Judge overturns California's ban on same-sex marriage

Aug 4, 2010 Full story: www.cnn.com 200,976

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: Apr 11

Santa Monica, CA

#184174 Mar 22, 2013
KiMare wrote:
<quoted text>
With all your 'moral' indignation, you somehow missed admitting you lied about what you claimed I said. Kind of makes the rest of your rant suspect.
Once again, you dig the hole deeper. Nothing you said changes the fact that killing an unborn child is murder, and a obedient Christian would never do it.
Christians get abortions all the time.
BTW, the buy bull teaches that human life begins with the first breath. There was no knowledge of conception back when it was written, stupid.
KiMare wrote:
Moreover, the Bible is also clear about just war and just execution for severe crimes. Your assertion would leave people like Hitler loose. Are you serious???
Godwin's Law.
KiMare wrote:
Nor do I claim anything. Evolution determined homosexuality is a defect.
Evolution determined chimeras are defective.
:)
And you are wrong, homosexuality isn't a defect, it's just a difference.
KiMare wrote:
Scientists have virtually proved it. You are having a hissy fit because I'm the messenger.
Hardly wise behavior for someone whose existence depends on people like me...
Smile.
Like you? Monsters!?
LOL!
Mr Anderson

Anderson, CA

#184175 Mar 22, 2013
akpilot wrote:
<quoted text>
Many people do, but James Madison explains it quite well in Federalist#42. He clearly shows how one may have certain "privileges" in one State while not enjoying the same in another. The only requirement is that a Citizen of one State be granted the SAME privileges as the citizen's of said state are granted while visiting.
" It seems to be a construction scarcely avoidable, however, that those who come under the denomination of free inhabitants of a State, although not citizens of such State, are entitled, in every other State, to all the privileges of free citizens of the latter; that is, to greater privileges than they may be entitled to in their own State... " James Madison- Federalist#42
federalism should apply to expanding rights, not supressing them.

doma will go the way of DADT.extinct

bad shot bill, but then again, he was only trying to appeal to southern evengelicals who were sour on dole.

until the 90's.....the constittuion was generally used to EXPAND peoples rights, not take them away.

clinton knows he was wrong.

will rick santorum figure out that a constitutional amendment TAKING rights away is wrong?? I doubt it.

Since: Jun 07

Location hidden

#184176 Mar 22, 2013
Marram wrote:
<quoted text>
You pointed it out to justify why you think itís okay that Gay Americans are not afforded equal marriage rights. Otherwise, why would you say it? That makes you a bigot, bigot. The rest of your post is just hysterical ramblings.
You really are dense.. We should build something out of you.

Since: Apr 11

Santa Monica, CA

#184177 Mar 22, 2013
KiMare wrote:
<quoted text>
1. Of course it doesn't have to be. The law determined that faithfulness to a mate was unnecessary with no-fault divorce. Now we have horrendous consequences of domestic violence and child abuse. Not to mention a devastating drop in every area of the social health of children of divorce.
Now there is a silly and stupid attempt to dumb down marriage to a friendship of any gender, totally denying the part of children. Any sensible person would say the law will be two for two if that happens.
2. That would be like the law requiring sex or children or any other such silly demands.
Here is an analogy that exposes that idiocy;
The differences between marriage with/without kids and gay couples;
An apple tree bearing fruit.
An apple tree not bearing fruit for some reason.
An walnut tree who never bears any fruit wanting to be a apple tree.
An walnut tree hanging apples on it's branches pretending to be a apple tree.
Even funnier?
What's even funnier is that you think you came up with a good analogy!
Stupid monster, the ability to bear apples is part of the definition of an apple tree, in fact it's pretty much the definition.
The ability to bear children is not part of the definition of marriage.

Have you ever been run out of town by villagers with torches?
:)

Mr Anderson

Anderson, CA

#184178 Mar 22, 2013
KiMare wrote:
<quoted text>
I think he clearly pointed out that you are an idiot in denial.
How can a duplicated half of a marriage equate to marriage.
The math clearly doesn't add up.
Smirk.
the only math that adds up is that marriage is between two people who love each other.
Some Never Came Home

Toronto, Canada

#184179 Mar 22, 2013
Pietro Armando wrote:
<quoted text>
Actually, they are, no different than any other American.
<quoted text>
That u already have the right to marry, or that u were creared as a result if sex between a man and a woman?
<quoted text>
It makes both if the above statements true. The only bigot here is u bigot.
So,I guess what you're saying is you'd be fine with a gay man marrying your daughter or a gay women marrying your son? LoL, Sorry but not the same! Not equality,don't be ridiculous! Bottom line,marriage equality is coming and you can't do anything to stop it,rightfully so! And it will do nothing to harm your marriage and it will do nothing to harm my marriage! And it will be of great benefit to the 10's of thousands of children being raised in same sex marriages and family's,Great isn't it!

“KiMare'a the Monster Mutation”

Since: Nov 10

Location hidden

#184180 Mar 22, 2013
KiMare wrote:
<quoted text>
I think he clearly pointed out that you are an idiot in denial.
How can a duplicated half of a marriage equate to marriage.
The math clearly doesn't add up.
Smirk.
Mr Anderson wrote:
<quoted text>
the only math that adds up is that marriage is between two people who love each other.
Do you mean like the union of Mars and Venus, or the collision of Uranus and Uranus?

Anal sex is inherently harmful, unhealthy and demeaning. You equate that to a loving act between two people?

Smile.

Since: Jun 07

Location hidden

#184181 Mar 22, 2013
Mr Anderson wrote:
<quoted text>
federalism should apply to expanding rights, not supressing them.
Giving more power to the Federal Government is not "expanding right's".

There is no Constitutional Right to marriage.

The problem is, those whom are in favor of same sex marriage can comprehend that. The other thing they can't comprehend is the one can be in favor of same sex marriage while also understanding that there is no Constitutional mandate to accept it.

The Constitution isn't, nor was it ever designed to "grant right's". Read it sometime. It is nothing more than the architecture and structure to form a government. It is an outline of power's. It is a restrictive document on the Federal Government. It is a document which is designed to protect the States from infringement. Until this fabricated incorporation doctrine by the SCOTUS, the Bill of Right's was strictly a mandate for the Federal Government.

The States are sovereign.

Since: Dec 09

Knoxville, TN

#184182 Mar 22, 2013
KiMare wrote:
<quoted text>
With all your 'moral' indignation, you somehow missed admitting you lied about what you claimed I said. Kind of makes the rest of your rant suspect.
Once again, you dig the hole deeper. Nothing you said changes the fact that killing an unborn child is murder, and a obedient Christian would never do it.
Moreover, the Bible is also clear about just war and just execution for severe crimes. Your assertion would leave people like Hitler loose. Are you serious???
Nor do I claim anything. Evolution determined homosexuality is a defect. Scientists have virtually proved it. You are having a hissy fit because I'm the messenger.
Hardly wise behavior for someone whose existence depends on people like me...
Smile.
Lied? Not at all... You just want to argue over linguistics. Another attempt to DISTRACT us from the ridiculousness of your comments.

And what part of "turn the other cheek" and "beat your swords into ploughshares, spears into prune hooks" and "love your neighbor as you love yourself" makes you think that there has EVER been a "justified war" or "justified capital punishment"? You are dead wrong, as always.

Interesting how you claim that evolution has determined that homosexuality is a defect, when "evolution" is the one who seems to have come up with us and continues to make us.

And you know nothing about what science has "virtually proven". You make such amateurish mistakes that you embarrass yourself when you wade into anything of substance.

And our very existence will come to an end by someone like you. You are NOBODY'S savior! You fan the flames of hate. You want homosexuals to disappear from the planet. Every single thing you say about us indicates that what I claim about you is TRUE.

Since: Dec 09

Knoxville, TN

#184183 Mar 22, 2013
KiMare wrote:
<quoted text>
1. Of course it doesn't have to be. The law determined that faithfulness to a mate was unnecessary with no-fault divorce. Now we have horrendous consequences of domestic violence and child abuse. Not to mention a devastating drop in every area of the social health of children of divorce.
Now there is a silly and stupid attempt to dumb down marriage to a friendship of any gender, totally denying the part of children. Any sensible person would say the law will be two for two if that happens.
2. That would be like the law requiring sex or children or any other such silly demands.
Here is an analogy that exposes that idiocy;
The differences between marriage with/without kids and gay couples;
An apple tree bearing fruit.
An apple tree not bearing fruit for some reason.
An walnut tree who never bears any fruit wanting to be a apple tree.
An walnut tree hanging apples on it's branches pretending to be a apple tree.
Even funnier?
The claim that if the government doesn't 'require' apple trees to bear fruit, then it is discrimination not to call walnut trees apple trees too!
Smile.
You know what I think? I think you have your head so far up your ass that you've become disoriented by the natural fermentation of the apples and walnuts you have ingested.

You don't know law. You don't know science. You don't know sociology. You don't know psychology. You don't know religion. You are horrible at analogies.

I'm surprised you can type on the computer. Maybe you just write your comments on a 3 X 5 index card in purple crayon and your wife types what you've written into your computer.

Since: Apr 11

Santa Monica, CA

#184184 Mar 22, 2013
KiMare wrote:
<quoted text>
In the face of this most basic essence of marriage; a cross cultural constraint on evolutionary mating behavior, your discussion is simply and purely denial.
Kind of takes the fun out of it, doesn't it.
Smile.
No society has accepted monsters.
Kind of takes the fun out of your life, doesn't it?
BTW, do those bolts in the side of your neck hurt?

Also, stupid, even if what you said were true, it wouldn't matter. You are appealing to tradition, a logical fallacy.

Since: Apr 11

Santa Monica, CA

#184185 Mar 22, 2013
RiccardoFire wrote:
<quoted text>A puddle of crud theory atheist talking about science...LOL...I Don't Have Enough Faith to Be an Atheist. That some apes evolved, others didn't and all life started from a puddle of crud that just showed up.'theory of evolution'. It's a fairy tale for grown ups!
There is evidence for evolution.
Take a science class, if you think you can understand will be taught.
KAPOOYA

La Puente, CA

#184186 Mar 22, 2013
K

A

P

O

O

Y

A

And that's how it's spelt.

Now don't mix it up with other less powerful words.

Nor with some late blooming goof posting a reply.

Since: Apr 11

Santa Monica, CA

#184187 Mar 22, 2013
KiMare wrote:
<quoted text>
I think he clearly pointed out that you are an idiot in denial.
How can a duplicated half of a marriage equate to marriage.
The math clearly doesn't add up.
Smirk.
How can two sets of human DNA equate to a human?
That's the number of chromosomes a shrimp has, not a human.
The math clearly doesn't add up.
:)

Since: Jan 10

Lewis Center, OH

#184188 Mar 22, 2013
KiMare wrote:
<quoted text>
I think he clearly pointed out that you are an idiot in denial.
How can a duplicated half of a marriage equate to marriage.
The math clearly doesn't add up.
Smirk.
It doesnít surprise me that you canít add. You canít make a good analogy either.
Some Never Came Home

Toronto, Canada

#184189 Mar 22, 2013
veryvermilion wrote:
<quoted text>
Lied? Not at all... You just want to argue over linguistics. Another attempt to DISTRACT us from the ridiculousness of your comments.
And what part of "turn the other cheek" and "beat your swords into ploughshares, spears into prune hooks" and "love your neighbor as you love yourself" makes you think that there has EVER been a "justified war" or "justified capital punishment"? You are dead wrong, as always.
Interesting how you claim that evolution has determined that homosexuality is a defect, when "evolution" is the one who seems to have come up with us and continues to make us.
And you know nothing about what science has "virtually proven". You make such amateurish mistakes that you embarrass yourself when you wade into anything of substance.
And our very existence will come to an end by someone like you. You are NOBODY'S savior! You fan the flames of hate. You want homosexuals to disappear from the planet. Every single thing you say about us indicates that what I claim about you is TRUE.
You'd think,considering his/her/it's (Kimare) condition(And I have my doubts) He would be more empathetic and sympathetic to the plight of the Gay Americans on marriage equality,even if his brain turned out to be a heterosexual in nature! There is something terribly,terribly wrong with that boy? Girl? It?

Since: Jan 10

Lewis Center, OH

#184190 Mar 22, 2013
Pietro Armando wrote:
<quoted text>
Actually, they are, no different than any other American.
<quoted text>
That u already have the right to marry, or that u were creared as a result if sex between a man and a woman?
<quoted text>
It makes both if the above statements true. The only bigot here is u bigot.
This response is why I posted the original post. Youíre just too stupid to realize how transparent you are. Is English your first language? BTW, I do know how a human life is created, but, reproduction does not equal superiority. And a coupleís ability to reproduce or not reproduce has no bearing on a right to marry. Why would you think reproduction has anything to do with marriage rights? Itís these types of bigoted viewpoints that are convincing more and more Americans to support Gay Marriage Equality.

Since: Jun 07

Location hidden

#184191 Mar 22, 2013
Marram wrote:
<quoted text>
This response is why I posted the original post. Youíre just too stupid ...
You calling someone stupid, now that's rich..

So it is your claim that treating a naturalized citizen different than a natural born citizen under Article II Sec 1 of the US Constitution is NOT a violation of the equal right's provision of the 14th Amendment -BUT- treating the union of 2 members of the opposite sex differently than the union of 2 members of the same sex IS?!?!

I can't wait for this explanation.

Oh, that's right, you won't give one, you will cry like a little baby, tell me how much smarter than me you are, and most likely call me a bigot.

Yeah, you win?

Since: Jan 10

Lewis Center, OH

#184192 Mar 22, 2013
akpilot wrote:
<quoted text>
You calling someone stupid, now that's rich..
So it is your claim that treating a naturalized citizen different than a natural born citizen under Article II Sec 1 of the US Constitution is NOT a violation of the equal right's provision of the 14th Amendment -BUT- treating the union of 2 members of the opposite sex differently than the union of 2 members of the same sex IS?!?!
I can't wait for this explanation.
Oh, that's right, you won't give one, you will cry like a little baby, tell me how much smarter than me you are, and most likely call me a bigot.
Yeah, you win?
Make up your mind, either you agree with amending the constitution or not. You canít have it both ways for argument sake. The rest of your post is just whiny hysterical ranting. And yes, you are a bigot.

Since: Jun 07

Location hidden

#184193 Mar 22, 2013
Marram wrote:
<quoted text>
Make up your mind, either you agree with amending the constitution or not. You canít have it both ways for argument sake. The rest of your post is just whiny hysterical ranting. And yes, you are a bigot.
You didn't answer the question.

So it is your claim that treating a naturalized citizen different than a natural born citizen under Article II Sec 1 of the US Constitution is NOT a violation of the equal right's provision of the 14th Amendment -BUT- treating the union of 2 members of the opposite sex differently than the union of 2 members of the same sex IS?!?!

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
CA CA Proposition 23 - Global Warming (Oct '10) 5 hr surfs up 7,955
CA Jury reaches verdict in Oakland BART shooting t... (Jul '10) Fri scoop 2,273
david steidell (Aug '07) Fri huhwhathaha 13
CA California seeks to ban free, single-use carryo... (Jun '10) Thu zhuzhamm 5,079
CA California Proposition 19: the Marijuana Legali... (Oct '10) Thu Pizza 16,000
HemetHEMET: Firefighters not giving up fight to... Thu West end Resident 2
ugly women with ugly tattoos!!!!! (Oct '12) Wed Bad teachers 90
•••

Hemet News Video

•••
•••

Hemet Jobs

•••
•••
•••

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 ]
•••