Judge overturns California's ban on same-sex marriage

Aug 4, 2010 Full story: www.cnn.com 201,038

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
Bowser

Long Beach, CA

#199648 Jul 2, 2013
KiMare wrote:
<quoted text>
Play dumb?
Oh, you are not playing.
Coward.
You have truly lost your mind. Get some help.
Bowser

Long Beach, CA

#199650 Jul 2, 2013
KiMare wrote:
<quoted text>
If you had any measure of character, you'd post your name like you did mine.
What are you afraid of?
You are delusional. Do you even realize you are confused about who you are directing comments to? There's this little thingy at the top of each post that states who posted it. Try reading.
fifty yard line

Pulaski, TN

#199652 Jul 2, 2013
ToManyLaws wrote:
<quoted text>
Wow more insanity....type in English next time.
What didn't you understand?
Bowser

Long Beach, CA

#199653 Jul 2, 2013
Frankie Rizzo wrote:
<quoted text>
I second that. Bowser is a coward.
...says the keyboard warrior, hiding behind his computer. You are ridiculous. I'm shutting you off now. Click.

“Vita e' Bella.”

Since: May 12

Location hidden

#199654 Jul 2, 2013
veryvermilion wrote:
<quoted text>
He could only be a "male lesbian" if he has his penis and testicles removed to become a woman, genitally, while remaining a genetic male.
He hasn't done that. So, he's half-lesbian.
Nooooooo....think about it Big Red. What do u call a man, who is sexually attracted to women, and feels like a woman trapped in a man's body? A male lesbian! Makes sense. More language changes for the movement.

“Waytogo”

Since: Oct 09

Location hidden

#199655 Jul 2, 2013
fifty yard line wrote:
<quoted text>
What didn't you understand?
His whole rant,,It was gibberish...

“Vita e' Bella.”

Since: May 12

Location hidden

#199656 Jul 2, 2013
Zoro wrote:
<quoted text>Look moron. The Religious right, could not stop the legalization of same sex marriage based on religious principles. They also will fail when it comes to the legalization of polygamy based on religious principles. Why cant you get it through your rock hard head, we as a secular nation do not make or change laws based on religious principles.
I don't care one way or another if a person wishes 3 wives or 4 husbands. The problem is that long ago, laws where passed on the subject of polygamy. The courts, or Legislative body can not and will not change them to suit the religious faithful. Not gonna happen.
At one time, and it still is for many, the concept of a "same sex" marriage was inconceivable. So don't b so quick to rule out polygamy.

Since: Nov 12

Elk Grove, CA

#199657 Jul 2, 2013
Pietro Armando wrote:
<quoted text>
Nooooooo....think about it Big Red. What do u call a man, who is sexually attracted to women, and feels like a woman trapped in a man's body? A male lesbian! Makes sense. More language changes for the movement.
exactly, says Chas Bono.
Bowser

Long Beach, CA

#199658 Jul 2, 2013
Pietro Armando wrote:
<quoted text>
Nooooooo....think about it Big Red. What do u call a man, who is sexually attracted to women, and feels like a woman trapped in a man's body? A male lesbian! Makes sense. More language changes for the movement.
Is there a reason every possibility needs a label? Sometimes it's better to just let things be as they are without assigning a label. Peace.

“Crusading Fundies r hilarious!”

Since: Feb 11

Location hidden

#199660 Jul 2, 2013
Frankie Rizzo wrote:
<quoted text>
Is this very post not really an argument against polygamy?
No, it isn't. You really should take a class in comprehension. You currently suck at it.
Frankie Rizzo wrote:
<quoted text>
Your anger about it's mere mention speaks volumes.
Where did I exhibit anger at it being mentioned. Specific post please.

Waiting....

Waiting....

Waiting....
Frankie Rizzo wrote:
<quoted text>
Your attempts to censor it speaks volumes.
In what post did I (or anyone for that matter) state that you can't keep repetitiously throwing multiple marriages into a forum that has nothing to do with them? Specific post number please. Demonstrate this "censorship" that you have experienced.

Waiting....

Waiting....

Waiting....

Lying sack of shyt.
Frankie Rizzo wrote:
<quoted text>
Sure, sure, we know. You're not angry and you don't attempt to censor me.
Yes, everyone other than you does know that. Your sheer inability to demonstrate these persecutions through specific posts speaks volumes.

You're climbing right up there on the stupidity ladder with Pietro.
Frankie Rizzo

Union City, CA

#199661 Jul 2, 2013
Zoro wrote:
<quoted text>Look moron. The Religious right, could not stop the legalization of same sex marriage based on religious principles. They also will fail when it comes to the legalization of polygamy based on religious principles. Why cant you get it through your rock hard head, we as a secular nation do not make or change laws based on religious principles.
I don't care one way or another if a person wishes 3 wives or 4 husbands. The problem is that long ago, laws where passed on the subject of polygamy. The courts, or Legislative body can not and will not change them to suit the religious faithful. Not gonna happen.
You said it yourself. We don't make laws based on religion. But that is exactly your argument against polygamy. It shouldn't be allowed because some of the people who practice it do it for religious reasons.

The anti-religious left shouldn't be allowed to deny equality for polygamists based on the religion of some polygamists.
Frankie Rizzo

Union City, CA

#199662 Jul 2, 2013
Jonah1 wrote:
<quoted text>
No, it isn't. You really should take a class in comprehension. You currently suck at it.
<quoted text>
Where did I exhibit anger at it being mentioned. Specific post please.
Waiting....
Waiting....
Waiting....
<quoted text>
In what post did I (or anyone for that matter) state that you can't keep repetitiously throwing multiple marriages into a forum that has nothing to do with them? Specific post number please. Demonstrate this "censorship" that you have experienced.
Waiting....
Waiting....
Waiting....
Lying sack of shyt.
<quoted text>
Yes, everyone other than you does know that. Your sheer inability to demonstrate these persecutions through specific posts speaks volumes.
You're climbing right up there on the stupidity ladder with Pietro.
You exhibit anger in every posts including this one. That's where you have exhibited anger.

Your anger speaks volumes hypocrite.
Frankie Rizzo

Union City, CA

#199663 Jul 2, 2013
Jonah1 wrote:
<quoted text>
No, it isn't. You really should take a class in comprehension. You currently suck at it.
<quoted text>
Where did I exhibit anger at it being mentioned. Specific post please.
Waiting....
Waiting....
Waiting....
<quoted text>
In what post did I (or anyone for that matter) state that you can't keep repetitiously throwing multiple marriages into a forum that has nothing to do with them? Specific post number please. Demonstrate this "censorship" that you have experienced.
Waiting....
Waiting....
Waiting....
Lying sack of shyt.
<quoted text>
Yes, everyone other than you does know that. Your sheer inability to demonstrate these persecutions through specific posts speaks volumes.
You're climbing right up there on the stupidity ladder with Pietro.
This silly jackass says he's not angry. Too funny! That's why I love you clowns.
fifty yard line

Pulaski, TN

#199664 Jul 2, 2013
ToManyLaws wrote:
<quoted text>
His whole rant,,It was gibberish...
Made total sense to me.

“Waytogo”

Since: Oct 09

Location hidden

#199665 Jul 2, 2013
fifty yard line wrote:
<quoted text>
Made total sense to me.
Then your as insane as he is.
Frankie Rizzo

Union City, CA

#199666 Jul 2, 2013
Bowser wrote:
<quoted text>
...says the keyboard warrior, hiding behind his computer. You are ridiculous. I'm shutting you off now. Click.
Too funny! You'll be back fruitcake.
Frankie Rizzo

Union City, CA

#199667 Jul 2, 2013
Bowser wrote:
<quoted text>
You are delusional. Do you even realize you are confused about who you are directing comments to? There's this little thingy at the top of each post that states who posted it. Try reading.
With coward trolls like you who changes his nic and impersonates other posters, who are we to believe is posting?

You want respect, earn it.
Frankie Rizzo

Union City, CA

#199668 Jul 2, 2013
Bowser wrote:
<quoted text>
You are really bad at sensing whether someone is angry...I'm not. And you still squawk like a parrot troll daily.
I have never made any argument against polygamy and don't have one. You must have forgotten that. I stated previously that, although it would not work for me, I don't care one way or the other about polygamy. As long as everyone is a consenting adult and people aren't doing things that harm me or others I don't care what they do.
No one cares what you do or don't care about, least of all me. But you get mad at me for supporting polygamy, it sure seems like you care. Or else why so mad?
Frankie Rizzo

Union City, CA

#199669 Jul 2, 2013
Zoro wrote:
<quoted text>So you think like Frankie. So you wan't to allow plygamy, because of religious principles.
So what will stop this, if we allow Polygamy based on religion???
“There is no minimal age for entering marriage. You can have a marriage contract even with a 1-year-old girl, not to mention a girl of 9, 7, or 8. This is merely a contract [indicating] consent. The guardian in such a case must be the father, because the father’s opinion is obligatory. Thus, the girl becomes a wife,” he said.
“But is the girl ready for sex or not? What is the appropriate age for having sex for the first time? This varies according to environment and traditions. In Yemen, girls are married off at 9, 10, 11, 8, or 13, while in other countries, they are married off at 16. Some countries have legislated laws forbidding having sex before the girl is 18,” he said
Read more at http://www.wnd.com/2008/06/68074/#hLadijrGUkT...
No one is advocating child abuse or child marriage. There are perfectly good laws against all the abuses you ignorantly fear are connected with polygamy. We don't prosecute same sex people's marriages when they commit crimes why do it to polygamists?

Prosecute the crime. Not the marriage. Some people in all kinds of marriages are bad.

Marriage. There is no one right way.

“Crusading Fundies r hilarious!”

Since: Feb 11

Location hidden

#199670 Jul 2, 2013
Frankie Rizzo wrote:
<quoted text>
You exhibit anger in every posts including this one. That's where you have exhibited anger.
Your anger speaks volumes hypocrite.
Your inability to address the accusations with specific posts speaks volumes more. Sorry, I have no need to post to outright liars. Carry on with your poly schtick, you seem to think its working.

Take care dolt.

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 California seeks to ban free, single-use carryo... (Jun '10) 5 min Concerned 5,085
CA CA Proposition 23 - Global Warming (Oct '10) 5 hr Me O My O 7,969
Riverside County:Tap Water Taste and Smell Unpl... 7 hr james marple 53
Do you approve of Jeff Stone as Supervisor? (Oct '11) 16 hr EastEndResident 10
Do you approve of Robert Youssef as Council Mem... 16 hr EastEndResident 2
CA California Proposition 19: the Marijuana Legali... (Oct '10) Wed do it here 16,011
Why Is There So Much Racial Tension In Hemet? (Oct '08) Tue sax 193

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 ]