Judge overturns California's ban on s...

Judge overturns California's ban on same-sex marriage

There are 201844 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.

Frankie Rizzo

Union City, CA

#177840 Jan 31, 2013
Jane Dodo wrote:
<quoted text>Equal protection, yes.... unless the State can show a legitimate interest in denying it. Do you think simple arithmetic might come into play when talking about equal? How is 3 equal to 2? How is 5 equal to two? How is 3 equal to 5?
The arithmetic argument against poly marriage again!(Heard it, remember dummy?).

Priceless!
Jane Dodo

Hoboken, NJ

#177841 Jan 31, 2013
Frankie Rizzo wrote:
<quoted text>
There you go again! Start a reading comprehension thread and get a better straw man. I don't think you'll convince many people that I have poor reading skills.
I don't need to convince anybody. It's evident from your posts that you don't understand what you read.
Big D

Modesto, CA

#177842 Jan 31, 2013
Frankie Rizzo wrote:
<quoted text>
Most homophobes have a "huge problem" with the adherents of same sex marriage.
Your "huge problem" with the adherents of polygamy is no better.
You and Janey-Doody really ought to start that reading thread!
What a dope!
Lean to read English.... is English you native language? Maybe I can have what I am saying translated into whatever language is used where you come from.

I donít have a huge problem with poly marriage. I have a problem with other crimes that are nearly always associated with it. And will not tolerate many of the current adherents of it and their cruel molestation and mistreatment of their young, or the fraud they use to gain multiple government assistance checks at our expense.
Frankie Rizzo

Union City, CA

#177843 Jan 31, 2013
Jane Dodo wrote:
<quoted text>
This thread is: Judge overturns California's ban on same-sex marriage
Ok?
The judge did not overturn the ban on polygamy.
He didn't? Oh, nevermind! YUK!YUK!YUK!

Remember Gilda Radner as Emily Litella? You're a real old auntie you've probably seen her.

But seriously, don't you agree that the judge's decision is not bad for the future of legalized polygamy?

Stop with the straw man and ad hominem. Why are you so intent on hijacking this thread for you narrow purposes of cheerleading one form of marriage over another?
Frankie Rizzo

Union City, CA

#177844 Jan 31, 2013
Big D wrote:
<quoted text>
Lean to read English.... is English you native language? Maybe I can have what I am saying translated into whatever language is used where you come from.
I donít have a huge problem with poly marriage. I have a problem with other crimes that are nearly always associated with it. And will not tolerate many of the current adherents of it and their cruel molestation and mistreatment of their young, or the fraud they use to gain multiple government assistance checks at our expense.
I donít have a huge problem with same sex marriage. I have a problem with other crimes that are nearly always associated with it. And will not tolerate many of the current adherents of it and their cruel molestation and mistreatment of their young, or the fraud they use to gain multiple government assistance checks at our expense.
Frankie Rizzo

Union City, CA

#177845 Jan 31, 2013
Big D wrote:
<quoted text>
Lean to read English.... is English you native language? Maybe I can have what I am saying translated into whatever language is used where you come from.
I donít have a huge problem with poly marriage. I have a problem with other crimes that are nearly always associated with it. And will not tolerate many of the current adherents of it and their cruel molestation and mistreatment of their young, or the fraud they use to gain multiple government assistance checks at our expense.
I said "Your huge problem WITH THE ADHERENTS OF POLYGAMY is no better."

Learn to read English. Perhaps it is your second language? Perhaps you are a dope? A liar?
Jane Dodo

Hoboken, NJ

#177846 Jan 31, 2013
Frankie Rizzo wrote:
<quoted text>
He didn't? Oh, nevermind! YUK!YUK!YUK!
Remember Gilda Radner as Emily Litella? You're a real old auntie you've probably seen her.
But seriously, don't you agree that the judge's decision is not bad for the future of legalized polygamy?
Stop with the straw man and ad hominem. Why are you so intent on hijacking this thread for you narrow purposes of cheerleading one form of marriage over another?
You are hilarious!
Jane Dodo

Hoboken, NJ

#177847 Jan 31, 2013
Frankie Rizzo wrote:
<quoted text>
I donít have a huge problem with same sex marriage. I have a problem with other crimes that are nearly always associated with it. And will not tolerate many of the current adherents of it and their cruel molestation and mistreatment of their young, or the fraud they use to gain multiple government assistance checks at our expense.
What legally married gay couple is getting multiple government assistence checks?

You're about as bright as a black hole.
Big D

Modesto, CA

#177848 Jan 31, 2013
Frankie Rizzo wrote:
<quoted text>
I donít have a huge problem with same sex marriage. I have a problem with other crimes that are nearly always associated with it. And will not tolerate many of the current adherents of it and their cruel molestation and mistreatment of their young, or the fraud they use to gain multiple government assistance checks at our expense.
I always knew that was where you were going, and have been saying so for weeks.

Standard bait and switch tactic, all the opponents of same sex marriage use, and the funny part is the comparison they make is to religious people.

dishonest to the core

Your argument will get no where you relies

Same sex marriage is happening and will continue to happen in more and more states and countries.

Your pet issue is going exactly nowhere.
Frankie Rizzo

Union City, CA

#177849 Jan 31, 2013
Jane Dodo wrote:
<quoted text>I don't need to convince anybody. It's evident from your posts that you don't understand what you read.
Sure Miss Thing.

So, why do you think the judge's decision has absolutely no bearing on the future of legalized polygamy?

Type slowly maybe I'll understand your answer. But you have to give me an answer before I can understand it silly!
Bruno

Westminster, CA

#177850 Jan 31, 2013
Pizzo, you are a real wack job . . .
Frankie Rizzo

Union City, CA

#177851 Jan 31, 2013
Jane Dodo wrote:
<quoted text>
You are hilarious!
Thanks! You're not. Evidence your comedy career fail! Boy you were bad!

But let's get on topic, you always go off. Why do you feel the judge's decision has absolutely no relevance to the future of legalizing poly?
Jane Dodo

Hoboken, NJ

#177852 Jan 31, 2013
Frankie Rizzo wrote:
<quoted text>
Sure Miss Thing.
So, why do you think the judge's decision has absolutely no bearing on the future of legalized polygamy?
Type slowly maybe I'll understand your answer. But you have to give me an answer before I can understand it silly!
Because the trial testimony was about SSM and NOT poly, the ruling was about SSM, not poly, the appeal was about SSM, not poly, the appeals court ruling was about SSM and not poly. The appeal to SCOTUS is about SSM, not poly. When SCOTUS overturns Prop 8, SSM will be legal again, poly will NOT.
Frankie Rizzo

Union City, CA

#177853 Jan 31, 2013
Big D wrote:
<quoted text>
I always knew that was where you were going, and have been saying so for weeks.
Standard bait and switch tactic, all the opponents of same sex marriage use, and the funny part is the comparison they make is to religious people.
dishonest to the core
Your argument will get no where you relies
Same sex marriage is happening and will continue to happen in more and more states and countries.
Your pet issue is going exactly nowhere.
I am not opposed to same sex marriage. I fully support it. I have been to several gay weddings (have you?) I have friends and family that I love who are in same sex marriages. I resent your dishonest attempts to demonize me.

I am trying to discuss marriage equality. The only reason you will not engage is because you are attempting to avoid revealing your hypocrisy. And failing, I might add.
Jane Dodo

Hoboken, NJ

#177854 Jan 31, 2013
Frankie Rizzo wrote:
<quoted text>
Thanks! You're not. Evidence your comedy career fail! Boy you were bad!
But let's get on topic, you always go off. Why do you feel the judge's decision has absolutely no relevance to the future of legalizing poly?
Maybe because there was NOTHING about polygamy in his decision..... geez.
Frankie Rizzo

Union City, CA

#177855 Jan 31, 2013
Bruno wrote:
Pizzo, you are a real wack job ...
It's better than being a SECOND CLASS JACKASS like you!

YUK!YUK!YUK!
Frankie Rizzo

Union City, CA

#177856 Jan 31, 2013
Jane Dodo wrote:
<quoted text>Maybe because there was NOTHING about polygamy in his decision..... geez.
You hate polygamists because "there was NOTHING about polygamy in his decision..... geez."?

Do you rest your case?
Frankie Rizzo

Union City, CA

#177857 Jan 31, 2013
Jane Dodo wrote:
<quoted text>
What legally married gay couple is getting multiple government assistence checks?
You're about as bright as a black hole.
I just replace poly in his hateful rant with same sex marriage to see how he liked the sound of it dummy.

What a dope!
Frankie Rizzo

Union City, CA

#177858 Jan 31, 2013
Jane Dodo wrote:
<quoted text>
Because the trial testimony was about SSM and NOT poly, the ruling was about SSM, not poly, the appeal was about SSM, not poly, the appeals court ruling was about SSM and not poly. The appeal to SCOTUS is about SSM, not poly. When SCOTUS overturns Prop 8, SSM will be legal again, poly will NOT.
So you think the judge's decision bodes poorly for the future of legalized poly?

I think you are wrong. I think allowing same sex marriage will help the case for allowing poly. It's just common sense.
Big D

Modesto, CA

#177859 Jan 31, 2013
Frankie Rizzo wrote:
<quoted text>
I am not opposed to same sex marriage. I fully support it. I have been to several gay weddings (have you?) I have friends and family that I love who are in same sex marriages. I resent your dishonest attempts to demonize me.
I am trying to discuss marriage equality. The only reason you will not engage is because you are attempting to avoid revealing your hypocrisy. And failing, I might add.
You go ahead and rant and rave, Same sex marriage is already a reality and will continue to spread.

Your pet rant is going nowhere, not because of any objection of mine ( I donít have an objection to the concept of it ), but because of the actions of far tooo many of the adherents of it.

There may come a time a couple of decades down the road when this changes, but it is not changing yet, regardless of what you, I or another else in this forum thinks
.

As religion becomes less and less a force in American politics the current adherents of it will sink further into oblivion.

Until a more mature, and more human group champions it, it is moot.

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.

Menifee Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
We need better places Sat Loodledoodle 2
News Your Views - 06/03 (Jun '11) Jul 28 positronium 8
News Woman Threatening to Jump From Perris Overpass ... Jul 23 potenciano2000 1
Local Politics Do you approve of Randon Lane as Mayor? Jul 23 Jesus ramirez 1
Menifee Authors Jul 20 286author 2
Review: Crossing Dental Group (Aug '09) Jul 20 disappointed 4
Come on already! Jul 20 UbetterUbet 10
More from around the web

Personal Finance

Menifee Mortgages