Judge overturns California's ban on same-sex marriage

Aug 4, 2010 Full story: www.cnn.com 201,321

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
Over the Sholder

Monrovia, CA

#204464 Jul 24, 2013
July 2013 the latest cup report is the average bra size rises to 34DD.
Big D

Modesto, CA

#204465 Jul 24, 2013
Frankie Rizzo wrote:
<quoted text>
I second that. We both know and understand no such thing. Procreation is closely associated with marriage. It is one of the main reasons the government supports marriage and gives benefits to marriage.
did you forget what you said in the last 30 min? Just how bad is your Alzheimerís? I will respond to it again

Our government does not require any couple to have the ability or intent to have children in order to marry, and never has.
Frankie Rizzo

Union City, CA

#204466 Jul 24, 2013
Big D wrote:
<quoted text>
did you forget what you said in the last 30 min? Just how bad is your Alzheimerís? I will respond to it again
Our government does not require any couple to have the ability or intent to have children in order to marry, and never has.
No one here has stated that procreation is a requirement for marriage.
Stand Tall

Monrovia, CA

#204467 Jul 24, 2013
Big D

Modesto, CA

#204471 Jul 24, 2013
Jayzbird58 Buster wrote:
<quoted text>Of course, you alone got it right. Wrong.
There are restrictions on marriage, period. That includes age, polygamy, incest and same sex.
You would be lying. Same sex marriage is NOT recognized on the federal level. The federal government does not recognize civil or same sex unions, THEY HONOR THE DESIGNATIONS BY THE LONE STATES WHO DO SO. If you get married in Buttlick, Mass your union is not recognized in sinful Nevada.
Dang skippy, Nevada allows prostitution in some counties, but even they see homosexuality as worse than prostitution. You know, since prostitution is what caused gay men and lesbians to choose homosexuality. Oldest trade on the planet. A gay has to make a living, I guess.
You are behind the times, section 3 of DOMA has been stuck down, the federal government recognizes all same sex marriages preformed in the states that recognize them. the only same sex couples who are legally married did so in states that recognize them, hence every legal same sex marriage is recognized by the federal government.

Catch up on the news of the last couple of months and come back
Big D

Modesto, CA

#204472 Jul 24, 2013
Frankie Rizzo wrote:
<quoted text>
No one here has stated that procreation is a requirement for marriage.
You just implied that was the case, I am happy to correct you.

Procreation has no place in a discussion about the legal right to marry
commonpeeps

Covina, CA

#204473 Jul 24, 2013
Over the Sholder wrote:
July 2013 the latest cup report is the average bra size rises to 34DD.
And that's for the guys. Man boobs or trannie surgery.
commonpeeps

Covina, CA

#204474 Jul 24, 2013
Jayzbird58 Buster wrote:
<quoted text>.....
Dang skippy, Nevada allows prostitution in some counties, but even they see homosexuality as worse than prostitution. You know, since prostitution is what caused gay men and lesbians to choose homosexuality. Oldest trade on the planet. A gay has to make a living, I guess.
Hmmm, got a point about some people changing their sexual preferences over money. Sounds reasonable to me, money, sexual gratification, moral decay, sex drugs ,disease,die.
Frankie Rizzo

Union City, CA

#204475 Jul 24, 2013
Big D wrote:
<quoted text>
You just implied that was the case, I am happy to correct you.
Procreation has no place in a discussion about the legal right to marry
Big D whimpered, after trying and failing to spin it that someone stated procreation is a requirement for marriage.
No Shows

Monrovia, CA

#204476 Jul 24, 2013
What do scum like the GOP, RNC, Tea Party REPUBLICANS ALL HAVE IN COMMON? There do nothings, the whole bunch of them!

Obama says D.C. has taken its eye off the ball, blaming GOP for gridlock in government.

They are Oh so good at dragging their 5 year old mentality feet, too. There a bunch of NO SHOWS.
Frankie Rizzo

Union City, CA

#204477 Jul 24, 2013
commonpeeps wrote:
<quoted text>And that's for the guys. Man boobs or trannie surgery.
I bet Poof has big floppy baloney-tits.

Since: Dec 09

Knoxville, TN

#204478 Jul 24, 2013
KiMare wrote:
<quoted text>
Why would I waste the time with a deliberate and continual liar?
You can't even be honest about accusing me of troll behavior because I exposed a gay troll.
You live a lie, and you demand others join your deceit.
Oh, I imagine a pastor would jump at the chance to meet with a "reprobate". Isn't that what you do? Aren't you supposed to be out saving souls and whatnot?

My guess, again, is that you won't face someone who is real. You'll only deal with this issue (as you do with most things) in the abstract.

You're not interested in reality.

I'll pay your gas to and from Knoxville (if you're still in Greeneville) to come to a gay men's discussion group, where you can address all of us in one room. We'd only be too happy to meet with you and hear your side.

Are you up for it?
Frankie Rizzo

Union City, CA

#204479 Jul 24, 2013
No Shows wrote:
What do scum like the GOP, RNC, Tea Party REPUBLICANS ALL HAVE IN COMMON?*There do nothings, the whole bunch of them!
Obama says D.C. has taken its eye off the ball, blaming GOP for gridlock in government.
They are Oh so good at dragging their 5 year old mentality feet, too.*There a bunch of NO SHOWS.
*They're
Big D

Modesto, CA

#204480 Jul 24, 2013
Frankie Rizzo wrote:
<quoted text>
Big D whimpered, after trying and failing to spin it that someone stated procreation is a requirement for marriage.
Donít worry, as long as no one mentions procreation as any even a distantly related reason to not allow same sex couples to marry.

I wonít bring it up again

However if anyone mentions the ability to have children in any way at all as an argument to not allow same sex couples to marry, as you did, I will be happy to correct them
commonpeeps

Covina, CA

#204481 Jul 24, 2013
No Shows wrote:
What do scum like the GOP, RNC, Tea Party REPUBLICANS ALL HAVE IN COMMON? There do nothings, the whole bunch of them!
Obama says D.C. has taken its eye off the ball, blaming GOP for gridlock in government.
They are Oh so good at dragging their 5 year old mentality feet, too. There a bunch of NO SHOWS.
There, there, there probably all as el stupido as there are there. It's they're dim whit dropout welfare bagger. Obviously a lib eubonics 6th grader.
Frankie Rizzo

Union City, CA

#204482 Jul 24, 2013
Big D wrote:
<quoted text>
Donít worry, as long as no one mentions procreation as any even a distantly related reason to not allow same sex couples to marry.
I wonít bring it up again
However if anyone mentions the ability to have children in any way at all as an argument to not allow same sex couples to marry, as you did, I will be happy to correct them
I did not use children as an argument against marriage equality. You lie.
Big D

Modesto, CA

#204483 Jul 24, 2013
Frankie Rizzo wrote:
<quoted text>
I second that. We both know and understand no such thing. Procreation is closely associated with marriage. It is one of the main reasons the government supports marriage and gives benefits to marriage.
.
Here you go, as you have obviously forgotten again

Procreation has not now nor ever been a basis for allowing marriage in this country.

Take your Alzheimer meds
Pietro Armando

Somerville, MA

#204484 Jul 24, 2013
Jonah1 wrote:
<quoted text>
You mean like when marriage defined the wife as property of the husband?
No, just husband and wife
Like that "distinct" relationship?! I love when fundies try and rewrite history in order to justify their agendas!!!
Or when the Glibtees try and rewrite history in order to justify their agendas!!!
Courts dont' recognize your manufactured and ridiculous "essence of marriage". Courts are only interested in the law. And the courts find no compelling reason to continue to discriminate against gay people. Sucks for you.
Gay people can marry, enter into a legally recognized union of husband and wife, valid in all fifty states, just like anyone else.
You've pointed out ONE distinction. That gay people won't be capable of producing a child without outside assistance. That distinction is completely irrelevant to the states, since marriage has no procreation requirement.
The fact that you are completely unable to grasp this reality isn't our problem, it's yours child.
Why would there need to be a "procreation requirement"? Is there a sex requirement? The law presumes a married couple will engage in "marital relations", aka sexual intercourse. Which of course leads to conception.
There is absolutely nothing in your nonsense that terrifies us. You are completely insignificant. Your refusal to acknowledge our marriages means diddly squat, because you are nothing more than a pimple on the face of humanity.
And you are a clown on that pimple.
10 years ago there were no states that would recognize our marriages. Today there are 13 states, the Disctrict of Columbia, and 17 foreign countries that recognize our marriages as the same as yours.
That's not quite accurate. Even the UK had to acknowledge the differences regarding consummation and SSM.
And those numbers will continue to grow, very quickly. The state bans will very soon be overturned as unconstitutional (watch Pennsylvania very close in the coming months sweetiepie!!!). The only one terrified....is you!!!!
Only time will tell.
The states, and the federal government will NEVER recognize your made up essences, your imaginary link to humanities existence and future, or your mutual sterility!!!! Ha ha ha ha haha ha!!!! Stupid KiMare!!!
Your ignorance continues.
Big D

Modesto, CA

#204485 Jul 24, 2013
Pietro Armando wrote:
<quoted text>
Why would there need to be a "procreation requirement"? Is there a sex requirement? The law presumes a married couple will engage in "marital relations", aka sexual intercourse. Which of course leads to conception..
In this day and age that is of course a choice. I do agree however that there should be no procreation requirement, as there are millions of happily married couples that either do not have the ability, or the desire to have children. And we count no less of their marriages than anyone elseís.
Frankie Rizzo

Union City, CA

#204486 Jul 24, 2013
Big D wrote:
<quoted text>
Here you go, as you have obviously forgotten again
Procreation has not now nor ever been a basis for allowing marriage in this country.
Take your Alzheimer meds
No one said procreation is a requirement for marriage. You insist someone did. Prove 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
Hemet Totem Pole 3 hr looking 1
Our Opinion: Why California's economy stays stu... 9 hr Merkel 1
morning sky school in mountain center ca (Mar '13) 19 hr ATTENTION 37
Hemet - The worst city to live in california 19 hr tellinitlikeitis 22
looking 19 hr tellinitlikeitis 5
Cornman (Nov '11) 19 hr tellinitlikeitis 25
dangerous sex offender 27348 Meridian st Hemet 19 hr tellinitlikeitis 3

Hemet News Video

Hemet Dating
Find my Match
More from around the web

Hemet People Search

Addresses and phone numbers for FREE

Personal Finance

Mortgages [ See current mortgage rates ]

NFL Latest News

Updated 10:24 pm PST