Judge overturns California's ban on s...

Judge overturns California's ban on same-sex marriage

There are 201865 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.

“Vita e' Bella.”

Since: May 12

Location hidden

#194088 Jun 1, 2013
veryvermilion wrote:
<quoted text>
I lumped the three of you together because you ALL are promoting disgusting ideas. Incestuous marriages
Which "incestuous" marriage is disgusting to you? Same sex siblings, opposite sex siblings, other blood relatives, ss or so?
and the sexualization of children disturbing notions. None of these issues have been supported by the larger LGBT Community.
Promoting the sexualization of children? Who are u claiming is doing that?
Why would you think that incestuous marriages would be healthy?
That aspect wasn't raised. Are all SSMs "healthy"? Who determines this? Explain what the difference is there between a first cousin SSM, and a sibling SSM?
There are many physical and psychological damaging possibilities that might result from such a union.
Is that not up to the consenting adults to the union to determine?
Tell me, honestly, would you marry your own sister? Would you marry your mother? Your grandmother?
That's what you're talking about here.
Are we really? Explain how two adult sisters/brothers who have cohabitants for years, provided each other with emotional, physical, financial, and/or care giving support, who are in essence, "spouses to each other", are any different from a pair of same sex first cousins, or a SSC? Is it strictly the sexual aspect?
I realize that you have moved away from the topic at hand (i.e.: The Prop. 8 Decision) and are now simply attempting to get a rise out of people.
Not so fast. It's all part of the issue. All part of the fundamental redefinition of marriage as a monogamous union of husband and wife. It is you who seek to change that, there fore it is you who has to answer such questions.
But you guys have gone beyond just being mischievous.
Do you think that you do "your side" any justice by supporting incest-based marriages and polygamy.
None of you are to be taken seriously any longer.
Do u honestly think, fundamentally altering the concept of marriage as a monogamous union of husband and wife, will not result in further changes? I'm baffled by this notion. Please explain why you think this? Would it really matter to any SSM supporter if some form of polygamy were legalized?
Until you can come back to an honest discussion of this topic, there's really no need to have any further interaction with any of you.
That's a two way street, Very Red.

“Vita e' Bella.”

Since: May 12

Location hidden

#194090 Jun 1, 2013
Ronald wrote:
<quoted text>
KiMare.
Yes. I agree. There is no place in "modern" America for normalphobia. The Boy Scouts of America uses its taxpayer provided "tax free" status to discriminate against little children who believe membership should be limited to boys who are "morally straight".*(so to speak)* Let's all write our ruling Government congressman and DEMAND the tax-free status of the "free-loading" Boy Scouts of America be ended.
Ronald
Why stop there, why not ban them outright?

Which is worse, bigotry from the right or left? Who or what detained "bigotry"?
Ronald

Bellflower, CA

#194091 Jun 1, 2013
Pietro Armando wrote:
<quoted text>
Why stop there, why not ban them outright?
Which is worse, bigotry from the right or left? Who or what detained "bigotry"?
Pietro Armando.

Yes. You are right. It seems all the taxpayer funded Government NGOs have acted in concert to neuter males. It is little wonder why women have become so bitchy and sexually frustrated as a result.

Ronald

Since: Dec 09

Knoxville, TN

#194092 Jun 1, 2013
Frankie Rizzo wrote:
<quoted text>
Yes. You're asking for the right to marry your boyfriend, I'm asking you for the right to marry my brother.
I will find plenty of experts to support incest marriage. Catch up! You still base your prejudices on old dis-proven science. And besides, procreation has nothing to do with marriage. Right?
And if I marry my brother we won't be procreating anyway being that it's impossible.
First cousins may marry in many states why not siblings?
I await your "plenty of experts" with bated breath...

Since: Dec 09

Knoxville, TN

#194093 Jun 1, 2013
Pietro Armando wrote:
<quoted text>
Which "incestuous" marriage is disgusting to you? Same sex siblings, opposite sex siblings, other blood relatives, ss or so?
<quoted text>
Promoting the sexualization of children? Who are u claiming is doing that?
<quoted text>
That aspect wasn't raised. Are all SSMs "healthy"? Who determines this? Explain what the difference is there between a first cousin SSM, and a sibling SSM?
<quoted text>
Is that not up to the consenting adults to the union to determine?
<quoted text>
Are we really? Explain how two adult sisters/brothers who have cohabitants for years, provided each other with emotional, physical, financial, and/or care giving support, who are in essence, "spouses to each other", are any different from a pair of same sex first cousins, or a SSC? Is it strictly the sexual aspect?
<quoted text>
Not so fast. It's all part of the issue. All part of the fundamental redefinition of marriage as a monogamous union of husband and wife. It is you who seek to change that, there fore it is you who has to answer such questions.
<quoted text>
Do u honestly think, fundamentally altering the concept of marriage as a monogamous union of husband and wife, will not result in further changes? I'm baffled by this notion. Please explain why you think this? Would it really matter to any SSM supporter if some form of polygamy were legalized?
<quoted text>
That's a two way street, Very Red.
I would encourage you to scroll back a few posts and read my response to Frank.

You guys are trolling. And Kimare is just a sick freak. You're three testicles in a scrotum. While you're hanging around together, why don't you seek a poly-same-sex marriage?

“Vita e' Bella.”

Since: May 12

Location hidden

#194094 Jun 1, 2013
veryvermilion wrote:
<quoted text>
I would encourage you to scroll back a few posts and read my response to Frank.
You guys are trolling. And Kimare is just a sick freak. You're three testicles in a scrotum. While you're hanging around together, why don't you seek a poly-same-sex marriage?
What "trolling"? Legitimate questions. Perhaps you could use your MSW and enlighten us.
Frankie Rizzo

Hayward, CA

#194095 Jun 1, 2013
laughing man wrote:
<quoted text>
Yeah, hanging curtains makes you speshul, Brainiac.
Maybe all of you should relocate to Detroit.
*snicker*
Redecorating adds thousands. Trouble is most people don't like lavender walls, pink flooring and Liberace chandeliers.
Frankie Rizzo

Hayward, CA

#194096 Jun 1, 2013
Pietro Armando wrote:
<quoted text>
Which "incestuous" marriage is disgusting to you? Same sex siblings, opposite sex siblings, other blood relatives, ss or so?
<quoted text>
Promoting the sexualization of children? Who are u claiming is doing that?
<quoted text>
That aspect wasn't raised. Are all SSMs "healthy"? Who determines this? Explain what the difference is there between a first cousin SSM, and a sibling SSM?
<quoted text>
Is that not up to the consenting adults to the union to determine?
<quoted text>
Are we really? Explain how two adult sisters/brothers who have cohabitants for years, provided each other with emotional, physical, financial, and/or care giving support, who are in essence, "spouses to each other", are any different from a pair of same sex first cousins, or a SSC? Is it strictly the sexual aspect?
<quoted text>
Not so fast. It's all part of the issue. All part of the fundamental redefinition of marriage as a monogamous union of husband and wife. It is you who seek to change that, there fore it is you who has to answer such questions.
<quoted text>
Do u honestly think, fundamentally altering the concept of marriage as a monogamous union of husband and wife, will not result in further changes? I'm baffled by this notion. Please explain why you think this? Would it really matter to any SSM supporter if some form of polygamy were legalized?
<quoted text>
That's a two way street, Very Red.
Excellent post.
Frankie Rizzo

Hayward, CA

#194097 Jun 1, 2013
veryvermilion wrote:
<quoted text>
I would encourage you to scroll back a few posts and read my response to Frank.
You guys are trolling. And Kimare is just a sick freak. You're three testicles in a scrotum. While you're hanging around together, why don't you seek a poly-same-sex marriage?
Great rebuttal fruitcake.

Let's just cut through all your bullsh!t. I support marriage equality and you do not. So climb down off your high gay horse and realize there are others deserving of the same equality you are demanding.

Re-read some of your hate filled posts. What harm would a marriage of three gay men cause you? What harm would a marriage of two brothers cause you? You act disgusted. How do you feel when people act disgusted over gay marriage? You are they.
FltyBys

San Dimas, CA

#194098 Jun 1, 2013
Why does Glendora, California allow fly-by-night contractors to build in this city?

Only answer is "kick-backs" to city officials and elected officials.

When ever the city gets involved in a project it goes to HECK in a hand basket.

Cheap threads like the ones from Glendora city hall:

Please refrain from posting profanity or offensive material.
Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator.
Frankie Rizzo

Hayward, CA

#194099 Jun 1, 2013
Pietro Armando wrote:
<quoted text>
What "trolling"? Legitimate questions. Perhaps you could use your MSW and enlighten us.
When a MSW is losing an argument with you, you are a troll and dismissed.

Since: Nov 12

Elk Grove, CA

#194100 Jun 1, 2013
Ronald wrote:
<quoted text>
Pietro Armando.
Yes. You are right. It seems all the taxpayer funded Government NGOs have acted in concert to neuter males. It is little wonder why women have become so bitchy and sexually frustrated as a result.
Ronald
Ronald
True and it seems you have described Mrs Clinton very well.

RiccardoFire

Since: Nov 12

Elk Grove, CA

#194101 Jun 1, 2013
Frankie Rizzo wrote:
<quoted text>
Excellent post.
I agree
Bud Longneck

Rock Island, IL

#194102 Jun 1, 2013
Frankie Rizzo wrote:
<quoted text>
Redecorating adds thousands. Trouble is most people don't like lavender walls, pink flooring and Liberace chandeliers.
Nothing like a little homophobic bigotry.
Frankie Rizzo

Hayward, CA

#194103 Jun 1, 2013
veryvermilion wrote:
<quoted text>
I await your "plenty of experts" with bated breath...
http://www.slate.com/articles/health_and_scie...
Swifttys

San Dimas, CA

#194104 Jun 1, 2013
The swift withdrawal of support by some conservative churches in states such as Alabama, Georgia and Kentucky comes after the May 23, 2013 vote by the group to end the century-old ban, effective January 1, 2013.
Frankie Rizzo

Hayward, CA

#194105 Jun 1, 2013
Bud Longneck wrote:
<quoted text>Nothing like a little homophobic bigotry.
Nothing like an oversensitive jackass being oversensitive about something he claims he's not.

It was a joke containing nothing to get upset about. Try and relax, Jiz. What are you the Gay Defense league? You should check if they want you in that capacity, I would think not.
Frankie Rizzo

Hayward, CA

#194106 Jun 1, 2013
Ronald wrote:
<quoted text>
Pietro Armando.
Yes. You are right. It seems all the taxpayer funded Government NGOs have acted in concert to neuter males. It is little wonder why women have become so bitchy and sexually frustrated as a result.
Ronald
Ronald.

I always enjoy reading your posts. Tell your honey Arf! for me.

Frankie Rizzo.
Mollotet

San Dimas, CA

#194107 Jun 1, 2013
The swift withdrawal of support by some conservative churches in states such as Alabama, Georgia and Kentucky comes after the May 23, 2013 vote by the group to end the century-old ban, effective January 1, 2013.

Like frank rozsres
Anonymous

Orange, CA

#194108 Jun 1, 2013
Ronald wrote:
<quoted text>
Pietro Armando.
Yes. You are right. It seems all the taxpayer funded Government NGOs have acted in concert to neuter males. It is little wonder why women have become so bitchy and sexually frustrated as a result.
Ronald
That's funny!

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
What types of fireworks are allowed in Hemet? (Jun '10) 4 hr Happy Fourth 12
Can white people call themselves African American? (Sep '12) Thu Anonymous 128
What is Menifee Lakes? (Feb '07) Jun 28 bob 22
News Three people sentenced for violent home invasio... (Nov '14) Jun 28 Crystal 101 6
News Hemet Doctor Accused Of Sexual Battery (Nov '07) Jun 27 Anonymous 69
News Two arrested in armored truck robbery (Aug '07) Jun 27 Tiffany Chance 31
What is being built in Hemet? (Aug '12) Jun 26 evon 48

Hemet Jobs

More from around the web

Personal Finance

Hemet Mortgages