children know.

The argument stopped there, after those comments there was no further push as "procreation" as any argument against same sex marriage as the lawyers had no response, there was nothing they coul do to separate same sex couples and punish them, without including a lot of other folks they didnít intend to punish.

it is still a dead argument, going nowhere except amongst the incredibly ignorant

If however you wish to further pursue this line of argument, please show me where.... anywhere in the US, that the ability or intent to have children is a prerequisite to obtaining a marriage license.

I am not interested in divorce or annulment as that takes one party in the marriage to desire one, I am talking about a prerequisite to obtaining a marriage license
Frankie Rizzo

Union City, CA

#186007 Apr 1, 2013
Randy -Rock- Hudson wrote:
Your side has Hemp Head....or whatever.....and my side has a Bluto. Neck and neck....
:-D
Hemp Telelgraph. Can't even spell his own name.

That dopey jackass Big D, always ranting about religion, is on my side too. Oy vey.
Big D

Modesto, CA

#186008 Apr 1, 2013
Frankie Rizzo wrote:
<quoted text>
Good! Big D's not. He's pissed off about other people's religion.
Not true I treat all religions equally

Christianity is as valid as Volcano worship, Islam is as valid as Scientology, all the same in the eyes of the law.

And you are free to believe one or all of the, and deserve equal protection and equal rights under the law in practicing them.

and we are free to laugh at them as well
Frankie Rizzo

Union City, CA

#186009 Apr 1, 2013
Big D wrote:
<quoted text>
LOL so you think this is your big ticket to defeat Same Sex marriage, I will let all the other people that cannot or intend not to have children know.
The argument stopped there, after those comments there was no further push as "procreation" as any argument against same sex marriage as the lawyers had no response, there was nothing they coul do to separate same sex couples and punish them, without including a lot of other folks they didnít intend to punish.
it is still a dead argument, going nowhere except amongst the incredibly ignorant
If however you wish to further pursue this line of argument, please show me where.... anywhere in the US, that the ability or intent to have children is a prerequisite to obtaining a marriage license.
I am not interested in divorce or annulment as that takes one party in the marriage to desire one, I am talking about a prerequisite to obtaining a marriage license
This is not a game or contest. No one laughed at another's position in the Supreme Court liar.

I support SSM your dopey paranoia notwithstanding.

You can lie all you want and declare I do not, but that's a very dumb way to argue and you will lose.
Frankie Rizzo

Union City, CA

#186010 Apr 1, 2013
Big D wrote:
<quoted text>
Not true I treat all religions equally
Christianity is as valid as Volcano worship, Islam is as valid as Scientology, all the same in the eyes of the law.
And you are free to believe one or all of the, and deserve equal protection and equal rights under the law in practicing them.
and we are free to laugh at them as well
Go start a religion thread or a I laugh at you thread. This one is about marriage equality. Which I support and you do not.

Since: Dec 09

Knoxville, TN

#186011 Apr 1, 2013
Pietro Armando wrote:
<quoted text>
Nice try. Individual couples who cannot or choose not, to bear children, don't invalidate the premise as a whole. Do you have an alternative theory as to why marriage developed, and there's not a cross cultural cross time sustained ssm structure with deep seated roots?
To be perfectly honest, I think widespread "legal marriage" that we know today (whether through the state or through the church) developed simply as a means of record keeping.

Keep in mind that homosapien is believed to have been on the planet at least 100,000 years.

Imagine how it must have been in ancient, rural or sparsely populated areas of the world. Were there churches? Were there official governments?

My guess is that ancient people paired up and started families without the use of pastors or leaders or officials of any kind.

Widespread marriage came about much later.

I'm guessing... I have no proof.
Big D

Modesto, CA

#186012 Apr 1, 2013
Frankie Rizzo wrote:
<quoted text>
This is not a game or contest. No one laughed at another's position in the Supreme Court liar.
I support SSM your dopey paranoia notwithstanding.
You can lie all you want and declare I do not, but that's a very dumb way to argue and you will lose.
I didnít call anyone a liar, a joke was made, the question asked, the lawyers could not respond and the topic was dropped.

You can lie all you want, but it was laughed out of court, that is certainly my view of it and the view of quite a number of other people.

If you want to talk about losing, lets see what happens in the next couple of months with Prop 8 and DOMA

care to make a wager... loser?
Big D

Modesto, CA

#186013 Apr 1, 2013
Frankie Rizzo wrote:
<quoted text>
Go start a religion thread or a I laugh at you thread. This one is about marriage equality. Which I support and you do not.
No thanks I will post what I like where I like, particularly as it seems to annoy you :)
Anonymous

Nassau, NY

#186014 Apr 1, 2013
Did anybody see the Jerry Springer episode today? I was just watching it, and that right there is why I think same sex relations are gross. You have guys who dress and act like girls, and girls who look and dress and act like guys. Total trash!!!!
Anonymous

Nassau, NY

#186015 Apr 1, 2013
Big D wrote:
<quoted text>
Did your imaginary playmate tell you this? Or do you think you are psychic?
Do you know how to read? He said he WAS married and now he's happy with men, so I'm guessing that's because his ex wife was so horrible he said the hell with woman I'm going to men!lol

Since: Nov 12

Elk Grove, CA

#186016 Apr 1, 2013
Big D wrote:
<quoted text>
Not true I treat all religions equally
Christianity is as valid as Volcano worship, Islam is as valid as Scientology, all the same in the eyes of the law.
And you are free to believe one or all of the, and deserve equal protection and equal rights under the law in practicing them.
and we are free to laugh at them as well
You forgot your religion that requires a greater faith then all of them. The puddle of crud theory. Talk about fairy tales....LOL.

“Vita e' Bella.”

Since: May 12

Location hidden

#186017 Apr 1, 2013
veryvermilion wrote:
<quoted text>
You know, just because something isn't openly discussed in history does not mean it didn't take place. There is an 11,600 year old drawing on a cave in Sicily that depicts homosexuality.
You won't likely find that in a traditional history book.
But given the age, I believe it qualifies as an example of how homosexual behavior has "deep seated roots" in the society of mankind.
Other depictions have been found that are 9,000 years old and over 4,000 years old.
Keep in mind that the Jewish race is believed to be about 3,800 years old.
So homosexuality was in place LONG before the name Yahweh was ever uttered from someone's lips.
Have I proven my point?
Not quite. I never said same sex sexual behavior is new. Quite the contrary. However despite its existence, it has not translated into SSM across time and place. If it did, would this debate be necessary? No, SSM would already b part of our culture.

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.

Desert Hot Springs Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
Touch Of Class Consignments, Cathedral City, ca. (Aug '13) Tue Mike 132
Blythe City Manager Says Solar Power Brings Ben... Dec 22 Solarman 1
stores with bad customer service {list your wor... Dec 18 Tracy 3
mexican landscapers dump in the desert Dec 11 Jean 22
Re-Thinking Southern California Earthquake Scen... Dec 8 Rick 1
Highway Dividers in Morongo Valley have Residen... (Aug '13) Dec 8 Martha Marsch 2
Lower gas prices means more people on the road ... Dec 7 Ronald 6
More from around the web

Desert Hot Springs People Search

Addresses and phone numbers for FREE

Desert Hot Springs News, Events & Info

Click for news, events and info in Desert Hot Springs

Personal Finance

Mortgages [ See current mortgage rates ]

NFL Latest News

Updated 1:16 am PST