Judge overturns California's ban on same-sex marriage

Aug 4, 2010 Full story: www.cnn.com 200,980

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
A lass

Monrovia, CA

#196791 Jun 19, 2013
Another episode has been aired on Vintage TV channels.
Big D

Modesto, CA

#196792 Jun 19, 2013
KiMare wrote:
<quoted text>
That ss couples are a defective failure of mating behavior is no opinion.
You may want to dumb down marriage to a 'committed relationship of two people', but other than establishing an immediate discriminatory relationship, it will still not equate to marriage. Reality won't let it.
That legal marriage is a behavior in animals in moronic

That homosexuality is not a normal behavior in the animal kingdom is also provably incorrect

The only question here is one of legality do we single out a group of people and deny them equal rights. In a land where we make no prejudicial laws based on Race Creed, Color, Sex, Religion, Orientation or National origin

The answer is clear, and now a clear majority of Americans see that.

“Vita e' Bella.”

Since: May 12

Location hidden

#196794 Jun 19, 2013
Big D wrote:
<quoted text>
That legal marriage is a behavior in animals in moronic
That homosexuality is not a normal behavior in the animal kingdom is also provably incorrect
The only question here is one of legality do we single out a group of people and deny them equal rights. In a land where we make no prejudicial laws based on Race Creed, Color, Sex, Religion, Orientation or National origin
The answer is clear, and now a clear majority of Americans see that.
Exactly all men are created equal, and all men have the right to marry, enter into a legally recognized relationship of husband and wife. All women have the same right as well. See, equal treatment. Yaaaaay, equality and justice for all.
Zoro

Cambridge, IL

#196795 Jun 19, 2013
Pietro Armando wrote:
<quoted text>
Are u unfamiliar with various state propositions that are put on the ballots at election time, like prop 22, and prop 8?
Yep, hey they where unconstitutional. No really, we don't vote on many laws. Thats what we have congress for.
Zoro

Cambridge, IL

#196796 Jun 19, 2013
Frankie Rizzo wrote:
<quoted text>
Yes he is. Jizzy is a moron from Illinois butting his cheap idiotic 2 cents into California's business.
Hey you're from Broooklim. What a greeeze ball.
Sinker

Monrovia, CA

#196797 Jun 19, 2013
We just call it, sinker = zoro.
Dan Rather

Monrovia, CA

#196801 Jun 19, 2013
I'd like to mention Chuck Conner's name too.

“Vita e' Bella.”

Since: May 12

Location hidden

#196816 Jun 19, 2013
Zoro wrote:
<quoted text>Hey you're from Broooklim. What a greeeze ball.
Zoro the Zero

Since: Nov 12

Elk Grove, CA

#196818 Jun 19, 2013
Frankie Rizzo wrote:
R.I.P. James Gandolfini Dead at 51. Great actor.
way too young, maybe if he used some of Andy's pot it would have saved him.

“Vita e' Bella.”

Since: May 12

Location hidden

#196821 Jun 19, 2013
Zoro wrote:
<quoted text>Yep, hey they where unconstitutional. No really, we don't vote on many laws. Thats what we have congress for.
There's a difference between not voting on any laws and voting on some. The people do vote. Now only if it counted, not once but twice.

“Vita e' Bella.”

Since: May 12

Location hidden

#196828 Jun 19, 2013
Rock Hudson wrote:
<quoted text>
Just....wipe your fingers on the drapes.
But now the drapes are on fire.:)

“Vita e' Bella.”

Since: May 12

Location hidden

#196829 Jun 19, 2013
veryvermilion wrote:
<quoted text>
We've been marching on a path towards equality and freedom since the American Revolution.
Freedom and equality is like the mythical monster, Hydra. Each time you cut off one head, two more grow back in its place.
Each time we feel that we've established freedom and equality for a particular group in this country, we see another group (or groups) of people who do not have access to certain rights that others take for granted.
You say that the benefits of marriage were not intended for gays. I say they were. They've been intended for gays since the foundation of this country.
However, it has taken over two-centuries for society to recognize this oversight. That's why you're seeing states pass laws to level the playing field for gays. That's why we're fighting in the courts to level the playing field. That's why we're educating the public about why the we need to level the playing field.
It will be level eventually. As you look around our country and at other countries, you can clearly see that the handwriting is on the wall. Equality WILL happen.
It hasn't been an easy process. Major change in ideology is never easy. There will be growing pains.
But that does not deter us from fighting for our rights.
Where do u get this stuff from. You've been watching reruns of "Super Big D: The Animated Series" again haven't you?

“Vita e' Bella.”

Since: May 12

Location hidden

#196830 Jun 19, 2013
veryvermilion wrote:
<quoted text>
We've been marching on a path towards equality and freedom since the American Revolution.
Freedom and equality is like the mythical monster, Hydra. Each time you cut off one head, two more grow back in its place.
Equality doesn't mean everything is the same.
Each time we feel that we've established freedom and equality for a particular group in this country, we see another group (or groups) of people who do not have access to certain rights that others take for granted.
Even though that group ALREADY HAS the same right.
You say that the benefits of marriage were not intended for gays. I say they were. They've been intended for gays since the foundation of this country
The benefits of marriage, the union of husband and wife, benefits the husband and wife, and society as a whole. "Gays", as a political sexual identity, did not exist, at the time the republic was founded.
However, it has taken over two-centuries for society to recognize this oversight. That's why you're seeing states pass laws to level the playing field for gays. That's why we're fighting in the courts to level the playing field. That's why we're educating the public about why the we need to level the playing field.
Yet, "gays" despite all the hoopla, aren't really that keen on marriage. Not only is the percentage of SSCs that can marry, actually do, low, more female couples marry than male, female couples tend to be more monogamous than male, and lesbian couples appear to have a higher divorce rate, than gay male couples, and the general population.
It will be level eventually. As you look around our country and at other countries, you can clearly see that the handwriting is on the wall. Equality WILL happen.
Yes, the handwriting is on he wall. Marriage rates are declining.
It hasn't been an easy process. Major change in ideology is never easy. There will be growing pains.
But that does not deter us from fighting for our rights.
Uhhhhhh...huh.....fighting for a "right", or a redefinition of everyone else's right?

Since: Dec 09

Knoxville, TN

#196831 Jun 19, 2013
KiMare wrote:
<quoted text>
Please, take it apart, and show us where you are confused.
At the most basic essence, marriage is a cross cultural constraint on evolutionary mating behavior.
It's your contrived drivel... You take it apart and explain it to us. The part that throws me is "...constraint on evolutionary mating behavior."

What is it about marriage that is a constraint (restriction, prevention, limitation) on mating behavior?

From where I sit, your definition literally means that marriage is a cross-cultural restriction on evolutionary mating behavior.

See, I just don't think you've thought this thing through.

I could be wrong. Maybe you had something else in mind when you made-up your own personal definition of marriage.

Am I the only one who finds this definition puzzling? Can anyone else explain it better?

Since: Dec 09

Knoxville, TN

#196832 Jun 19, 2013
Pietro Armando wrote:
<quoted text>
Equality doesn't mean everything is the same.
<quoted text>
Even though that group ALREADY HAS the same right.
<quoted text>
The benefits of marriage, the union of husband and wife, benefits the husband and wife, and society as a whole. "Gays", as a political sexual identity, did not exist, at the time the republic was founded.
<quoted text>
Yet, "gays" despite all the hoopla, aren't really that keen on marriage. Not only is the percentage of SSCs that can marry, actually do, low, more female couples marry than male, female couples tend to be more monogamous than male, and lesbian couples appear to have a higher divorce rate, than gay male couples, and the general population.
<quoted text>
Yes, the handwriting is on he wall. Marriage rates are declining.
<quoted text>
Uhhhhhh...huh.....fighting for a "right", or a redefinition of everyone else's right?
1.) Equality doesn't mean everything is the same? What the heck does that mean? Of course it means that everything is the same.

2.) Gays do not have the right to marry the consenting, unrelated, adult of their CHOICE--of their own gender. We cannot marry the person who we love--who we want to spend the rest of our lives with. Opposite-gender couples do have that right.

3.) Don't try to mix things up. Heterosexuals weren't a political sexual identity at the foundation of our country either. It's not about being a political group. I am a gay man, not a political issue. And gay people DID exist during the foundation of this country. If we were found to be engaging in homosexual activity, punishments were usually harsh. In fact, most were executed.

4.) Who cares who marries the most, who divorces the most? We SHOULD have the RIGHT to enter into marriage REGARDLESS of how our marriages turn out in the long-run. Heck, if heterosexual marriages were scrutinized based on their divorce rates, I guarantee you that the government would establish some kind of pre-marital evaluation to determine which couples would stay together and which would not. Then they would hand out licenses to those couples who "passed the test".
But that's not how marriage works in this country (or any other country that I am aware). So why hold same-sex couples to a different standard?

5.) So what?

6.) We are fighting for the right to marry. You know damn good and well that heterosexuals would still be able to marry one another. Same-sex marriage would have NO impact on opposite-sex marriage.
It's SO CHILDISH to argue over a word. You don't want to SHARE the word marriage with gays. My God, can you be anymore immature?

Since: Dec 09

Knoxville, TN

#196834 Jun 19, 2013
Here is an apology to the LGBT Community and its supporters from "Exodus International" president, Alan Chambers:

"Recently, I have begun thinking again about how to apologize to the people that have been hurt by Exodus International through an experience or by a message. I have heard many firsthand stories from people called ex-gay survivors. Stories of people who went to Exodus affiliated ministries or ministers for help only to experience more trauma. I have heard stories of shame, sexual misconduct, and false hope. In every case that has been brought to my attention, there has been swift action resulting in the removal of these leaders and/or their organizations. But rarely was there an apology or a public acknowledgement by me.
And then there is the trauma that I have caused. There were several years that I conveniently omitted my ongoing same-sex attractions. I was afraid to share them as readily and easily as I do today. They brought me tremendous shame and I hid them in the hopes they would go away. Looking back, it seems so odd that I thought I could do something to make them stop. Today, however, I accept these feelings as parts of my life that will likely always be there. The days of feeling shame over being human in that way are long over, and I feel free simply accepting myself as my wife and family does. As my friends do. As God does.
Never in a million years would I intentionally hurt another person. Yet, here I sit having hurt so many by failing to acknowledge the pain some affiliated with Exodus International caused, and by failing to share the whole truth about my own story. My good intentions matter very little and fail to diminish the pain and hurt others have experienced on my watch. The good that we have done at Exodus is overshadowed by all of this.
Friends and critics alike have said itís not enough to simply change our message or website. I agree. I cannot simply move on and pretend that I have always been the friend that I long to be today. I understand why I am distrusted and why Exodus is hated.(cont...)

Since: Dec 09

Knoxville, TN

#196835 Jun 19, 2013
Apology cont...

Please know that I am deeply sorry. I am sorry for the pain and hurt many of you have experienced. I am sorry that some of you spent years working through the shame and guilt you felt when your attractions didnít change. I am sorry we promoted sexual orientation change efforts and reparative theories about sexual orientation that stigmatized parents. I am sorry that there were times I didnít stand up to people publicly ďon my sideĒ who called you names like sodomiteóor worse. I am sorry that I, knowing some of you so well, failed to share publicly that the gay and lesbian people I know were every bit as capable of being amazing parents as the straight people that I know. I am sorry that when I celebrated a person coming to Christ and surrendering their sexuality to Him that I callously celebrated the end of relationships that broke your heart. I am sorry that I have communicated that you and your families are less than me and mine.
More than anything, I am sorry that so many have interpreted this religious rejection by Christians as Godís rejection. I am profoundly sorry that many have walked away from their faith and that some have chosen to end their lives. For the rest of my life I will proclaim nothing but the whole truth of the Gospel, one of grace, mercy and open invitation to all to enter into an inseverable relationship with almighty God.
I cannot apologize for my deeply held biblical beliefs about the boundaries I see in scripture surrounding sex, but I will exercise my beliefs with great care and respect for those who do not share them. I cannot apologize for my beliefs about marriage. But I do not have any desire to fight you on your beliefs or the rights that you seek. My beliefs about these things will never again interfere with Godís command to love my neighbor as I love myself.
You have never been my enemy. I am very sorry that I have been yours. I hope the changes in my own life, as well as the ones we announce tonight regarding Exodus International, will bring resolution, and show that I am serious in both my regret and my offer of friendship. I pledge that future endeavors will be focused on peace and common good.

Since: Dec 09

Knoxville, TN

#196837 Jun 19, 2013
laughing man wrote:
<quoted text>
"gay marriage" has a nice ring to the very same flatliners who mock "military intelligence".
Time to change your diaper, crybaby.
Looks like it's time your doctor ups the dosage on your Aricept patch. Your dementia seems to be flaring up.

You do realize, don't you, that your comments put many of us in mind of an angry old coot who wanders out of his house in his bathrobe every so often, shakes his fist at the sky and lets out an unintelligible rant.

Then one of your neighbors sees you outside, runs over and helps you back into the house and tries to get you settled down.

Your episodes are increasing in frequency, little man. Keep it up and you're going to find yourself in a home, where they change your Depends twice a day and serve you Jello for dessert.
laughing man

UK

#196848 Jun 19, 2013
Hey, the polyp buster is up to three sets of negative smilies already!

KEWL!!!!

Judged:

11

11

11

Reply »
Report Abuse Judge it!

“KiMare'a the Monster Mutation”

Since: Nov 10

Location hidden

#196849 Jun 20, 2013
KiMare wrote:
<quoted text>
Please, take it apart, and show us where you are confused.
At the most basic essence, marriage is a cross cultural constraint on evolutionary mating behavior.
veryvermilion wrote:
<quoted text>
It's your contrived drivel... You take it apart and explain it to us. The part that throws me is "...constraint on evolutionary mating behavior."
What is it about marriage that is a constraint (restriction, prevention, limitation) on mating behavior?
From where I sit, your definition literally means that marriage is a cross-cultural restriction on evolutionary mating behavior.
See, I just don't think you've thought this thing through.
I could be wrong. Maybe you had something else in mind when you made-up your own personal definition of marriage.
Am I the only one who finds this definition puzzling? Can anyone else explain it better?
Not sure anyone can help you VV, if that is what you have racked your brain over... Especially considering you are a 'professional' social worker.

Here is a brief but thorough explanation;

http://voices.yahoo.com/
analyzing-human-mating-behavio r-1020545.html

This paragraph on long term mating (marriage) explains the
strategy;

"The nature of human reproduction is such that paternal parental investment is not essential to offspring survival. Consequently, short term mating strategies are more favorable to males; Buss and Schmitt (1993) assert that by inseminating as many females as possible while providing as little parental investment as possible, males increase the odds of forwarding their genes. In contrast, the large amount of parental investment required by females makes long term mating strategies much more favorable for them. By attaining the commitment of their male counterparts, females can capitalize on the consequent non-genetic resources provided by the male (food, protection)."

But in all honesty VV, you understand exactly what I said. You play dumb because you have no counter for it.

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
CA CA Proposition 23 - Global Warming (Oct '10) 25 min Butterflypie 7,958
CA California seeks to ban free, single-use carryo... (Jun '10) 1 hr Flaggstaff 5,083
Review: Hemet Eye Care Center Of Optometry (Oct '13) 16 hr hi5432j 2
Re-Elect Tom Fuhrman Menifee City Council 18 hr Jeremy Cronin 23
CA Jury reaches verdict in Oakland BART shooting t... (Jul '10) Sun theos 2,276
david steidell (Aug '07) Sep 19 huhwhathaha 13
CA California Proposition 19: the Marijuana Legali... (Oct '10) Sep 18 Pizza 16,000
•••

Hemet News Video

•••
Hemet Dating

more search filters

less search filters

•••

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 ]
•••