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 8,159)

Showing posts 163,161 - 163,180 of199,080
|
Go to last page| Jump to page:
heartandmind

Moline, IL

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#186729
Apr 5, 2013
 

Judged:

2

2

2

Pietro Armando wrote:
<quoted text>
So a judge bought it......andddddddd....that means.....?
<quoted text>
Far easy to dismiss my point, than offer an opposing view.
well, since i actually agree with what was presented in court by educated, degreed and licensed attornies, anything i say would be redundant.

...and since a judge who's job it is to know the law and to interpret the law understands and accepts those arguments, that would put credibility and validity to the correlations made. kind of sad that has to be pointed out to you. if you don't accept those correlations, oh well. just your opinion - it just differs from the ones actually making decisions about the law.
Frankie Rizzo

Union City, CA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#186730
Apr 5, 2013
 

Judged:

2

2

2

Big D wrote:
<quoted text>
Actually no it was the same level of illegal both before and after prop 8, zero effect.
If all the other laws against poly were repealed except prop 8, would polygamy be legal?

100% effect.

Prop 8 discriminates against polygamy the same as it does same sex marriage. You know, EQUALLY.
Frankie Rizzo

Union City, CA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#186731
Apr 5, 2013
 

Judged:

2

2

2

Big D wrote:
<quoted text>
When they go to the slippery slope arguments, you have won.
They can no longer bring any valid argument against same sex marriage so they are dipping into imaginary hypotheticals that are not at issue currently to try and scare people.
That only works with the ignorant, their constituency
http://www2.law.ucla.edu/volokh/marriage.pdf
Big D

Modesto, CA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#186732
Apr 5, 2013
 

Judged:

3

3

3

Frankie Rizzo wrote:
<quoted text>
If all the other laws against poly were repealed except prop 8, would polygamy be legal?
100% effect.
Prop 8 discriminates against polygamy the same as it does same sex marriage. You know, EQUALLY.
Go repeal all those laws and you will have a case, right now you have squat

Prop 8 has zero effect

Prop 8 had absolutely no effect whatsoever on something that was already illegal.
Big D

Modesto, CA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#186733
Apr 5, 2013
 

Judged:

3

3

3

Frankie Rizzo wrote:
<quoted text>
If all the other laws against poly were repealed except prop 8, would polygamy be legal?
100% effect.
Prop 8 discriminates against polygamy the same as it does same sex marriage. You know, EQUALLY.
If there was even a hint of a chance that those previous laws could be overturned before prop 8 is overturned it might be worth mentioning in passing, but as it stands... zero chance and not worth even refering to.

This argument will only work with the religious nut jobs that are frightened to death of the slippery slope arguments, nada for anyone else.
Frankie Rizzo

Union City, CA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#186734
Apr 5, 2013
 

Judged:

3

3

3

Big D wrote:
<quoted text>
Go repeal all those laws and you will have a case, right now you have squat
Prop 8 has zero effect
Prop 8 had absolutely no effect whatsoever on something that was already illegal.
For the ...x time, I do not want to go out and (follow Big D orders). I simply want to fully explore marriage equality.

If the other laws against polygamy were repealed but Prop 8 was still in force, would polygamy be legal? No? Why not? Prop 8 has "zero effect" on polygamy, right?
Frankie Rizzo

Union City, CA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#186735
Apr 5, 2013
 

Judged:

3

3

3

Big D wrote:
<quoted text>
If there was even a hint of a chance that those previous laws could be overturned before prop 8 is overturned it might be worth mentioning in passing, but as it stands... zero chance and not worth even refering to.
This argument will only work with the religious nut jobs that are frightened to death of the slippery slope arguments, nada for anyone else.
I am not arguing against marriage equality, you are. I am arguing for it. Perhaps you are misunderstanding me, hence your frustration?

“Vita e' Bella.”

Since: May 12

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#186736
Apr 5, 2013
 

Judged:

3

3

3

Big D wrote:
<quoted text>
I donít see any point where someone else being able to marry will affect my marriage or what it means to me in any way whatsoever.
So then there's no need to bar any consenting adults from entering in a marriage. Plural marriage won't affect you personally in anyway, nor will first cousins, or siblings.
I donít feel the need to cross every bridge today, hence I am not actually very interested in all the slippery slope garbage, it is meaningless, so letís stick to the issue at hand Same Sex marriage.
Its only meaningless because it steals some of the lime light from that sacred secular cow, SSM.

The Mighty Big D has spoken! He does not feel the need to cross that bridge.
There are in fact 18,000 legally married same sex couples in California right now, over 100,000 nationally ( donít know the actual exact number )
There are thousands of polygamists/plural marriage practitioners in the country too.
Those couples being able to devote their lives to one another has not in any way harmed my marriage, in fact my wife and I have talked about this, and we think that being inclusive has actually made us feel stronger about marriage in general.
does the Brown family make you feel stronger too.
I realize that mentally to you, it has made it weaker, but I donít see that, the issue is in your head, not in reality. Legally ( which is all I look to the government for ) it is no different than it was before.
We both know you failed to address the question. At what point does marriage as matter of public policy/common societal understanding and/or norm, become meaningless. Today its SSM, tomorrow poly, after that.....?
Big D

Modesto, CA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#186737
Apr 5, 2013
 

Judged:

5

5

5

Pietro Armando wrote:
<quoted text>
So then there's no need to bar any consenting adults from entering in a marriage. Plural marriage won't affect you personally in anyway, nor will first cousins, or siblings.
<quoted text>
Its only meaningless because it steals some of the lime light from that sacred secular cow, SSM.
The Mighty Big D has spoken! He does not feel the need to cross that bridge.
<quoted text>
There are thousands of polygamists/plural marriage practitioners in the country too.
<quoted text>
does the Brown family make you feel stronger too.
<quoted text>
We both know you failed to address the question. At what point does marriage as matter of public policy/common societal understanding and/or norm, become meaningless. Today its SSM, tomorrow poly, after that.....?
OK you stick with the slippery slope, but I should warn you, it wonít bother anyone other than you people that are already scared to death that same sex couples can marry in 10 states and one district and are recognized in 12 and that number is growing every year.

That argument wont work on anyone else, and your numbers are dwindling as to the folks that argument will work on.

It certainly didnít work with the courts, I donít know who you are trying to convince. That kind of "scary" argument will only work on the fearful and those that already want to dictate to everyone else what they are allowed to do.
Big D

Modesto, CA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#186738
Apr 5, 2013
 

Judged:

5

5

5

Frankie Rizzo wrote:
<quoted text>
I am not arguing against marriage equality, you are. I am arguing for it. Perhaps you are misunderstanding me, hence your frustration?
Oh I donít have an frustration except I keep making the mistake of overestimating your reasoning capacity.

Do I have to explain it to you again? I would vote in favor of Poly marriage, I have not been arguing against it at all, you cannot separate in your pea brain discussion about an issue regarding it and the actual position.

You are like a village idiot with one foot nailed to the floor, running in circles and donít know what to do.

But while you run around in circles, more and more states and nations are recognizing same sex marriage. Hope that makes you happy as you claim it does.
Frankie Rizzo

Union City, CA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#186739
Apr 5, 2013
 

Judged:

5

5

5

Pietro Armando wrote:
<quoted text>
....The Mighty Big D has spoken! He does not feel the need to cross that bridge...
Bravo! You have summed up his entire argument against true marriage equality very succinctly.
Frankie Rizzo

Union City, CA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#186740
Apr 5, 2013
 

Judged:

5

5

5

Big D wrote:
<quoted text>
OK you stick with the slippery slope, but I should warn you, it wonít bother anyone other than you people that are already scared to death that same sex couples can marry in 10 states and one district and are recognized in 12 and that number is growing every year.
That argument wont work on anyone else, and your numbers are dwindling as to the folks that argument will work on.
It certainly didnít work with the courts, I donít know who you are trying to convince. That kind of "scary" argument will only work on the fearful and those that already want to dictate to everyone else what they are allowed to do.
No one is scared to death over same sex marriage, drama queen. What are the latest percentages of people who support it? Does that look like Americans being scared to death of it?
Frankie Rizzo

Union City, CA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#186741
Apr 5, 2013
 

Judged:

5

5

5

Big D wrote:
<quoted text>
Oh I donít have an frustration except I keep making the mistake of overestimating your reasoning capacity.
Do I have to explain it to you again? I would vote in favor of Poly marriage, I have not been arguing against it at all, you cannot separate in your pea brain discussion about an issue regarding it and the actual position.
You are like a village idiot with one foot nailed to the floor, running in circles and donít know what to do.
But while you run around in circles, more and more states and nations are recognizing same sex marriage. Hope that makes you happy as you claim it does.
Sure you'd vote for those sick fundies "using polygamy to commit their crimes like child molesting and welfare fraud", we believe you Big D!
Frankie Rizzo

Union City, CA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#186742
Apr 5, 2013
 

Judged:

5

5

5

Big D wrote:
<quoted text>
Oh I donít have an frustration except I keep making the mistake of overestimating your reasoning capacity.
Do I have to explain it to you again? I would vote in favor of Poly marriage, I have not been arguing against it at all, you cannot separate in your pea brain discussion about an issue regarding it and the actual position.
You are like a village idiot with one foot nailed to the floor, running in circles and donít know what to do.
But while you run around in circles, more and more states and nations are recognizing same sex marriage. Hope that makes you happy as you claim it does.
It's like someone saying oh hell yeah, I support SSM even though homosexuals will use it to commit their crimes of welfare fraud and child molestation. Look in the news there was a case of it in Utah.

Since: Dec 09

Knoxville, TN

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#186743
Apr 5, 2013
 

Judged:

5

5

5

Pietro Armando wrote:
<quoted text>
The key word misused here is "always". Simply because it was done in the past, doesn't automatically mean it shouldn't be done now, or should be. If SSM is such a hot idea, why having societies, across time and place, incorporated it into their societal structures? Why didn't it naturally develop alongside of both monogamous, and polygamous, opposite sex marriage?
Why is it so important to base this issue on history?

I can easily go back and find that major cultures and society utilized slavery from beginning to end. It's still an issue today--some 27,000,000 people are estimated to be enslaved today around the world.

But OUR society--our country--DOES NOT condone slavery.

If we were creating policy based on what history supported, then (using your argument) there should be legalized slavery in the U.S. today.

You cannot base your arguments about how gays have been treated throughout history as an argument for how we should be treated today.

We have modern medical findings and contemporary beliefs about gays and lesbians. THAT should be the basis for how we go forward.

Same-sex marriage SHOULD BE based on its own merits--not on how history has treated the matter.
Big D

Modesto, CA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#186744
Apr 5, 2013
 

Judged:

5

5

5

Frankie Rizzo wrote:
<quoted text>
Sure you'd vote for those sick fundies "using polygamy to commit their crimes like child molesting and welfare fraud", we believe you Big D!
and he keeps running around in a circle LOL

You arent getting anywhere Frankie.... Same Sex marriage continues to go forward.
Big D

Modesto, CA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#186745
Apr 5, 2013
 

Judged:

5

5

5

Frankie Rizzo wrote:
<quoted text>
No one is scared to death over same sex marriage, drama queen. What are the latest percentages of people who support it? Does that look like Americans being scared to death of it?
Oh yes they are, have you not seen them post here, frightened down to their socks.

Americans arenít of course, patriotic Americans are for freedom equality and justice, it is those that have a private little rule book that has nothing to do with US law that are acting like frightened little children.
Big D

Modesto, CA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#186746
Apr 5, 2013
 

Judged:

5

5

5

veryvermilion wrote:
<quoted text>
Why is it so important to base this issue on history?
I can easily go back and find that major cultures and society utilized slavery from beginning to end. It's still an issue today--some 27,000,000 people are estimated to be enslaved today around the world.
But OUR society--our country--DOES NOT condone slavery.
If we were creating policy based on what history supported, then (using your argument) there should be legalized slavery in the U.S. today.
You cannot base your arguments about how gays have been treated throughout history as an argument for how we should be treated today.
We have modern medical findings and contemporary beliefs about gays and lesbians. THAT should be the basis for how we go forward.
Same-sex marriage SHOULD BE based on its own merits--not on how history has treated the matter.
Are they on history again? Do they want to burn witches?

Protestants?
Frankie Rizzo

Union City, CA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#186747
Apr 5, 2013
 

Judged:

5

5

5

Big D wrote:
<quoted text>
Oh yes they are, have you not seen them post here, frightened down to their socks.
Americans arenít of course, patriotic Americans are for freedom equality and justice, it is those that have a private little rule book that has nothing to do with US law that are acting like frightened little children.
"...frightened little children."

Too funny!
Frankie Rizzo

Union City, CA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#186748
Apr 5, 2013
 

Judged:

5

5

5

Big D wrote:
<quoted text>
and he keeps running around in a circle LOL
You arent getting anywhere Frankie.... Same Sex marriage continues to go forward.
The tired old Mighty D straw man, "you're not really for what you're arguing for, prove to me you're sincere instead of the topic so I can try to win"

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

Add to my Tracker Send me an email

Showing posts 163,161 - 163,180 of199,080
|
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.

Other Recent Hemet Discussions

Search the Hemet Forum:
Topic Updated Last By Comments
Single men in Hemet 8 hr mesohh 7
ANTI-ABORTION: Roe v Wade commemorations in Hem... 11 hr there is no god 2
Recall papers served on 3 Hemet council members 14 hr Hemet is good 16
Hemet Council Election 2014. (Jan '13) 14 hr Hemet is great 31
CA California Proposition 19: the Marijuana Legali... (Oct '10) 17 hr Activity 15,657
Why is hemet racist ?!? 18 hr Farout 7
sad sad sad:/ 18 hr Sofia 9
•••
•••

Hemet News Video

•••
•••

Hemet Jobs

•••
•••
•••

Hemet People Search

Addresses and phone numbers for FREE

•••

Personal Finance

Mortgages [ See current mortgage rates ]
•••