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
sid

Brisbane, Australia

#180225 Feb 19, 2013
Frankie Rizzo wrote:
<quoted text>
Aw, shuddup you cyberstalking homophobe creep! No one cares.
You got your feelings hurt. Get over it.
MabarCACA Controllers wrote:
<quoted text>
Stupif DICKHEAD.
Go suck on dogshit sid's castrated genitals idiotic black dalit sewer rat chharchhobi transvestite MalbarKAKALatrine FUCKTARD sIndian.

Add to the start of each comment: I Beady, apologise to all users of Topix
for my stupid use of Sockpuppet names and Proxy Servers.
for damaging the Australian and Mauritian forums by creating stupid Threads and posting stupid Comments.

Add to the start of each comment: I Beady, will cease
using Sockpuppet Names
using Proxy Servers
posting abusive comments
targeting random Topix Users for nothing more than my own enjoyment
using Topix

Add to the start of comment: I Beady apologise
to sairla, Juicylu, The Adelaidean, Patron5, John Barnes, Neville Thompson, Aggrolite, Sid and Julie Chamberpot.
for my false accusations to other users of holding racist, bigoted and prejudiced opinions and views. for my false accusations to other users of making comments, remarks, conduct and behaviour in for my false accusations to other users of the Australian and Mauritian forums.
for calling people scumbags, ignorant buffoons and of being worthless vermin scumbags.
for saying to people things like Real Indian PoonJABI, madman, deranged, demented, crazy, ROMEO TINY inferior midget turd, Rupert PIN DICK FOOFTER, Insane Lunatic Nutcase, SPAMalot IDENTITY THIEF, PLAGIARIZER, ROBBER and IMPOSTOR SPASTIC FUCKTURD PHAGGOT SHEMALE, ti IndoMauritian pilon chickyladyrentboy, obsessed and delusional, Not only dumb but a fraud, an impostor, a liar, a fraudster, a troll for hire and rent by your his admission but more importantly a farcical clown and jerk and a total doorknob Stupid DICKHEAD, FOOKING disgusting, despicable fraud, fraudster, black dalit sewer rat transvestite MalbarKAKALatrine FUCKTARD IMPOSTOR B@stard go get your butt rammed..
to all Topix Users I have abused and disrupted.

Add to the start of comment: I Beady
will cease this stupid conduct immediately

Once you have completed the above task, log off the Proxy Server and then sign in to Topix under your user name 'Beady'

Since: Mar 07

Drakes Branch, VA

#180226 Feb 19, 2013
Brian_G wrote:
<quoted text>It's true, women are in the line of fire now, even when they aren't assigned to combat units. Putting women in combat units will cause more death and injury in combat and training.
If you respect women, keep the out of the front lines and keep marriage one man and one woman.
If one respects men, they should be kept out of the front lines as well, since all of those fatherless children and single moms are not part of the ideal family structure you keep demanding.

And, if you truly respect women, you would allow them to choose the gender they wish to marry. They know better than you do what is right for them .

Making decisions for other people, based only on your own biases, is certainly not respect.

Far from it.

Since: Mar 07

Drakes Branch, VA

#180227 Feb 19, 2013
Pietro Armando wrote:
<quoted text>
Bravo! I like that first line, thanks for that perspective.
Hardly, because no one is proposing removing procreation from all marriages. Gay folks marrying will never stop straight (or gay) people from procreating.

Imagining that it would seems a little strange to most of us.

No marriage law anywhere in this country REQUIRES procreation, but having married parents certainly is a benefit to children.

Even children with gay parents.

If you believe otherwise, prove it.

“Reality bites”

Since: Dec 11

Location hidden

#180228 Feb 19, 2013
Quest wrote:
<quoted text>
Hardly, because no one is proposing removing procreation from all marriages. Gay folks marrying will never stop straight (or gay) people from procreating.
Imagining that it would seems a little strange to most of us.
No marriage law anywhere in this country REQUIRES procreation, but having married parents certainly is a benefit to children.
Even children with gay parents.
If you believe otherwise, prove it.
Pietro somehow thinks that its impossible for two men or two women to raise a child.
Frankie Rizzo

Union City, CA

#180229 Feb 19, 2013
Jazybird58 wrote:
<quoted text>Pietro somehow thinks that its impossible for two men or two women to raise a child.
And you don't think at all.
Big D

Modesto, CA

#180230 Feb 19, 2013
Brian_G wrote:
<quoted text>It's true, women are in the line of fire now, even when they aren't assigned to combat units. Putting women in combat units will cause more death and injury in combat and training.
If you respect women, keep the out of the front lines and keep marriage one man and one woman.
I do respect them, and will give them the same rights as anyone else. If they want combat roles and can handle the job ( many have already shown they can ) I wonít be the one to stop them.

Same as I will work for equal rights for gay folks.
Big D

Modesto, CA

#180231 Feb 19, 2013
Jazybird58 wrote:
<quoted text>Pietro somehow thinks that its impossible for two men or two women to raise a child.
I know for a fact that isnít true, I work with a gay couple raising twin daughters, they are a wonderful family, respected at work and in the community.

“Reality bites”

Since: Dec 11

Location hidden

#180232 Feb 19, 2013
Frankie Rizzo wrote:
<quoted text>
And you don't think at all.
Who's a good boy?

“Reality bites”

Since: Dec 11

Location hidden

#180233 Feb 19, 2013
Big D wrote:
<quoted text>
I know for a fact that isnít true, I work with a gay couple raising twin daughters, they are a wonderful family, respected at work and in the community.
Don't let the fundies read that. They still think you can catch the Gay.
Big D

Modesto, CA

#180234 Feb 19, 2013
Jazybird58 wrote:
<quoted text>Don't let the fundies read that. They still think you can catch the Gay.
Well they also believe in talking snakes, magical trees, a rib woman, and ... well the list goes on.

I donít worry too much about what they believe
Frankie Rizzo

Union City, CA

#180235 Feb 19, 2013
Jazybird58 wrote:
<quoted text>Who's a good boy?
Great post Fruitcake! One of your best. But now that you've had your little hissyfit, lets get back to the topic, marriage equality.

Don't you agree that the Judge's decision bodes well for polygamy and all other marriage rights too?
Frankie Rizzo

Union City, CA

#180236 Feb 19, 2013
sheesh void of hate wrote:
<quoted text>
I've got two of 'em. Both '78s and neither is for sale. One is a work in progress (one day it'll be a sidecar rig) and the other is bone stock - the one in my pic. I've owned it since new. Last one sold at a Honda dealership in Tennessee in 1979. They ran an add in a Nashville paper listing 12 K models and 12 F models on clearance. I wanted an F. It took 12 Fs and 11 Ks to talk my father into cosigning on the bank loan. The princely sum of $1800. You can't touch a scooter for that money now. In a few years you probably won't be able to touch a pack of gum for it.
Sorry Sheesh, simply responding to my posts positively causes you many negative judge-its!

As you know I can and do declare I support same sex marriage but when I do I still get negative judge-its. They say I am fibbing. It's a trick! I'm a secret fundie spy!
Frankie Rizzo

Union City, CA

#180237 Feb 19, 2013
Big D wrote:
<quoted text>
I do respect them, and will give them the same rights as anyone else. If they want combat roles and can handle the job ( many have already shown they can ) I wonít be the one to stop them.
Same as I will work for equal rights for gay folks.
But not those child abusing welfare cheating polygamists.
Frankie Rizzo

Union City, CA

#180238 Feb 19, 2013

“Reality bites”

Since: Dec 11

Location hidden

#180239 Feb 19, 2013
Frankie Rizzo wrote:
<quoted text>
Great post Fruitcake! One of your best. But now that you've had your little hissyfit, lets get back to the topic, marriage equality.
Don't you agree that the Judge's decision bodes well for polygamy and all other marriage rights too?
Fluck are you stuck on stoopid? I have told you NO on many occasions. The Judges ruling has no bearing on polygamy at all. The flucking thread is about voters trying to remove an existing right, based on a persons sexuality. That's discrimination you flipping moron.

“Reality bites”

Since: Dec 11

Location hidden

#180240 Feb 19, 2013
Big D wrote:
<quoted text>
Well they also believe in talking snakes, magical trees, a rib woman, and ... well the list goes on.
I donít worry too much about what they believe
The ole burning bush trick.
Frankie Rizzo

Union City, CA

#180241 Feb 19, 2013
Opponents of gay rights often warn that legalizing same-sex marriage would inexorably lead to legalizing polygamy. Maybe it would, and maybe it should. Denying gay couples the right to marry violates state constitutional guarantees of equality, as the California and Massachusetts high courts have rightly ruled.(The Supreme Court of California also held that the right to marry is fundamental.) Surely Mormons have the same rights to equal treatment under lawóand of course, they have a substantial First Amendment claim to engage in multiple marriages according to the dictates of their faith.

So why is polygamy illegal? Why donít Mormons have the right to enter into multiple marriages sanctified by their church, if not the state? Thereís a short answer to this question but not a very good one: polygamy is illegal and unprotected by the Constitution because the Supreme Court doesnít like it. Over one hundred years ago, the Court held in Reynolds v. U.S. that polygamy was ďan offence against society.Ē The Reynolds decision upheld the criminal conviction of a man accused of taking a second wife in the belief that he had a religious duty to practice polygamy, a duty he would violate at risk of damnation. The Court compared polygamy to murders sanctified by religious belief, such as human sacrifice or the burning of women on their husbandsí funeral pyres.
Big D

Modesto, CA

#180242 Feb 19, 2013
Jazybird58 wrote:
<quoted text>Fluck are you stuck on stoopid? I have told you NO on many occasions. The Judges ruling has no bearing on polygamy at all. The flucking thread is about voters trying to remove an existing right, based on a persons sexuality. That's discrimination you flipping moron.
I think he is stuck on stupid, he is still working the same tactic that has failed over and over and over and he is still on it.

Isnít one of the definitions of insanity is trying the same thing over and over and expecting different results?

“Reality bites”

Since: Dec 11

Location hidden

#180243 Feb 19, 2013
Frankie Rizzo wrote:
Opponents of gay rights often warn that legalizing same-sex marriage would inexorably lead to legalizing polygamy. Maybe it would, and maybe it should. Denying gay couples the right to marry violates state constitutional guarantees of equality, as the California and Massachusetts high courts have rightly ruled.(The Supreme Court of California also held that the right to marry is fundamental.) Surely Mormons have the same rights to equal treatment under lawóand of course, they have a substantial First Amendment claim to engage in multiple marriages according to the dictates of their faith.
So why is polygamy illegal? Why donít Mormons have the right to enter into multiple marriages sanctified by their church, if not the state? Thereís a short answer to this question but not a very good one: polygamy is illegal and unprotected by the Constitution because the Supreme Court doesnít like it. Over one hundred years ago, the Court held in Reynolds v. U.S. that polygamy was ďan offence against society.Ē The Reynolds decision upheld the criminal conviction of a man accused of taking a second wife in the belief that he had a religious duty to practice polygamy, a duty he would violate at risk of damnation. The Court compared polygamy to murders sanctified by religious belief, such as human sacrifice or the burning of women on their husbandsí funeral pyres.
Do you understand that laws that allow polygamy for Mormons only would be Unconstitutional? You need to hire a lawyer and take it before SCOTUS.

“Reality bites”

Since: Dec 11

Location hidden

#180244 Feb 19, 2013
Big D wrote:
<quoted text>
I think he is stuck on stupid, he is still working the same tactic that has failed over and over and over and he is still on it.
Isnít one of the definitions of insanity is trying the same thing over and over and expecting different results?
I started a thread just for him. His very own blogg

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.

Hemet Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
How come all Hemet sex offenders addresses aren... (Dec '08) 9 hr lARRY mILLER9626 12
Review: R G Deck Coatings Inc 10 hr Annonymous 1
San Jacinto Woman Accused of Stabbing Boyfriend... Wed lupita garcia 1
corruption with Riverside county CPS Wed Chris 10
One of Two Suspects Arrested in Jack-in-the-Box... Dec 23 Amazed 12
San JacintoUnlock parks, San Jacinto residents say Dec 22 SJskin 1
Water main Break Shadow Mountain Way Dec 22 hemetone 2

Hemet News Video

Hemet Dating
Find my Match
More from around the web

Hemet People Search

Addresses and phone numbers for FREE

Hemet News, Events & Info

Click for news, events and info in Hemet

Personal Finance

Mortgages [ See current mortgage rates ]

NFL Latest News

Updated 6:34 am PST