Judge overturns California's ban on s...

Judge overturns California's ban on same-sex marriage

There are 201878 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.

Since: Jun 13

Location hidden

#195745 Jun 12, 2013
Frankie Rizzo wrote:
<quoted text>
He's not. Notice he always slinks away when the heat is on.
Woo hoo!

Since: Jun 13

Location hidden

#195746 Jun 12, 2013
Frankie Rizzo wrote:
<quoted text>
He's not. Notice he always slinks away when the heat is on.
I dunno about him Frank there's just something off about this clown. Keep keepin the pressure on him my man!!

Since: Jun 13

Location hidden

#195747 Jun 12, 2013
Stop all this gay marriage non-sense!! Stop polluting our world w your unfertile unions!!

Since: Jun 13

Location hidden

#195748 Jun 12, 2013
mod

Long Beach, CA

#195749 Jun 12, 2013
Fck off, Chester. Just STFU already dumbazz troll.

Since: Jun 13

Location hidden

#195750 Jun 12, 2013
Stop bashing gay marriage!!!! Gays are people with rights too!!!

Since: Jun 13

Location hidden

#195751 Jun 12, 2013
DeJuan90 wrote:
Wow who is this "Frankie Rizzo"...this guy's OBSESSED with gay marriage...someone get this guy a friend or a gf or something already...what a tool!!
Frankie Rizzo

Hayward, CA

#195752 Jun 12, 2013
DeJuan90 wrote:
You mad bro?

Since: Dec 09

Knoxville, TN

#195753 Jun 12, 2013
Rock Hudson wrote:
<quoted text>
Oh, thanks for explaining that to me, I thought that she asked a self-evident question pertaining to the validity of making any sort of legislation as per marriage. I feel so much better now, that you have tried to steer the question into your court, and decided, for her, what she meant.
Sit down, fruitcake, I know exactly what the question meant, and it was a simple, straightforward question, not a convoluted foray into "Let's help the gays" territory.
The question of state limitations on marriage was bound to be raised by someone. And Olson was prepared for whatever question was asked.

I think Sotomayor pitched it, knowing full well what the response would be.

That's my opinion. I'm entitled to it.

By the way, your temper is showing. Did you mean for that to happen or did it just slide out like a fart?
amy

Los Angeles, CA

#195754 Jun 12, 2013
Rock Hudson wrote:
<quoted text>
Been working a lot, and my computer got stolen.
Now the thief has all your gay and animal porn on your hard drive.

Since: Dec 09

Knoxville, TN

#195755 Jun 12, 2013
Chester Hester wrote:
<quoted text>
Wow who is this "Frankie Rizzo"...this guy's OBSESSED with gay marriage...someone get this guy a friend or a gf or something already...what a tool!!
Frankie isn't obsessed with gay marriage. Frankie is obsessed with Frankie. He loves seeing his words on the computer.

There's no telling how many hundreds (thousands) of times he's posted on this topic.

He must be some kind of a shut-in, in a wheelchair or something. He fires off comments like an assault weapon.

Unfortunately, he's lost all credibility here since he's started pushing for polygamy and incestuous marriages.
mod

Long Beach, CA

#195758 Jun 12, 2013
I thought I told Chester to STFU so why is he still speaking???????
Frankie Rizzo

Hayward, CA

#195759 Jun 12, 2013
veryvermilion wrote:
<quoted text>
Frankie isn't obsessed with gay marriage. Frankie is obsessed with Frankie. He loves seeing his words on the computer.
There's no telling how many hundreds (thousands) of times he's posted on this topic.
He must be some kind of a shut-in, in a wheelchair or something. He fires off comments like an assault weapon.
Unfortunately, he's lost all credibility here since he's started pushing for polygamy and incestuous marriages.
That's what bigots said about same sex marriage not too long ago. Those supporting it had no credibility. And look at you now! Being a bigot and a hypocrite yourself just like them!

We're real proud of you fruitloops.
laughing man

Luton, UK

#195761 Jun 13, 2013
There's several posts missing on this page. The former fry cook must have gotten in another rage.

Perhaps it was told to stop loitering around the Home Depot bathroom again.
Big D

Modesto, CA

#195762 Jun 13, 2013
Rock Hudson wrote:
<quoted text>
Oh, hell. You tell that EXACT lie, every time you claim that "the majority" of us support this issue. I have repeatedly set you straight, but you refuse to acknowledge it.
that happens to be a fact that you are just ignorant of

You have not set me straight once, you have just explained that you are totally ignorant of the fact

we can argue opinions all day long, but I am not going to argue facts with you, you either know them or are ignorant of them
Anonymous

Vallejo, CA

#195763 Jun 13, 2013
Southern Baptists officially oppose gay Scout rule
http://www.dailyrepublic.com/usworld/southern...

“What Goes Around, Comes Around”

Since: Mar 07

Kansas City, MO.

#195764 Jun 13, 2013
Anonymous wrote:
Southern Baptists officially oppose gay Scout rule
http://www.dailyrepublic.com/usworld/southern...
That is the first time you posted anything positive! There is a thread with that over there in the right hand column------>. Southern Baptist---go figure.
Obit Offbeat

Alamo, CA

#195765 Jun 13, 2013
Obama Boo Boo is spying on gay peps.
Big D

Modesto, CA

#195766 Jun 13, 2013
Anonymous wrote:
Southern Baptists officially oppose gay Scout rule
http://www.dailyrepublic.com/usworld/southern...
Cool because a growing number of Americans oppose Southern Baptists

lides

“No Headline available”

Since: Jan 08

Defiance, Ohio

#195767 Jun 13, 2013
Pietro Armando wrote:
There is no "couple's right", it is legal fiction. Thanks for trying though.
I never said there was. I said that the legal protections of marriage are between two people. Ergo, same sex COUPLES, being two people, seeking to marry are seeking equal protection of the law; while poly-amorous GROUPS, being three or more, seek inherently greater protection.
Pietro Armando wrote:
It appears you have difficulty distinguishing between men and women, the function of the sexes as it relates to marriage, and why that relationship as a union of male and female is privileged by society.
Let me help you. Legally, there is no state interest in limiting marriage to opposite sex couples. The only possible argument that one could be hinting at in implying that there is such an interest is procreation, and it has already been demonstrated that there is no state interest in procreation relative to the legal protections of marriage. infertile heterosexual couples are regularly allowed to marry. Only a fool would think it is rational to imply that there is a state interest in procreation relative to the legal protections of marriage, applicable only to same sex couples, and solely to exclude them from equal protection of the law.

It seems you still have no valid argument.

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
Is San Jacinto Dangerous? (Jun '10) Sun Meg H 35
Whats the deal on the mushroom house in homeland? (Jan '10) Sun Liz G 20
hookers in Hemet (Sep '11) Sun Liz G 134
The under ground tunnel , Florida ave. downtown... (Oct '11) May 21 Leesa 93
hans christensen middle school. (Mar '10) May 21 Ladymorgana 32
Rancho LA Vita HOA: Unfair!! (Jun '14) May 21 ceci 3
Hemet Mystery Hunt May 19 Madbro 3

Hemet Jobs

More from around the web

Personal Finance

Hemet Mortgages