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
164,021 - 164,040 of 200,331 Comments Last updated 1 hr ago
Frankie Rizzo

Union City, CA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#187754
Apr 8, 2013
 

Judged:

4

4

4

A Most Interesting Man wrote:
<quoted text>
I guess that would make you a charter member of the National Necrophilia foundation I reckon then? Sexey and dead,the Marlboro man died of lung cancer quite awhile ago! He even did an anti-smoking commercial for the Cancer society with him up on his big OL horse with a oxygen tank and mask before he died!
Aw shuddup Bill you big dopey jackass!
Sparkle

Seattle, WA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#187755
Apr 8, 2013
 

Judged:

5

4

4

Country-Girl22 wrote:
<quoted text>Don't worry old surfer dude, this girl sells her body for a living and has encouraged her kids to do the same. They even make her her trashy stage outfits. Of course this girl is all for ssm and is against anyone who is not, she has no morals and is just a pig!
So I guess telling lies about others doesn't break your gods laws either ehh... My child is in college now you dolt and she don't know how to sew and the only pig is you

Since: Dec 09

Knoxville, TN

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#187756
Apr 8, 2013
 

Judged:

4

2

2

Pietro Armando wrote:
<quoted text>
No, they simply recognized a husband AND wife, regardless of ethnicity, are still husband AND wife.
So, you're saying that the Supreme Court "expanded" or "redefined" marriage in America to include interracial marriage; which had not been recognized universally in the U.S. prior to 1967.

And you, yourself, admitted earlier that same-gender marriages have existed in the past. So, it's not like it's a brand new idea.

Besides, same-sex couples have been around for eons, even if they haven't been formally recognized through marriage.

You guys act as though us gay people just started falling out of the closet a few years ago.

We won't let your ignorance stand in the way of what we believe we are entitled to.

“"Do Unto Others" ”

Since: Mar 13

Austin Texas

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#187757
Apr 8, 2013
 

Judged:

2

2

2

Frankie Rizzo wrote:
<quoted text>
Aw shuddup Bill you big dopey jackass!
Huh? What? Who? How about you stop spamming and for once say something of substance you nut job! LOL

Since: Mar 09

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#187758
Apr 8, 2013
 

Judged:

3

3

3

Randy -Rock- Hudson wrote:
<quoted text>
Nice. Don't understand why you cannot include Hawaii in your 4 corners, call it a Ferry Jaunt?
:-D
Bet that 30 Degrees felt like heaven, huh? Get rid of the hair-dryer blast...
We were coming down the west side of the Rockies fairly early in the morning. We'd gone through Powder River Pass (elev. 9666). It was mid July and there was snow on the ground when we got off the bikes to stretch at the elevation sign. This was fairly early in the morning so the ride down the west side was in the shade of the mountains. My fingers went numb after a bit (summer gloves), but I didn't care, just put one hand on the cylinder head for a bit and then repeat for the other.

No time for a ferry to Hawaii! Gotta get from Key West to Madawaska, Maine via San Diego and Blaine, WA in three weeks to get the biscuit. That reminds me, I've got to join the So Cal MC Association (or something like that) to make the ride official. Good thing I don't care much about sight seeing from Key West to west Texas as I've been all over the place in that section of the country. That and west Texas is best gone through as fast as possible to get through the feedlot stench. Nothing like the smell of urine from cattle living in crowded feedlots. They're shoulder to shoulder on dung mountains.

Since: Mar 09

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#187759
Apr 8, 2013
 

Judged:

2

2

2

KiMare wrote:
Pietro Armando wrote:
<quoted text>
How about one's OWN mother and father if at all possible? Why not one dad and two moms? What about a dad and grand dad? There are numerous possibilities.
<quoted text>
Sheesh, I missed that exchange too.
Care to repeat it?
If you dumb down marriage to two people in a relationship, it is simply a friendship with a discriminatory limit on the number of people.
Waiting.
Smile.
You missed it, eh? Posting while you're sleeping?

Since: May 09

Brooklyn, NY

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#187760
Apr 8, 2013
 

Judged:

2

2

2

While driving thru the Carolinas I needed to stop for smokes: Think Mayberry RFD run by the Gestapo.

Since: Mar 09

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#187761
Apr 8, 2013
 

Judged:

2

2

2

yea sure wrote:
did anybody notice that the mainstream press has not said a single WORD about this case ?
----they dont want us to know about it ----
The case of a same-sex Connecticut couple accused of repeatedly raping and abusing two of their nine adopted boys is headed for trial.
Married couple George Harasz and Douglas Wirth of Glastonbury were supposed to be sentenced Friday in Hartford Superior Court under a plea deal, but instead withdrew from their agreement with prosecutors. The men had already pleaded no contest in January to one felony count each of risk of injury to a minor a reduction from even more serious charges related to sexual assault.
Read more: http://www.nydailynews.com/news/crime/gay-con...
A local CBS station covered it. There is also a Huffington Post article about it.

Since: Dec 09

Knoxville, TN

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#187762
Apr 8, 2013
 

Judged:

3

2

2

Pietro Armando wrote:
<quoted text>
I pointed out legal interracial (black white) are nothing new, and existed prior to some of the bans. SSM is a modern invention.
How many races/ethnicities are there? Same number as there are sexes?
Same-gender marriage is nothing new either. Couples have been trying to have their marriages legalized for over 40 years.

And I'm sure that when interracial marriage started here in the U.S. it was considered unthinkable to the vast majority of citizens--just like you think same-gender marriage is unthinkable.

Now we don't even give interracial marriages a second thought.

Marriage laws have evolved in this country. There is no denying that.

At one time it in the U.S. was legal for people to marry as young as 12 years old. And in some parts of the developing world, that's still possible.

You guys seem to think that marriage has been static and unchanging for thousands of years. But you know that isn't the case.

Whether it's been between one man and one woman, one man and multiple women, one woman and multiple men, a man and a man, a woman and a woman, one man (or woman) and deceased people (look up "ghost marriages"), arranged marriages--the fact of the matter is that marriage has looked very different over time and throughout the different cultures on this planet.

That we are evolving marriage to include same-gender couples is just another example of the changes in the definition of marriage.
CA chamber of Commece

Covina, CA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#187763
Apr 8, 2013
 

Judged:

2

2

2

California chamber of commerce is nothing more than a right-wing lobbying organization, red neck and all, RNC, GOP, Republican and tea party snot holes.
Frankie Rizzo

Union City, CA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#187765
Apr 8, 2013
 

Judged:

3

3

3

A Most Interesting Man wrote:
<quoted text>
Huh? What? Who? How about you stop spamming and for once say something of substance you nut job! LOL
Who? You! Old SniffsButt Bill! That's who.

Can we get a "Shut your pie hole!"? Or a big LOLOLOLOLOLOLOL!

YUK!YUK!YUK!
Frankie Rizzo

Union City, CA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#187766
Apr 8, 2013
 

Judged:

3

3

3

Cat Purrs wrote:
<quoted text> I hope everything goes well for you and your daughter. BTW I love your avatar.
Thank you.

Since: Apr 13

Bellevue, WA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#187767
Apr 8, 2013
 

Judged:

2

2

2

Frankie Rizzo wrote:
<quoted text>
Thank you.
she was talking to me... hello

“"Do Unto Others" ”

Since: Mar 13

Austin Texas

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#187768
Apr 8, 2013
 

Judged:

1

1

1

Frankie Rizzo wrote:
<quoted text>
Who? You! Old SniffsButt Bill! That's who.
Can we get a "Shut your pie hole!"? Or a big LOLOLOLOLOLOLOL!
YUK!YUK!YUK!
Like I said,Who? Or how about a good Yuk,yuk,yuk? You are a frigging whack job! Yuk,yuk,yuk,yuk,yuk!

“Vita e' Bella.”

Since: May 12

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#187770
Apr 9, 2013
 
veryvermilion wrote:
<quoted text>
So, you're saying that the Supreme Court "expanded" or "redefined" marriage in America to include interracial marriage; which had not been recognized universally in the U.S. prior to 1967.
No, the Court maintained the nature of the marital relationship as a union of husband and wife. It also recognized the ban on BLACK & WHITE interracial marriage was a means of continuing a policy of white supremacy which the court found abhorant. The ban was not universally applied for it only banned certain racial combinations. For instance, depending on the state, a black person or "colored" could not marry a white person but could marry an 'oriental".
And you, yourself, admitted earlier that same-gender marriages have existed in the past. So, it's not like it's a brand new idea.
True, however, "gay marriage" is a recent modern invention. Same gendered marriage never developed, parallel to opposite sex marriage, either polygamous or monogamous. If it had, it would already exist.
Besides, same-sex couples have been around for eons, even if they haven't been formally recognized through marriage.
Perhaps.
You guys act as though us gay people just started falling out of the closet a few years ago.
SSSB is not new, the concept of a political sexual identity, "gay", is relatively new.
We won't let your ignorance stand in the way of what we believe we are entitled to.
We won't let your ignorance stand in the way of what we believe is a relationship, conjugal marriage, worthy of respect, privileged status, and not subject to redefinition in order to pacify modern sexual political identity movements. Different situations call for different solutions.

“Vita e' Bella.”

Since: May 12

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#187771
Apr 9, 2013
 
GreaterGreece wrote:
<quoted text>
I'm sure that there have always been a percentage of monogamous gay couples,
Perhaps, but one must be careful not to inject modern cultural aspects in to historical situations, times, and places. "Gay" is a relatively modern identify concept. SSSB is not.
just as there have always been gay people: Monotheism drove gay people underground, just like it drove prostitution underground.
Both SSSB, and prostitution has always existed, although I think the latter is far more prevelant, and has greater historical depth and practiced in far more times and places. Monotheism may have been but one factor in both behaviors being marginalized.

“Vita e' Bella.”

Since: May 12

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#187772
Apr 9, 2013
 
A Most Interesting Man wrote:
<quoted text>
Huh? What? Who? How about you stop spamming and for once say something of substance you nut job! LOL
He has, on numerous occasions, but its ether ignored or accurately addressed by the other side.

“Vita e' Bella.”

Since: May 12

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#187773
Apr 9, 2013
 
veryvermilion wrote:
<quoted text>
Same-gender marriage is nothing new either. Couples have been trying to have their marriages legalized for over 40 years.
A relative short time since the birth of the republic, and a mere drop in the bucket of time of marriage across time and place.
And I'm sure that when interracial marriage started here in the U.S. it was considered unthinkable to the vast majority of citizens--just like you think same-gender marriage is unthinkable.
As would be interethnic marriage, inter religious marriage, etc. People, perhaps less so today than 40 plus years ago, tend to marry within one's own socioeconomic religious ethnic group. There was a time when Catholic Jewish marriages, for example were uncommon, perhaps rare.
Now we don't even give interracial marriages a second thought.


As with interethnic, inter religious, etc.
Marriage laws have evolved in this country. There is no denying that.
At one time it in the U.S. was legal for people to marry as young as 12 years old. And in some parts of the developing world, that's still possible.
You guys seem to think that marriage has been static and unchanging for thousands of years. But you know that isn't the case.
All the evolution didn't change the male female composition of the marital relationship. At its essence, a sexual union of husband and wife.
Whether it's been between one man and one woman, one man and multiple women, one woman and multiple men, a man and a man, a woman and a woman, one man (or woman) and deceased people (look up "ghost marriages"), arranged marriages--the fact of the matter is that marriage has looked very different over time and throughout the different cultures on this planet.
The one universal characteristic is the union of male and female.
That we are evolving marriage to include same-gender couples is just another example of the changes in the definition of marriage.
How does an institution evolve by removing one half of its essential compositional components, and replacing it with a duplication of the remaining half? That's bizarre.

An analogy would be arguing for the legal definition of a hamburger, assuming there is one, be "expanded" to include veggie patties. Vegetarians want the "burger" name but not the beef. SSM advocates want the name "marriage" but not the beefcake AND cheesecake.

“Vita e' Bella.”

Since: May 12

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#187774
Apr 9, 2013
 
Judged:111
Could someone, a SSMer, please explain where do we, as a society, draw the line, in defining marriage? At what point, does it become pointless?

Monogamous conjugal marriage proponents advocate maintaining the legal definition of marriage as a union of husband and wife.

SSM proponents advocate defining marriage as a union of (two) spouses for life, regardless of gender composition.

Plural conjugal marriage practitioners advocate for the inclusion of plural marriage in the legal definition.

Polyamorists, incest.....

Where is the line drawn?
Obskeptic

Detroit, MI

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#187775
Apr 9, 2013
 
veryvermilion wrote:
<quoted text>
Unless I'm mistaken, the argument most often thrown around here is that heterosexual couples should have access to the benefits and protections of marriage PRIMARILY because they may have children.
The last part of my post was an attempt to show that there are a significant number of same-gender couples who have children. Shouldn't these be afforded the same protections and benefits under the law as opposite-gender couples who are married?
If you don't want to include children in the equation, then the fact that two, consenting, unrelated, adults who wish to partner their lives under the eyes of the government by way of marriage, should be a sufficient argument for same-gender marriage.
Don't try to throw in the ringer of plural marriage and incestuous marriages. They have already been found to be unlawful.
Same-gender marriage HAS NOTHING TO DO with incest or bigamy.
We are ONLY talking about same-gender, unrelated, consenting, adult couples.
Your right. Polygamy and incest are unlawful because they are construed to be immoral and a detriment to society. Society has made that determination. You even wish to remove these concepts from your argument because they are considered taboo by society. Thats why you, and the rest of the liberals are using your time tested strategy to simply re-define what's moral. Like deciding for yourselves that the rest of us have no right to determine or define your sexual perversion as moral and mainstream. Call an apple an orange all you want, it will still and always will be an apple.

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

Add to my Tracker Send me an email

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.

10 Users are viewing the Hemet Forum right now

Search the Hemet Forum:
Title Updated Last By Comments
CA CA Proposition 23 - Global Warming (Oct '10) 59 min Abrahem 7,841
Black Hair salon in hemet 4 hr run 44
CA California Proposition 19: the Marijuana Legali... (Oct '10) 18 hr Mis kites 15,915
Vacationing family loses thousands in bicycle t... Wed Donny B 5
topix needs to remove ads Wed ads 5
Annoying Teachers! (Aug '11) Wed underpaid 72
Illegal immigrants in Menifee Wed thot 13
•••
•••

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 ]
•••