Judge overturns California's ban on same-sex marriage

[Pietro Armando]

Rose_NoHo wrote:

<quoted text>
Randy-Rock-Hudson has 98.6 of them.:)

Rosie made a funny. Atta girl!

[Pietro Armando]

Xavier Breath wrote:

<quoted text>
I'm sure that somehow made sense to you, but not me. Did MSNBC make incorrect predictions about the election like FUX News did?
FYI.... I don't watch either one. I read.

As do I Xbox....as do I.

[Frankie Rizzo]

Pietro Armando wrote:

<quoted text>
Red herring is delicious with pasta.

It goes good with crow too. As Rose_NoHo and others will one day find.

[akpilot]

Dan wrote:

<quoted text>
You need to get a life as well loser.
Who but some loser punk like you would spit venom at a group of people like gays whom have nothing to do with you nor cause harm and are looking for a basic right to live their lives freely yet you just don't like it.
I'll bet my penny collection there's at least 12,904 things people don't like about you yet even I would protect your ability to live free in a free country.
You're a putz. Mind your own God damned business and leave gays alone idiot. Have a good week -

All that effort to throw a tantrum and show the world how juvenile you are, and yet in all the nonsense not even a semblance of a response.
----------
BTW, since you agree Article V isn't made up, perhaps now you could read it. Then we could discuss how it was violated during the drafting of the 14th Amendment.
If we ever get you educated that far, which is highly doubtful, we can then discuss the use of martial law during the ratification when the vote didn't go the way they liked the first time.

[akpilot]

Xavier Breath wrote:

<quoted text>
I don't understand? What does discussing Article V have to do with Prop 8? You want to rehash the ratification of the 14th Amendment, go right ahead. The rest of us realize that's all been settled DECADES ago.

We didn't expect you to understand, critical thinking is a difficult thing for you.

But you keep your head in the sand.

BTW, since you agree Article V isn't made up, perhaps now you could read it. Then we could discuss how it was violated during the drafting of the 14th Amendment.
If we ever get you educated that far, which is highly doubtful, we can then discuss the use of martial law during the ratification when the vote didn't go the way they liked the first time.

[akpilot]

Rose_NoHo wrote:

<quoted text>
Don't give a damn what they had in mind,

We know you don't, that's why you are so damn ignorant.

[BrassO]

The flag horns are coming

[Pietro Armando]

BrassO wrote:

The flag horns are coming

QUICK.... Hide the silverware!

[BrassO]

Not another all brass band marching through again?

[Brandon Rhoades]

WHY VOTE wrote:

Ok, I don't really care if same sex people get married or are together in any capacity. I am for equal rights BUT.......... I am very annoyed that peoples votes don't mean anything anymore. What happened to a majority vote rules? What happened to the peoples voice?
My stance on this has nothing to do with same sex couples. This is just the latest thing a court has overturned or blocked that THE PEOPLE voted for. Look at AZ., look back at prop. 187 which would have saved is billions in illegal immigrant funding. The people of the USA are trying to make changes to better our country and the few judges are effectively disenfranchising us.
Again this is not directed at same sex couples it is major frustration over the majority loosing there voice.
WHY VOTE????

This is not a republic, it is a democracy. Your vote is just a suggestion for the appointed official. How and when this changed from our founding fathers, I am not sure and do not really care as it is futile.

[akpilot]

Brandon Rhoades wrote:

<quoted text>
This is not a republic, it is a democracy.

Umm, what?

[sheesh void of hate]

akpilot wrote:

<quoted text>
Umm, what?

I think he reversed them. Still incorrect though. As was the poster he was quoting.

[Frankie Rizzo]

Rose_NoHo wrote:

"Frankie Rizzo" is just a troll who is flying under false colors. He's actually against gay marriage, and attacks anybody in the forum in favor of it, using the red herring of polygamy. Bet he has never posted in a forum about polygamy...

Says a dumbass troll who is too scared to respond to me directly.

Priceless!

[Pietro Armando]

Frankie Rizzo wrote:

<quoted text>
Says a dumbass troll who is too scared to respond to me directly.
Priceless!

No, trollette.....she's a trollette.

[Big D]

Brandon Rhoades wrote:

<quoted text>
This is not a republic, it is a democracy. Your vote is just a suggestion for the appointed official. How and when this changed from our founding fathers, I am not sure and do not really care as it is futile.

Actually we are a democratic republic, look up the phrase democratic republic in the dictionary and look at the first example given.

The whole popular argument that we are either a democracy or a republic are both wrong, we are both, always have been.

[Xavier Breath]

akpilot wrote:

<quoted text>
We didn't expect you to understand, critical thinking is a difficult thing for you.
But you keep your head in the sand.
BTW, since you agree Article V isn't made up, perhaps now you could read it. Then we could discuss how it was violated during the drafting of the 14th Amendment.
If we ever get you educated that far, which is highly doubtful, we can then discuss the use of martial law during the ratification when the vote didn't go the way they liked the first time.

We've had this discussion before. It's over with, dickweed. The 14th Amendment is not going away, and you can squawk about Article V all you like.

[Pietro Armando]

Big D wrote:

<quoted text>
Actually we are a democratic republic, look up the phrase democratic republic in the dictionary and look at the first example given.
The whole popular argument that we are either a democracy or a republic are both wrong, we are both, always have been.

Agreed...good point.

[BrassO]

So why do you think they did it that way?

Was there a plan behind all this?

[Big D]

Pietro Armando wrote:

<quoted text>
Agreed...good point.

Thanks

That whole argument always bothered me,“we are a democracy, no we are a republic!”

We are a democratic republic, we are practically the definition of a democratic republic.

And we would not be a nation I would want to live in if we were only one or the other, as either of them alone is terrible in one way or another.

We are not perfect, far from it, but as a representative democracy and a republic, it is tolerable.

[Pietro Armando]

Big D wrote:

<quoted text>
Thanks
That whole argument always bothered me,“we are a democracy, no we are a republic!”
We are a democratic republic, we are practically the definition of a democratic republic.
And we would not be a nation I would want to live in if we were only one or the other, as either of them alone is terrible in one way or another.
We are not perfect, far from it, but as a representative democracy and a republic, it is tolerable.

It also allows us to debate the issues of the day, as we do here. Whether agree, disagree, or agree to disagree, we're fortunate to be able to do so. Now back to the show.