Judge overturns California's ban on s...

Judge overturns California's ban on same-sex marriage

There are 201845 comments on the www.cnn.com story from Aug 4, 2010, titled Judge overturns California's ban on same-sex marriage. In it, www.cnn.com reports that:

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.

Join the discussion below, or Read more at www.cnn.com.

Xavier Breath

West New York, NJ

#181906 Feb 28, 2013
Frankie Rizzo wrote:
<quoted text>
Prop 8 says marriage is a man and a woman ONLY. Not 2 men and a woman. Not 2 men, not 2 women. It EFFECTIVELY and EQUALLY bans polygamy as well as SSM.
Look Jerky. The bottom line is I support marriage equality and you do not.
Polygamy was already illegaly when Prop 8 was passed. Prop 8 banned same sex marriage.

Since: Jun 07

Location hidden

#181907 Feb 28, 2013
Xavier Breath wrote:
<quoted text>Polygamy was already illegaly when Prop 8 was passed. Prop 8 banned same sex marriage.
Prop 8 banned any marriage save that of one man and one woman.

I thought you wanted to deal with "what is?"

“KiMare'a the Monster Mutation”

Since: Nov 10

Location hidden

#181908 Mar 1, 2013
As I have noted many times before, I focus on one single aspect of gay sex for two reasons; One, intercourse is at the heart of a union between a couple. Anal sex is an extremely poor counterfeit of nature's design. And two, anal sex is an inherently harmful, unhealthy and demeaning, clearly indicating a genetic defect.

While lesbian sex is simply unhealthy and demeaning, it still is a silly attempt by duplicate genders trying to imitate the design of evolution, the 'reunion' of diverse genders to one life form.
Edgar

Spring, TX

#181910 Mar 1, 2013
KiMare wrote:
As I have noted many times before, I focus on one single aspect of gay sex for two reasons; One, intercourse is at the heart of a union between a couple. Anal sex is an extremely poor counterfeit of nature's design. And two, anal sex is an inherently harmful, unhealthy and demeaning, clearly indicating a genetic defect.
While lesbian sex is simply unhealthy and demeaning, it still is a silly attempt by duplicate genders trying to imitate the design of evolution, the 'reunion' of diverse genders to one life form.
But it isn't your decision what another couple wants to do, is it?
Edgar

Spring, TX

#181911 Mar 1, 2013
akpilot wrote:
<quoted text>
So when something changes nothing changes?
You really need help.
You think I was saying nothing changes?

You have a vivid imagination.
Edgar

Spring, TX

#181912 Mar 1, 2013
KiMare wrote:
As I have noted many times before, I focus on one single aspect of gay sex for two reasons; One, intercourse is at the heart of a union between a couple. Anal sex is an extremely poor counterfeit of nature's design. And two, anal sex is an inherently harmful, unhealthy and demeaning, clearly indicating a genetic defect.
While lesbian sex is simply unhealthy and demeaning, it still is a silly attempt by duplicate genders trying to imitate the design of evolution, the 'reunion' of diverse genders to one life form.
(Also, the fact that you focus so much on aspects of gay sex really makes me wonder...)

Since: Mar 07

Location hidden

#181913 Mar 1, 2013
KiMare wrote:
As I have noted many times before, I focus on one single aspect of gay sex for two reasons; ..
Is it "gay sex" if lots of straight people do it, and most gay people don't? I believe it's called anal sex.

If you want the government to directly intervene and prevent all anal sex, then wouldn't that apply to straight folks as well? What kind of testing and regulation would you require the government to engage in to deny marriage license to any anal sex practitioners? Who would run it?

Who would pay for it?

And most importantly, who else but you would support it?

Since: Mar 07

Location hidden

#181914 Mar 1, 2013
akpilot wrote:
<quoted text>
....
LOL. Dummy, everyone is treated equally- no one is allowed to marry a person of the same sex and everyone is allowed to marry someone of the opposite sex.
.......
You mean like there was no discrimination in preventing interracial marriages, since all black and white people could already marry someone of the same race?

That argument didn't work well, then. Why do you think it smells any better today?

Did the societal ideal suddenly begin to favor only loveless marriages of convenience? When did that happen?

Since: Mar 07

Location hidden

#181915 Mar 1, 2013
akpilot wrote:
<quoted text>
Prop 8 banned any marriage save that of one man and one woman.
I thought you wanted to deal with "what is?"
No it didn't. It only banned new marriages but preserved all of the EXISTING same sex marriages.

Another reason for it's silliness and it's unconstitutionality.

You can't claim to be "preserving or protecting" something, where there is living proof that what you are protecting it against causes no harm and only good.

Since: Mar 07

Location hidden

#181916 Mar 1, 2013
akpilot wrote:
<quoted text>
.......
In contrast, neither men nor women are disproportionately disadvantaged or burdened by the fact that New York's Domestic Relations Law allows only opposite-sex couples to marry¬óboth genders are treated precisely the same way." Hernandez v Robles
Of course, that's patently absurd, since of COURSE gay men and lesbian women are disproportional disadvantages and burdened by such bans.

This reasoning counted only exist if there were no such thing as people who can only be attracted to the same gender.

Try proving that one.

That's why this type of reasoning has fallen out of favor legally.

Deal with it.

Jazybird58

“Reality bites”

Since: Dec 11

Location hidden

#181917 Mar 1, 2013
Frankie Rizzo wrote:
<quoted text>
I was scared and pumped on adrenaline. I jumped too soon. I misjudged how high we were. Maybe 12 feet. It hurt for a while and a little ever since but nothing debilitating until recently. Now I cannot walk and the docs aren't giving me a good prognosis. I had another surgery yesterday. Laposcopic surgery. Modern medicine is a blessing.
My age and the old injury combined, and here I am.
You're a real jerk and a creep, but I wouldn't wish it on you or anyone, Well maybe my ex wife...naaah. No one. Not even you or her.
Not being able to stand or walk is a life changing challenge. I'm up for it. I follow docs orders religiously.
Sorry to hear that. Was it a hot LZ? Where you in the 101, or 82nd
Edgar

Spring, TX

#181918 Mar 1, 2013
akpilot wrote:
<quoted text>
My communication skills aren't the problem, you comprehension skills are.
<quoted text>
LOL. Dummy, everyone is treated equally- no one is allowed to marry a person of the same sex and everyone is allowed to marry someone of the opposite sex.
We have been through this before Rose, even the court told you that you are an idiot:
But this is factually untrue in some states, akpilot, and soon to be so in more. Gay marriage is expanding.

Civil rights movements throughout history do not have a history of being snuffed out easily, at least in this country. Maybe in North Korea or China they do, but not here.

Sorry.
Frankie Rizzo

Hayward, CA

#181919 Mar 1, 2013
Xavier Breath wrote:
<quoted text>
If the queen had balls she'd be king.
If, if, if..... try dealing with what is.
IF New Jersey would allow it, you could get married to another man.

IF California didn't have prop 8, you could get married to another man.

IF you weren't so bigoted and paranoid, you'd support poly marriage.

IF you supported poly you wouldn't be a hypocrite!

IF you took your meds, you wouldn't be so angry.
Frankie Rizzo

Hayward, CA

#181920 Mar 1, 2013
Jazybird58 wrote:
<quoted text>Sorry to hear that. Was it a hot LZ? Where you in the 101, or 82nd
I was in the Navy. SAR. Search and rescue.
Xavier Breath

West New York, NJ

#181921 Mar 1, 2013
akpilot wrote:
<quoted text>
Prop 8 banned any marriage save that of one man and one woman.
Polygamy was already banned. Prop 8 didn't ban something that was already illegal. It banned Same sex marriage. You guys can spin it all you like. Prop 8 is going down. If you think that means polygamy will become legal, you have bigger problems.
Frankie Rizzo

Hayward, CA

#181922 Mar 1, 2013
Xavier Breath wrote:
<quoted text>
If the queen had balls she'd be king.
If, if, if..... try dealing with what is.
Prop 8 is still the law of the land in CA, try dealing with what is.

Boy are you dumb. And angry.
Frankie Rizzo

Hayward, CA

#181924 Mar 1, 2013
Xavier Breath wrote:
<quoted text>Polygamy was already illegaly when Prop 8 was passed. Prop 8 banned same sex marriage.
Prop 8 banned all marriages except for a man and a woman. Quit trying to hog all the victimhood.

What don't you understand about "A" man and "A" woman, Miss Thing?
Xavier Breath

West New York, NJ

#181925 Mar 1, 2013
KiMare wrote:
As I have noted many times before, I focus on one single aspect of gay sex for two reasons; One, intercourse is at the heart of a union between a couple. Anal sex is an extremely poor counterfeit of nature's design. And two, anal sex is an inherently harmful, unhealthy and demeaning, clearly indicating a genetic defect.
While lesbian sex is simply unhealthy and demeaning, it still is a silly attempt by duplicate genders trying to imitate the design of evolution, the 'reunion' of diverse genders to one life form.
Poor little shame-based KiMerde. Such a neurotic prig.
Frankie Rizzo

Hayward, CA

#181926 Mar 1, 2013
Quest wrote:
<quoted text>
Is it "gay sex" if lots of straight people do it, and most gay people don't? I believe it's called anal sex.
If you want the government to directly intervene and prevent all anal sex, then wouldn't that apply to straight folks as well? What kind of testing and regulation would you require the government to engage in to deny marriage license to any anal sex practitioners? Who would run it?
Who would pay for it?
And most importantly, who else but you would support it?
Not me! My g.f. would leave me!
Xavier Breath

West New York, NJ

#181927 Mar 1, 2013
Frankie Rizzo wrote:
<quoted text>
Prop 8 is still the law of the land in CA, try dealing with what is.
Boy are you dumb. And angry.
And if all the laws were overturned, nothing would be illegal. You're a genius. A singular talent for stating the obvious.

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
Hemet is a sanctuary city for illegal aliens (Dec '08) Wed gijose 49
News Man Accused of Stealing Two Cars, Trying to Rob... Apr 28 Nosafeplace 1
stetson townhomes (Aug '13) Apr 27 Guesswho 14
What is there to do in Hemet ? (May '08) Apr 25 White13China 55
News PERRIS: Man charged with three counts of murder (Aug '13) Apr 24 White13China 3
Hemet-San Jacinto gang sweep nets 22 arrests (Nov '14) Apr 24 White13China 3
young gay guys in hemet (Oct '14) Apr 23 BigBlackBulge 11
More from around the web

Personal Finance

Hemet Mortgages