Judge overturns California's ban on same-sex marriage

Aug 4, 2010 | Posted by: Topix | Full story: www.cnn.com

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.

Comments (Page 7,914)

Showing posts 158,261 - 158,280 of200,244
|
Go to last page| Jump to page:
Big D

Modesto, CA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#181355
Feb 26, 2013
 

Judged:

5

5

5

Xavier Breath wrote:
<quoted text>
Who said heterosexuality is no longer relevant? Who says if one parameter is subject to change, all parameters become subject to change? Where do you get these stupid ideas?
People who donít have a valid argument against something so use this as a cheap crutch do
Frankie Rizzo

Union City, CA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#181356
Feb 26, 2013
 

Judged:

6

6

6

Quest wrote:
<quoted text>
It's important (or not so) to the couples involved. A great many people do indeed believe that it is relevant to marriage, and don't base their own actions on the actions of others who do not see it that way.
I personally believe that it is vital to maintaining a health marriage, although it is not natural to everyone. If it is not natural to you, and you cannot find someone to marry be believes just as you do, then marriage is not the right choice.
I have seen very few happy marriages where monogamy is optional. But it is not my place to decide that for anyone other than myself.
Yes. It is not my place either. To say who can marry and who cannot. I support everyone's right to marry. Not just approved groups.

As a conservative I fully support same sex marriage. It is not the government's place to decide which genders may marry and by the very same logic it is not the governments place to decide the number of participants in that marriage either.

What harm would a loving committed marriage of three men cause anyone? Those against polygamy will probably never even have to be offended by the sight of a happy poly family, it will be so rare.

Supporting polygamy causes all hell to break loose on this thread. That speaks volumes.
Frankie Rizzo

Union City, CA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#181357
Feb 26, 2013
 

Judged:

5

5

5

Big D wrote:
<quoted text>
People who donít have a valid argument against something so use this as a cheap crutch do
Right. I have no valid argument against same sex marriage. There is none. I support same sex marriage.
Frankie Rizzo

Union City, CA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#181358
Feb 26, 2013
 

Judged:

5

5

5

Xavier Breath wrote:
<quoted text> Perhaps your continued and repeated use of anti-gay epithets throws your honesty into question.
Relax fruitcake, I call my girlfriend and grand kids that. They giggle.

I use it with no sexuality connotation whatsoever. Get that chip off your shoulder Miss Thing.

One more failure in your witch hunt. Try harder.

The "you're lying" straw man. So old.
Frankie Rizzo

Union City, CA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#181359
Feb 26, 2013
 

Judged:

5

5

5

Batting order wrote:
Hi rizzo, aren't you going to be next up on the trial court issues in the city of Bell, California?
http://www.wavlist.com/soundfx/020/clock-cuck...

Since: Mar 07

The entire US of A

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#181360
Feb 26, 2013
 

Judged:

5

5

5

Frankie Rizzo wrote:
<quoted text>
.......
Supporting polygamy causes all hell to break loose on this thread. That speaks volumes.
That is only because it is unrelated to gay people having the same ability to marry just ONE that straight folks already have, and because it is one of the prime straw men thrown around as a reason to prevent gay folks from marrying just that one.

Even polygamists can already marry that first spouse.

But only if that spouse is of the opposite gender.
Frankie Rizzo

Union City, CA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#181361
Feb 26, 2013
 

Judged:

6

6

6

Xavier Breath wrote:
<quoted text>
Who said heterosexuality is no longer relevant?
You do dummy. And so do I.
Frankie Rizzo

Union City, CA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#181362
Feb 26, 2013
 

Judged:

6

6

6

Xavier Breath wrote:
<quoted text>
Polygamy was illegal BEFORE Prop 8. I'm very glad that exposes your stupidity.
We know that Miss Thing.

But prop 8 says marriage is for a man and a woman, effectively banning same sex marriage AND polygamy. It's defeat is good for both.

Your anger at that fact and your attempts to deny that fact speak volumes.
Frankie Rizzo

Union City, CA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#181363
Feb 26, 2013
 

Judged:

5

5

5

Quest wrote:
<quoted text>
That is only because it is unrelated to gay people having the same ability to marry just ONE that straight folks already have, and because it is one of the prime straw men thrown around as a reason to prevent gay folks from marrying just that one.
Even polygamists can already marry that first spouse.
But only if that spouse is of the opposite gender.
There should be no reason to say "opposite sex marriage" or "same sex marriage" or "poly marriage". It's all just "marriage"

All marriages are worthy of the same respect and consideration.

The government should have no say in who you marry. If they want to offer special benefits to married people, they should respect equal protection.

Either they should stop all the goodies they give to married people, or stop choosing who gets them based on tradition or popularity of their marriages and give them to all marriages.
Big D

Modesto, CA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#181364
Feb 26, 2013
 

Judged:

5

5

4

Frankie Rizzo wrote:
<quoted text>
We know that Miss Thing.
But prop 8 says marriage is for a man and a woman, effectively banning same sex marriage AND polygamy. It's defeat is good for both.
Your anger at that fact and your attempts to deny that fact speak volumes.
LOL are you suggesting that polygamy was legal before prop 8?

Wrong!... try again

Same sex marriage was in fact legal before prop 8, and some 18,000 legal same sex marriages were preformed legally before this unconstitutional measure was voted on.
Xavier Breath

Hoboken, NJ

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#181365
Feb 26, 2013
 

Judged:

6

6

5

Frankie Rizzo wrote:
<quoted text>
Relax fruitcake, I call my girlfriend and grand kids that. They giggle.
I use it with no sexuality connotation whatsoever. Get that chip off your shoulder Miss Thing.
One more failure in your witch hunt. Try harder.
The "you're lying" straw man. So old.
Sure........ we believe you..... wink, wink.
Xavier Breath

Hoboken, NJ

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#181366
Feb 26, 2013
 

Judged:

6

6

6

Frankie Rizzo wrote:
<quoted text>
You do dummy. And so do I.
I never said that.
Xavier Breath

Hoboken, NJ

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#181367
Feb 26, 2013
 

Judged:

5

5

5

Frankie Rizzo wrote:
<quoted text>
We know that Miss Thing.
But prop 8 says marriage is for a man and a woman, effectively banning same sex marriage AND polygamy. It's defeat is good for both.
Your anger at that fact and your attempts to deny that fact speak volumes.
Polygamy was illegal BEFORE Prop 8. It will remain illegal when Prop 8 goes down. Prop 8 had nothing to do with polygamy. Your stupidity speaks volumes.
Xavier Breath

Hoboken, NJ

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#181368
Feb 26, 2013
 

Judged:

4

4

4

Frankie Rizzo wrote:
The government should have no say in who you marry.
Oh dear god..........

Who does legal recognition come from then, shit-for-brains?
Frankie Rizzo

Union City, CA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#181369
Feb 26, 2013
 

Judged:

6

6

6

Big D wrote:
<quoted text>
LOL are you suggesting that polygamy was legal before prop 8?
Wrong!... try again
Same sex marriage was in fact legal before prop 8, and some 18,000 legal same sex marriages were preformed legally before this unconstitutional measure was voted on.
No. It was illegal before prop 8 and it will still be illegal after prop 8 goes away. It's a federal law.

But bear with me on this scenario. The feds rightfully ditch that archaic discriminatory law against polygamy.

So now poly marriage is up to the states. In CA if prop 8 still was in force, you could not poly marry in CA. And the only thing stopping you would be prop 8.

I am saving this post as boilerplate for every time one of you clowns tries to use your dumb "prop 8 has no effect on poly" argument again.

Try again hypocrite.
Frankie Rizzo

Union City, CA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#181370
Feb 26, 2013
 

Judged:

5

5

5

Xavier Breath wrote:
<quoted text>
Polygamy was illegal BEFORE Prop 8. It will remain illegal when Prop 8 goes down. Prop 8 had nothing to do with polygamy. Your stupidity speaks volumes.
No. Polygamy was illegal before prop 8 and it will still be illegal after prop 8 goes away. It's a federal law.

But bear with me on this scenario. The feds rightfully ditch that archaic discriminatory law against polygamy.

So now poly marriage is up to the states. In CA if prop 8 still was in force, you could not poly marry in CA. And the only thing stopping you would be prop 8.

I am saving this post as boilerplate for every time one of you clowns tries to use your dumb "prop 8 has no effect on poly" argument again.

Try again hypocrite.
Big D

Modesto, CA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#181371
Feb 26, 2013
 

Judged:

6

6

6

Frankie Rizzo wrote:
<quoted text>
No. It was illegal before prop 8 and it will still be illegal after prop 8 goes away. It's a federal law.
But bear with me on this scenario. The feds rightfully ditch that archaic discriminatory law against polygamy.
So now poly marriage is up to the states. In CA if prop 8 still was in force, you could not poly marry in CA. And the only thing stopping you would be prop 8.
I am saving this post as boilerplate for every time one of you clowns tries to use your dumb "prop 8 has no effect on poly" argument again.
Try again hypocrite.
Bear with me hypocrite

Prop 8 is specifically about same sex marriage

It makes no changes whatsoever with Poly marriage which was illegal both before and after prop 8, prop 8 was specifically about same sex marriage, nothing whatsoever to do with Poly Marriage which was already illegal anyway, not so with Same sex marriage.

This attack of yours on same sex marriage is continuing to fail
Big D

Modesto, CA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#181372
Feb 26, 2013
 

Judged:

4

4

4

Interesting article

http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2013/02/...
Xavier Breath

Hoboken, NJ

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#181373
Feb 26, 2013
 

Judged:

6

5

5

Frankie Rizzo wrote:
<quoted text>
No. Polygamy was illegal before prop 8 and it will still be illegal after prop 8 goes away. It's a federal law.
But bear with me on this scenario. The feds rightfully ditch that archaic discriminatory law against polygamy.
So now poly marriage is up to the states. In CA if prop 8 still was in force, you could not poly marry in CA. And the only thing stopping you would be prop 8.
I am saving this post as boilerplate for every time one of you clowns tries to use your dumb "prop 8 has no effect on poly" argument again.
Try again hypocrite.
Go right ahead. Use your hypothetical as proof. We'll continue to laugh at your simple-mindedness. And when the feds do away with that silly law about free-speech, we'll get your ass thrown in jail. Try again, shit-for-brains.

I'm saving this post as proof of your abject stupidity.
Frankie Rizzo

Union City, CA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#181374
Feb 26, 2013
 

Judged:

6

6

5

Frankie Rizzo wrote:
<quoted text>
There should be no reason to say "opposite sex marriage" or "same sex marriage" or "poly marriage". It's all just "marriage"
All marriages are worthy of the same respect and consideration.
The government should have no say in who you marry. If they want to offer special benefits to married people, they should respect equal protection.
Either they should stop all the goodies they give to married people, or stop choosing who gets them based on tradition or popularity of their marriages and give them to all marriages.
"Even polygamists can already marry that first spouse."

Priceless!

Even homosexuals have that right to marry that opposite gender spouse. Now see how silly you are?

Tell me when this thread is updated: (Registration is not required)

Add to my Tracker Send me an email

Showing posts 158,261 - 158,280 of200,244
|
Go to last page| Jump to page:
Type in your comments below
Name
(appears on your post)
Comments
Characters left: 4000
Type the numbers you see in the image on the right:

Please note by clicking on "Post Comment" 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.

11 Users are viewing the Hemet Forum right now

Search the Hemet Forum:
Topic Updated Last By Comments
Omg!! I can't believe my eyes so many blacks in... (May '13) 2 hr ladytntad 170
CA CA Proposition 23 - Global Warming (Oct '10) 13 hr PMS will get yeah 7,821
CA California seeks to ban free, single-use carryo... (Jun '10) 17 hr all doned in 4,864
The Waterfalls (May '09) 22 hr hiker2 14
CA Jury reaches verdict in Oakland BART shooting t... (Jul '10) Sat The right is wrong 2,225
Do you approve of Jerry Franchville as Mayor? (Apr '12) Sat Becki Fire 5
Why is hemet racist ?!? Sat Becki Fire 26
•••
•••

Hemet News Video

•••
•••

Hemet Jobs

•••
Enter and win $5000
•••
•••

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 ]
•••