Judge overturns California's ban on same-sex marriage

Aug 4, 2010 Full story: www.cnn.com 201,192

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
Xavier Breath

Hoboken, NJ

#191813 May 11, 2013
LawandOrder_ wrote:
<quoted text>You are in for some gay denial. So far only one state has voted for same sex mirages. The rest have done it through judicial highjack with mostly the small states, except New York. 31 states have constitutional bans against same sex mirages and 40 states have state bans.
Also, gay paedophilia follows these states and countries, so why is that. The first state to legalize same sex mirages was also the flashpoint for over 95% of the Catholic child abuse cases being gay.
You don't get out much, do ya?
Big D

Modesto, CA

#191814 May 11, 2013
So we can dispense with the ignorance now?

There is no question that a majority of Americans support same sex marriage, which means widespread support of heterosexuals as well

“KiMare'a the Monster Mutation”

Since: Nov 10

Location hidden

#191815 May 11, 2013
Shit Breath wrote:
<quoted text> Oh puh-leez! Does the word "Spartans" rattle loose any cobweb in your empty head?
You make MY point.

It is why we don't take our wives to war.

A man goes to war to protect his wife and children.

Mating behavior is so powerful, when it comes down to protecting my wife and child or obeying military orders, mating behavior wins and orders lose.

You are suggesting putting your loved one directly in harms way.

Man up idiot.

Smile.

“KiMare'a the Monster Mutation”

Since: Nov 10

Location hidden

#191816 May 11, 2013
Big D wrote:
So we can dispense with the ignorance now?
There is no question that a majority of Americans support same sex marriage, which means widespread support of heterosexuals as well
It is ignorance that accepts calling ss couples married.

It is denial that demands it.

A sterile, redumbant gendered couple is always only half of marriage.

Smile.

Since: Dec 09

Knoxville, TN

#191817 May 11, 2013
Rock Hudson wrote:
<quoted text>
1) Fine.
2) Not completely different. Both types of marriage are subject to laws, why does one receive approval, while the other does not? both are a matter of the government stepping in.
3) Since children do not matter, incest is no more deserving of discrimination than is SSM.
4) Power Of Attorney can solve these issues.
1.) Glad we agree...

2.) Why should gay marriage receive approval, while incestuous marriage not? That's your question? Are you trying to tell us something? Are you in a sexual/emotional relationship with your mother? Is that why you guys continue to trot out this ridiculous comparison?
Incest is psychologically damaging to its participants. I'm not sure if there has ever been a case of incest that started when both partners were well into their adulthood. Typically it starts when one of the partners is a child. Or it begins when an older sibling, usually a male, victimizes a younger sibling. There is a definite lack of consent with almost all incest situations. Even if the younger partner eventually grows to accept his/her "partner"--meaning that he/she "consents"--there are often lifelong emotional symptoms that persist as a result of the early on "nonconsensual" actions that took place.
So, even if a an incestuous relationship does not result in offspring, there are psychological considerations.
The same is true for people who have been held captive for many years. At some point they may accept the futility of attempting to escape and form a "consensual" relationship with their captors. Even when given opportunities to escape, they may not do so immediately.
To a degree there is a certain amount of "brainwashing" that takes place in these kinds of relationships that have psychological damages.
Compare these kinds of relationships to a same-gender partnership, in which both partners are consenting adults when they seek out a relationship with someone of their own gender. There are no more psychological or physical problems in adult, consensual gay relationships than there are in heterosexual relationships.
Do I REALLY need to spell this stuff out for you? Are you honestly that dense?

3.) See above...

4.) A power of attorney does not give a same-sex couple access to the federal Family Medical Leave Act, which would entitled a partner to take time off from work, without losing his/her job, in order to care for an ill partner or their child.
A power of attorney does not provide VA benefits to a legally married same-gender spouse of a veteran.
A power of attorney does not allow a same-gender spouse to access his/her partner's Medicare or Social Security benefits, should he/she need to do so.
A power of attorney does not allow a same-gender couple to seek the protection of bankruptcy.
A power of attorney does not protect a same-gender spouse from estate taxes.
A power of attorney does not provide insurance benefits from one partner to another.
A power of attorney does not protect a stay-at-home spouse's income if his/her spouse is placed in long-term care at a nursing home. The spouse who is sent to stay in a nursing home must use 100% of his/her Social Security income to pay for his/her care, leaving his/her spouse to live only on his/her own income. This is not the case for heterosexual married couples.
The list could go on...

Since: Dec 09

Knoxville, TN

#191818 May 11, 2013
KiMare wrote:
<quoted text>
Excuse me, but a diverse gender couple is NOT the same as as a duplicated gender couple.
Moreover, because a redumbant gender couple is mutually sterile, they DON'T need the same rights and protections.
Duh.
Smile.
A "diverse gender couple" in their 20's and 30's is not the same as a "diverse gender couple" in their 70's or a "diverse gender couple" in which there are sterility problems or a "diverse gender couple" in which there is no desire for children.

Since these "diverse gender couples" are not going to have children. They have crossed the line to "redumbant couples" and should not have the same rights and protections.

If same-gender couples are refused protections and rights of marriage, then so should these other, childless couples.

Do you enjoy painting yourself into a corner?

Since: Dec 09

Knoxville, TN

#191819 May 11, 2013
KiMare wrote:
<quoted text>
It is ignorance that accepts calling ss couples married.
It is denial that demands it.
A sterile, redumbant gendered couple is always only half of marriage.
Smile.
If a "sterile, redumant gendered couple" is always only a "half" of a marriage, then we want at least those protections and benefits that will apply only to the couple. If children are adopted by this couple, then we want full protections and benefits.

“KiMare'a the Monster Mutation”

Since: Nov 10

Location hidden

#191820 May 11, 2013
KiMare wrote:
<quoted text>
Excuse me, but a diverse gender couple is NOT the same as as a duplicated gender couple.
Moreover, because a redumbant gender couple is mutually sterile, they DON'T need the same rights and protections.
Duh.
Smile.
veryvermilion wrote:
<quoted text>
A "diverse gender couple" in their 20's and 30's is not the same as a "diverse gender couple" in their 70's or a "diverse gender couple" in which there are sterility problems or a "diverse gender couple" in which there is no desire for children.
Since these "diverse gender couples" are not going to have children. They have crossed the line to "redumbant couples" and should not have the same rights and protections.
If same-gender couples are refused protections and rights of marriage, then so should these other, childless couples.
Do you enjoy painting yourself into a corner?
Sorry Queen, it is you who looks silly gay twirling your way out of the corner.

The point was the difference between a diverse gendered couple and a duplicate gendered couple. You simply lied.

And the fair distinctions only continue when you consider the aspect of procreation (or total lack thereof...).

Remember this;

The differences between marriage with/without kids and gay couples;

An apple tree bearing fruit.
An apple tree not bearing fruit for some reason.
A walnut tree who never bears any fruit wanting to be an apple tree.
A walnut tree hanging apples on it's branches pretending to be an 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.

“KiMare'a the Monster Mutation”

Since: Nov 10

Location hidden

#191821 May 11, 2013
veryvermilion wrote:
<quoted text>
If a "sterile, redumant gendered couple" is always only a "half" of a marriage, then we want at least those protections and benefits that will apply only to the couple. If children are adopted by this couple, then we want full protections and benefits.
Can't claim equal rights if you are not equal.

Get your own identity and legitimate rights. Quit trying to impose an imposter relationship on marriage.

Adoptive parents already have more protections and benefits. Ss couples adopting already do too. They just deprive the child of one parent.

Smile.
Big D

Modesto, CA

#191822 May 11, 2013
KiMare wrote:
<quoted text>
It is ignorance that accepts calling ss couples married.
It is denial that demands it.
A sterile, redumbant gendered couple is always only half of marriage.
Smile.
Yes what you have is ignorance, but no one is worried, America will win, and you will lose.

knowledge will eventually defeat ignorance, It always doesn, it just takes a while

Smile
Frankie Rizzo

Union City, CA

#191823 May 11, 2013
Big D wrote:
So we can dispense with the ignorance now?
There is no question that a majority of Americans support same sex marriage, which means widespread support of heterosexuals as well
Big D is so amazed and proud that he just figured out many heterosexuals support SSM. So he is now enlightening the stupid masses!

Too funny!
Frankie Rizzo

Union City, CA

#191824 May 11, 2013
KiMare wrote:
<quoted text>
I'm simply saying that history shows that keeping mating behavior temptations separate from a military force keeps everyone safer, and the force more effective in doing it's duty.
Of course I'd be grateful to anyone saving my life in a military situation, but that is not the main purpose of a military force is it?
I'll agree that the military is not the place for social experiments, but I disagree that we shouldn't allow homosexuals to serve. We need all the good help we can get.
Frankie Rizzo

Union City, CA

#191825 May 11, 2013
Xavier Breath wrote:
<quoted text>
I can't identify gender? THAT'S what you think gender identity disorder is?
hahahahah
ahahahhahaha
ahahahahha
ahhahahahaha
I can't count? that's why you insist polygamy should be illegal?

YUK!YUK!YUK!YUK!YUK!YUK!YUK!YU K!
Frankie Rizzo

Union City, CA

#191826 May 11, 2013
Xavier Breath wrote:
<quoted text>You don't get out much, do ya?
>looks at top of page<
Frankie Rizzo

Union City, CA

#191827 May 11, 2013
Xavier Breath wrote:
<quoted text> Oh puh-leez! Does the word "Spartans" rattle loose any cobweb in your empty head?
>looks at top of page<
Frankie Rizzo

Union City, CA

#191828 May 11, 2013
Xavier Breath wrote:
<quoted text>
Frog with no legs can't hear.
>looks at top of page<
Frankie Rizzo

Union City, CA

#191829 May 11, 2013
YUK!YUK!YUK! Aida Lott. What a miserable off topic angry dope!

P.S. No more "Frankie's Pudenda", X-Box? I liked that one.
Big D

Modesto, CA

#191830 May 11, 2013
KiMare wrote:
<quoted text>
Can't claim equal rights if you are not equal.
That is what the slave owners said a few generations ago, look at their organizations now.

Does not bode well for how future generations will be looking at your religion does it?
Frankie Rizzo

Union City, CA

#191832 May 11, 2013
Rainbow Kid wrote:
<quoted text>
Drop dead, ypu pig !
Well put.

Big D's a real peach, eh?

“KiMare'a the Monster Mutation”

Since: Nov 10

Location hidden

#191833 May 11, 2013
Big D wrote:
<quoted text>
That is what the slave owners said a few generations ago, look at their organizations now.
Does not bode well for how future generations will be looking at your religion does it?
Huge difference between skin color, and equating a sterile redumbant gendered couple with marriage.

It is clear your bigotry brought religion in, I was speaking about simple common sense.

Future generations will laugh at another brief excursion into denial. Children deprived of nature's provision of a mother and father will not laugh.

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
Black People in Hemet (Jan '10) 2 hr Kuntakinta 448
$297.00 Car Wash at Rapid Zone (Apr '11) 7 hr upsetcustomer 21
HemetHEMET: Food market's ex-owner convicted of... Fri lupita garcia 11
2 females found dead on Girard St in Hemet (Nov '13) Fri Chris 59
Boy, Man Found Dead Inside Hemet Home Fri Chris 3
more section 8 housing coming soon Fri Chris 16
ugly women with ugly tattoos!!!!! (Oct '12) Oct 23 Stupid asses 99

Hemet News Video

Hemet Dating
Find my Match

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 ]