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
158,461 - 158,480 of 200,576 Comments Last updated 6 hrs ago
Frankie Rizzo

Union City, CA

#181573 Feb 27, 2013
Xavier Breath wrote:
<quoted text>
I think you are not clear about how "Judge overturns California's ban on same-sex marriage" has nothing to do with your argument.
I think you are not clear on the slippery slope created by the judge's decision.
Xavier Breath

Hoboken, NJ

#181574 Feb 27, 2013
Frankie Rizzo wrote:
<quoted text>
More ad hominem dopiness.
Anything to avoid the slippery slope argument which is easily countered, But you are too dumb to do it.
The slippery slope argument is a logical fallacy. It's Logic 101.

The Slippery Slope is a fallacy in which a person asserts that some event must inevitably follow from another without any argument for the inevitability of the event in question. In most cases, there are a series of steps or gradations between one event and the one in question and no reason is given as to why the intervening steps or gradations will simply be bypassed.
Frankie Rizzo

Union City, CA

#181575 Feb 27, 2013
Xavier Breath wrote:
<quoted text>If you think anybody's mind has EVER been changed by a Topix post, you are Queen Naive. Puh-leez..... a guilt trip?
I don't. But Big D's and your attempts to shout me down and censor me seem like you do.

I argue there is a slippery slope. You scream and whine there isn't and offer nothing to support that. Except the off topic card. It's not off topic and you know it.
Xavier Breath

Hoboken, NJ

#181576 Feb 27, 2013
Big D wrote:
<quoted text>
I dont think the Brown case has anything to do with Prop 8
You are right
It's their way of hijacking the thread, because it will all be over in a few months and they know they're gonna lose big time. Wouldn't it be wild if the SCOTUS decision covers the entire 9th Circuit?
Frankie Rizzo

Union City, CA

#181577 Feb 27, 2013
Big D wrote:
<quoted text>
He already tired the sister argument but that didn’t go over so well
Why can't I marry my sister? You refuse to say.

Your "marry my goat" argument was a real doozy!
Big D

Modesto, CA

#181578 Feb 27, 2013
Frankie Rizzo wrote:
<quoted text>
I think you are not clear on the slippery slope created by the judge's decision.
And there it is folks!

The reason Frankie constantly brings up Poly, the slippery slope argument used against Same Sex Marriage!

First same sex marriage, next dogs and cats will start having Dats ( or is it Cogs )

You going to start being honest about it now?
Xavier Breath

Hoboken, NJ

#181579 Feb 27, 2013
Frankie Rizzo wrote:
<quoted text>
I think you are not clear on the slippery slope created by the judge's decision.
Clear enough to know that a slippery slope argument, whatever the details, is a fallacious argument.

The Slippery Slope is a fallacy in which a person asserts that some event must inevitably follow from another without any argument for the inevitability of the event in question. In most cases, there are a series of steps or gradations between one event and the one in question and no reason is given as to why the intervening steps or gradations will simply be bypassed.

hehehe

you tickle me.
Big D

Modesto, CA

#181580 Feb 27, 2013
Frankie Rizzo wrote:
<quoted text>
Why can't I marry my sister? You refuse to say.
Your "marry my goat" argument was a real doozy!
Because she doesn’t want you, ask your goat
Xavier Breath

Hoboken, NJ

#181581 Feb 27, 2013
Frankie Rizzo wrote:
<quoted text>
HA HA! So funny! A criminal case against someone based on their choice of who to marry and love. What a riot.
Brown said "There are tens of thousands of plural families in Utah and other states. We are one of those families. We only wish to live our private lives according to our beliefs. While we understand that this may be a long struggle in court, it has already been a long struggle for my family and other plural families to end the stereotypes and unfair treatment given consensual polygamy. We are indebted to Professor Turley and his team for their work and dedication. Together we hope to secure equal treatment with other families in the United States.”
On 1 June 2012, the criminal case against the Browns was dropped. However the suit filed by the Browns remains active after a federal judge refused to dismiss it, saying "strategic attempt to use the mootness doctrine to evade review in this case draws into question the sincerity of [the Utah County Attorney’s] contention that prosecution of plaintiffs for violating this statute is unlikely to recur".
Here we go again..... you are so defective.

The Browns went on tv and ADVERTIZED the fact that they were breaking Utah law. Charges were brought and dropped. The Browns are attempting to get that law overturned. They are NOT SEEKING LEGAL RECOGNITION OF THEIR "MARRIAGE" So spare us the martyr to the cause dog&pony show.
Big D

Modesto, CA

#181582 Feb 27, 2013
Frankie Rizzo wrote:
<quoted text>
Why can't I marry my sister? You refuse to say.
Your "marry my goat" argument was a real doozy!
Ok you want a serious answer?

Start a petition to put it on a ballot, it will be like taking a survey and you will get a LOT of answers.:)

Have your sister there with you when you do it too, that will make it a LOT funnier, please take video, get Google-glass because we will want to see the feed direct.

Make sure you tell people about the slippery slope and that you are asking because of Same Sex Marriage

My opinion doesn’t matter, get a general public opinion.

( but please get Google-glass first, we want to watch )
Xavier Breath

Hoboken, NJ

#181583 Feb 27, 2013
Frankie Rizzo wrote:
<quoted text>
I don't. But Big D's and your attempts to shout me down and censor me seem like you do.
I argue there is a slippery slope. You scream and whine there isn't and offer nothing to support that. Except the off topic card. It's not off topic and you know it.
I didn't make up the rules in Logic. It's Logic 101.
The slippery slope argument is what it is.

The Slippery Slope is a fallacy in which a person asserts that some event must inevitably follow from another without any argument for the inevitability of the event in question. In most cases, there are a series of steps or gradations between one event and the one in question and no reason is given as to why the intervening steps or gradations will simply be bypassed.

let's try this ploy:

In most cases, there are a series of steps or gradations between one event and the one in question and no reason is given as to why the intervening steps or gradations will simply be bypassed.

In most cases, there are a series of steps or gradations between one event and the one in question and no reason is given as to why the intervening steps or gradations will simply be bypassed.

In most cases, there are a series of steps or gradations between one event and the one in question and no reason is given as to why the intervening steps or gradations will simply be bypassed.
Xavier Breath

Hoboken, NJ

#181584 Feb 27, 2013
Frankie Rizzo wrote:
<quoted text>
I don't. But Big D's and your attempts to shout me down and censor me seem like you do.
We love free speech. Think of us as FactCheck.org
Big D

Modesto, CA

#181585 Feb 27, 2013
Xavier Breath wrote:
<quoted text>
I didn't make up the rules in Logic. It's Logic 101.
The slippery slope argument is what it is.
The Slippery Slope is a fallacy in which a person asserts that some event must inevitably follow from another without any argument for the inevitability of the event in question. In most cases, there are a series of steps or gradations between one event and the one in question and no reason is given as to why the intervening steps or gradations will simply be bypassed.
let's try this ploy:
In most cases, there are a series of steps or gradations between one event and the one in question and no reason is given as to why the intervening steps or gradations will simply be bypassed.
In most cases, there are a series of steps or gradations between one event and the one in question and no reason is given as to why the intervening steps or gradations will simply be bypassed.
In most cases, there are a series of steps or gradations between one event and the one in question and no reason is given as to why the intervening steps or gradations will simply be bypassed.
He has been denying the whole "slippery slope" as the reason for his bringing up poly ( and his sister ) thing from the beginning, and now he embraces it.

Maybe we can finally set aside his dishonesty if he is going to start being honest about his position on SSM now.
Big D

Modesto, CA

#181586 Feb 27, 2013
Slipery slope

----------

The heart of the slippery slope fallacy lies in abusing the intuitively appreciable transitivity of implication, claiming that A leads to B, B leads to C, C leads to D and so on, until one finally claims that A leads to Z. While this is formally valid when the premises are taken as a given, each of those contingencies needs to be factually established before the relevant conclusion can be drawn. Slippery slope fallacies occur when this is not done—an argument that supports the relevant premises is not fallacious and thus isn't a slippery slope fallacy.

Often proponents of a "slippery slope" contention propose a long series of intermediate events as the mechanism of connection leading from A to B. The "camel's nose" provides one example of this: once a camel has managed to place its nose within a tent, the rest of the camel will inevitably follow. In this sense the slippery slope resembles the genetic fallacy, but in reverse.

----------

Hence my waiting for the goat argument, as SSM so obviously leads to people marrying goats.

He has already gone from Poly to Sister, Goats have to be next on the list
Paste wax

Covina, CA

#181587 Feb 27, 2013
An article in the SGVExaminer.com newspaper, page B3 February 14 - 20, 2013

Penned by Robert Sundance.

Helps explain how and why small time police chiefs of small towns are and have become boot-lickers to the political connected and city council member's.

Why is it the blind eye is turned towards a illegal act by one of the politically connected and or J-walkers are roughted up and charged with felonies etc.

“Vita e' Bella.”

Since: May 12

Location hidden

#181589 Feb 27, 2013
Xavier Breath wrote:
<quoted text>
Here we go again..... you are so defective.
The Browns went on tv and ADVERTIZED the fact that they were breaking Utah law. Charges were brought and dropped. The Browns are attempting to get that law overturned. They are NOT SEEKING LEGAL RECOGNITION OF THEIR "MARRIAGE" So spare us the martyr to the cause dog&pony show.
Wowwww.....tsk tsk..."dog&pony show"...really? My my how the SSM elite look down on others. The fact that the Browns are not seeking legal recognition does not preclude the possibility in the future by them or others.

How does plural marriage effect SSM?

“Reality bites”

Since: Dec 11

Location hidden

#181590 Feb 27, 2013
Pietro Armando wrote:
<quoted text>
Wowwww.....tsk tsk..."dog&pony show"...really? My my how the SSM elite look down on others. The fact that the Browns are not seeking legal recognition does not preclude the possibility in the future by them or others.
How does plural marriage effect SSM?
Dunno, dont care. Do you?

Since: Mar 09

Location hidden

#181591 Feb 27, 2013
Frankie Rizzo wrote:
<quoted text>

Dorn wrote:
Allowing homosexual couples to marry and receive the same financial benefits that straight married couples have is the right thing to do.
If that should somehow result in allowing polygamous marriages, women should be allowed to have more than one husband as well as allowing men to marry more than one woman. This would not cause any more children to be born and would eleminate prostitution.
Time marches on: For the good of Planet Earth humans should stop overpopulating and using up the natual resourses which causes other species to go extinct.

Excellent post. I fully agree.
I don't! The only thing that will eliminate prostitution is extinction of humans.
Big D

Modesto, CA

#181592 Feb 27, 2013
Pietro Armando wrote:
<quoted text>
Wowwww.....tsk tsk..."dog&pony show"...really? My my how the SSM elite look down on others. The fact that the Browns are not seeking legal recognition does not preclude the possibility in the future by them or others.
How does plural marriage effect SSM?
No effect whatsoever so far

We have 10 states that legally recognize and preform same sex marriages

We have the District of Columbia that recognizes and preforms same sex marriages

We have one state that does not yet preform them in that state but does recognize all same sex marriages performed in other states

and a state in temporary limbo that did recognize same sex marriages and will likely again soon come June

and we have how many states so far that recognize poly marriages?

oh that is right.... none

they appear totally unrelated

and I am not going to talk about A leads to C ( sister ) before you can establish A leads to B (Poly )

so far... you got zip

“Vita e' Bella.”

Since: May 12

Location hidden

#181593 Feb 27, 2013
Big D wrote:
<quoted text>
No effect whatsoever so far
We have 10 states that legally recognize and preform same sex marriages
We have the District of Columbia that recognizes and preforms same sex marriages
We have one state that does not yet preform them in that state but does recognize all same sex marriages performed in other states
and a state in temporary limbo that did recognize same sex marriages and will likely again soon come June
and we have how many states so far that recognize poly marriages?
oh that is right.... none
they appear totally unrelated
and I am not going to talk about A leads to C ( sister ) before you can establish A leads to B (Poly )
so far... you got zip
Key words "....so far"

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

Add to my Tracker Send me an email

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
CA California seeks to ban free, single-use carryo... (Jun '10) 2 hr lechezz 4,998
CA CA Proposition 23 - Global Warming (Oct '10) 6 hr Tank ever 7,926
Riverside County:Tap Water Taste and Smell Unpl... 11 hr Chris 49
The Waterfalls (May '09) 14 hr Chris 20
HEMET GAYS! new2this Wed Chris 7
Black People in Hemet (Jan '10) Wed umyeah 474
Abandoned Insane Asylum In Hemet.... (Jun '09) Aug 26 michelle 58
•••

Hemet News Video

•••
Hemet Dating

more search filters

less search filters

•••

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 ]
•••