Judge overturns California's ban on same-sex marriage

Aug 4, 2010 | Posted by: Topix | Full story: www.cnn.com

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.

Comments
155,761 - 155,780 of 200,593 Comments Last updated 5 hrs ago
Randy -Rock- Hudson

Wooster, OH

#178637 Feb 6, 2013
Frankie Rizzo wrote:
<quoted text>
No. I am not arguing that it won't be a decade or two away. So what? Why do you keep stressing that?
Your arguments regarding polygamy seem to be:
-I don't care.
-Polygamists are bad people.
-Same sex marriage is here now, polygamy is not.
-Frankie's obsessed with polygamy.
Did I miss any?
Looks like a perfect summary to me...Except you forgot the part where he says "poly is off-topic"...
Randy -Rock- Hudson

Wooster, OH

#178639 Feb 6, 2013
Big D wrote:
<quoted text>
Again you are confusing what I might think ( which doesn’t matter ) with the reality that nothing will come of it for the next couple of decades.
did you want to make the wager?
...Because, Big D, I'll take that bet. How much ? And I don't take checks...
Randy -Rock- Hudson

Wooster, OH

#178640 Feb 6, 2013
Big D wrote:
<quoted text>
Yeah, you have to prove that it does someone harm, that is why Prop 8 was overturned and that decision upheld by the California appellate courts.
You can’t just deny people the right to happiness just because you don’t like them. You aren’t royalty, you don’t get to just decide on a whim who is protected under the law and who is not.
You have to show how it harms others, your lawyers have already failed in that task twice, and now at the supreme court no new evidence can be presented, only failed evidence already presented.
You are on the wrong side of history.
This argument, RIGHT HERE, sounds an awful lot like the one used to benefit the gays:
"The Browns present a strong argument that what they do in their home is their business. And the more they argue for privacy and rights to marry whomever they choose, the more it morphs into a parallel argument in favor of same-sex marriage. In fact, if Turley is right when he says that, in this marriage debate, we are truly concerned with liberty and protections for “private relations among consenting adults,” then the number should not matter any more than sex."
...doesn't it ? In fact, if we delete a couple of words..."then the number should not matter any more than sex.", then it is a carbon copy. As is proper. As Frank and I have been saying.
Smile. You're the guest star of "Ooops, Guess I F**ked Up Again"....Played nightly on Topix.
GoodHunting

Monrovia, CA

#178641 Feb 6, 2013
A 72-year-old homeowner immediately retrieved his handgun when he heard several home intruders attempting to gain entry to his Las Vegas residence.

This happened early Feburary 04, 2013 Monday morning when the criminals entered his bedroom, he opened fire, killing one of the suspects and sending the rest fleeing.

Finally the police showed up so they could clean up the crooks and haul them away.

Since: Jan 12

Commonwealth of Pennsylvania

#178642 Feb 6, 2013
UK legalizes gay marriage. Meanwhile in the "land of the free" we have drone strikes killing US civilians without trial. Pathetic AmeriKKKa
Crazy EXs

Monrovia, CA

#178643 Feb 6, 2013
Arm yourself, crazy LAPD cops are killing people.

Irvine and LAPD Police have identified a former Los Angeles Police Department officer suspected of shooting a newly engaged couple to death in an Irvine parking garage.

Since: Apr 11

North Hollywood, CA

#178644 Feb 6, 2013
KiMare wrote:
<quoted text>
1. The cross cultural constraint predates gay couples claiming marriage by quite some time making your point pointless.
The statement is a simple fact that you cannot directly refute, hence these games.
2. I said the basic essence of marriage is a cross cultural constraint on evolutionary mating behavior. You had no logical counter, so you made up a statement (lied) I never made. Again, where did I say marriage wasn't about love?
3. Maybe you've heard the term 'survival of the fittest',
"Survival of the fittest" is a tautology because there is no way to measure who is fittest apart from survival.
KiMare wrote:
which is the summation of the four points in the link. Or put simply, no mutation occurs if there is not procreation. There is no procreation by gay couples.
4. Point 3; hence gay couples are an evolutionary blunder.
You say you are a monster mutation. Are you an evolutionary blunder? Should you have been aborted?
KiMare wrote:
This is simple logic. Perhaps you might try a direct response to the fact; Marriage is a cross cultural constraint on evolutionary mating behavior.
By the way, here is some of the other elements of marriage distinguished from gay couples;
If you
believe denying marriage to a relationship
will prevent love
If you
demand any committed relationship
has to be called marriage
If you
claim rights and benefits can only be acquired
by a imposition on marriage
If you
equate the diversity of two genders
with the redundancy of same genders
If you
desecrate the sacred tradition of all major religions
and violate the historic practice of every single culture in history
If you
believe a fundamental change to the building block of society
will have absolutely no affect
If you
think a law can change
the reality of crucial distinctions in relationships
If you
pretend duplicating sexuality
is the same as blending masculinity and femininity
If you
condemn some children to parents of only one gender
and deliberately deny some children one natural parent
If you
ignore the design of sexual union
to manipulate a harmful act
If you
violate evolution's law of reproduction
to equate a genetic dead end
If you
risk the healthiest human relationship
to include one of the unhealthiest
If you
parallel the sole birthplace of every other relationship
with one that can reproduce none
If you
dilute all these things
down to just 'a committed relationship of two people'
Then, and only then, can you equate same-sex unions with marriage.
Smile.
Whatever, you worthless blunder, marriage is a right.
RingNeck

Monrovia, CA

#178645 Feb 6, 2013
Time to choke a chicken again.
Armed

Monrovia, CA

#178646 Feb 6, 2013
Arm yourself, those crazy LAPD cops are killing people.

Irvine and LAPD Police have identified a former Los Angeles Police Department officer suspected of shooting a newly engaged couple to death in an Irvine parking garage.

“I Luv Carbon Dioxide”

Since: Dec 08

Location hidden

#178647 Feb 6, 2013
sheesh void of hate wrote:
Well now, since you've not provided a real argument...
The real arguments include the probable consequences of introducing gender segregation to marriage.

Since: Nov 12

Elk Grove, CA

#178648 Feb 6, 2013
Brian_G wrote:
<quoted text>The real arguments include the probable consequences of introducing gender segregation to marriage.
i agree and just like the boy scouts, it will be a matter of time when Churches will be sued that refuse a homosexual marriage.
Black momma OG

Norwalk, CA

#178649 Feb 7, 2013
This is a if or but I do believe in a contract between two people some things I guess I am old fashion to a degree. A person chose to be together need some kind of financial protection as far as the boyscott thing that is crazy to me. Just get your seperate sector you're setting yourself up for more lawsuits
Run

Honolulu, HI

#178650 Feb 7, 2013

“KiMare'a the Monster Mutation”

Since: Nov 10

Location hidden

#178651 Feb 7, 2013
chance47 wrote:
<quoted text>
By calling my questioning 'games' I take it you are simply dismissive on this. Noted.
<quoted text>
Careful now... asking why you think marriage isn't about love is NOT claiming that you made the statement. Telling me I lied is , well, ironically a lie of yours.
<quoted text>
Another lie... lots of gays have procreated... and lots of straight people do not....
<quoted text>
I daresay that is not simple logic (maybe simpleton logic!).'blunders' are what define and drive evolutionary forces. I would contend that humans have a certain frequency of how many will be gay - just like a certain frequency will have curly hair or blue eyes. There is no 'blunder' in what we are... just variation.
<quoted text>
1. Only if you are dismissive of the unrefuted answers.

2. So defensive (and avoiding the issue...)! The difference is between asking "do you think" (a question) and stating "why do you think" (an assertion). You lied. Like I said, why are these childish word games necessary for a legitimate cause?

3. Of course lots of gays have procreated. That's not what I said and you know it. Another act of deception. I said gay couples.

Not one single gay couple in ALL of human history has ever procreated.

The differences between marriage with/without kids and gay couples;

A apple tree bearing fruit.
A apple tree not bearing fruit for some reason.
A walnut tree who never bears apples wanting to be a apple tree.
A walnut tree hanging apples on it's branches pretending to be a apple tree.

Even funnier?

The claim that if the government doesn't 'require' apple trees to bear fruit, then it is discrimination not to call walnut trees apple trees too!

4. You make a simpleton blunder by confusing 'blunder' and 'defect' with 'mutation'. Evolution thrives on mutation. However, a mutation that cannot perpetuate itself is a blunder/defect.

Remember when I schooled you about the fundamental goal of evolution (VIST)?

I = Inheritance: Genetic traits are inherited from parents and are passed on to offspring.

S = Selection: Organisms with traits that are favorable to their survival get to live and pass on their genes to the next generation.

It seems to me your post picture should be a buff ego with no head...

Snicker.

“Vita e' Bella.”

Since: May 12

Location hidden

#178652 Feb 7, 2013
Randy -Rock- Hudson wrote:
<quoted text>
Many do not give a flip about SSM, but are forced to watch as it becomes valid. But for those that give a flip about poly and incest, it must be a slap in the face to watch "equality' being doled out, but only for some....Like "Animal Farm". We are all created equal, but some are more equal than others...
What the? Way ta go! Man oh man.....I actually used the 'Animal Farm' analogy on another thread, "Obama announces support for Gay Marriage. Glad to know I'm not the only one who sees the connection.

“KiMare'a the Monster Mutation”

Since: Nov 10

Location hidden

#178653 Feb 7, 2013
KiMare wrote:
<quoted text>
...If you
believe denying marriage to a relationship
will prevent love
If you
demand any committed relationship
has to be called marriage
If you
claim rights and benefits can only be acquired
by a imposition on marriage
If you
equate the diversity of two genders
with the redundancy of same genders
If you
desecrate the sacred tradition of all major religions
and violate the historic practice of every single culture in history
If you
believe a fundamental change to the building block of society
will have absolutely no affect
If you
think a law can change
the reality of crucial distinctions in relationships
If you
pretend duplicating sexuality
is the same as blending masculinity and femininity
If you
condemn some children to parents of only one gender
and deliberately deny some children one natural parent
If you
ignore the design of sexual union
to manipulate a harmful act
If you
violate evolution's law of reproduction
to equate a genetic dead end
If you
risk the healthiest human relationship
to include one of the unhealthiest
If you
parallel the sole birthplace of every other relationship
with one that can reproduce none
If you
dilute all these things
down to just 'a committed relationship of two people'
Then, and only then, can you equate same-sex unions with marriage.
Smile.
chance47 wrote:
<quoted text>
Thanks for the stream of consciousness, I suppose. Here are my responses in order if you are interested:
Love exists even in the void of marriage (for straight people and gay)
Lots of committed relationships have nothing to do with mar
riage (or sex)
Human rights are innate, not granted
Equate… diversity … redundancy.. what???
Surely, sacred religions aren’t afraid of the doing of you or I…
Violate history? Oh yeah, bring back slavery and the dark ages! Yipee!
Things don’t get better without change
Laws do change this – for instance the marriage tax credit
WTF is duplicating sexuality
So children of single parents are also condemned? Really?
WTF is design of sexual union
Evolution has no laws. Not one... none at all…
Pray tell, what is the unhealthiest relationship of all?(hint: it’s not SSM)
Reproduction doesn’t require marriage; and marriage does not imply kids
Dilute.. the..what, huh?
1. Which makes the gay (pun intended) claim that not having access to marriage stops love.

2. Of course rights are innate. However, certain rights are unique to select people/groups. You avoid answering the assertion; Why discriminate with only gays relationships instead of all relationships?

3. You don't need marriage to acquire any legitimate rights due a gay couple.

4. Another simpleton response... Using a classic analogy, Marriage is the union of Mars and Venus, Gay couples are the collision of Uranus and Uranus.

5. You are not just culturally insensitive, you are culturally stupid. All major religions hold marriage sacred. Calling gay couples married is a sacrilege.

Slavery and intellectual repression have been rejected over and over through history. Gay couples being designated married has never been accepted or legal in any culture from start to finish in all of human history. Simply because they are viewed as a defective distinct relationship.

“KiMare'a the Monster Mutation”

Since: Nov 10

Location hidden

#178654 Feb 7, 2013
6. Your answer has nothing to do with my statement and makes an unproved, unlikely assumption.

7. You confuse innate distinctions with external issues. No law can equate a hetero couple with a homo couple.

8. The union of a male and female create a unique relationship. The redumbancy of a single gender is simply duplication.

9. According to social scientists, severely so. And according to the latest, largest and most scientific study of family types, children in lesbian homes fare even worse!

10. The male and female body are designed for sexual union. Anal sex is inherently harmful, unhealthy and demeaning.

11. Please re-study the fundamentals of evolution, it is not that complicated...

12. You are avoiding the point. Marriage is the healthiest relationship. Gay relationships are 'one of' the most unhealthy.

13. No one except a relationship that is totally desolate is asserting that marriage 'requires' procreation. It is simply expected. Please re-read the apple/walnut analogy again real slowely...

14. Please re-read the entire 'If You'. Then ignore all the distinctions noted and dumb down marriage to 'two people in a relationship'. Which simply means any relationship of two people is supposed to be called marriage. Which by the way, is discriminatory towards three or more people in a relationship...

Like I said, a buff ego with no head...

Smirk.

“Busting Kimare's”

Since: Feb 13

Clitty

#178655 Feb 7, 2013
KiMare wrote:
10. The male and female body are designed for sexual union. Anal sex is inherently harmful, unhealthy and demeaning.

Smirk.
but we are both male and female. what union or we designed for?

“Vita e' Bella.”

Since: May 12

Location hidden

#178656 Feb 7, 2013
Dusty Mangina wrote:
<quoted text>
but we are both male and female. what union or we designed for?
Plumber's union.

Since: Mar 09

Location hidden

#178657 Feb 7, 2013
Brian_G wrote:
<quoted text>The real arguments include the probable consequences of introducing gender segregation to marriage.
LIke forced marriages in prison? Yeah, we've already seen just how many of those have occured in Canada. Perhaps you need to rethink, with some intelligence for a change, what those probable consequences might be before banging on about them.

Tell me when this thread is updated: (Registration is not required)

Add to my Tracker Send me an email

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
Paving Fraud Suspect Arrested (Oct '08) 2 hr nikki 377
Californians fight over migrants 2 hr Serrano Red 130
CA California seeks to ban free, single-use carryo... (Jun '10) 5 hr go away 5,007
Riverside County:Tap Water Taste and Smell Unpl... 9 hr james marple 50
CA California Proposition 19: the Marijuana Legali... (Oct '10) 14 hr lazy posts 15,963
CA CA Proposition 23 - Global Warming (Oct '10) Thu Tank ever 7,926
Re-Elect Tom Fuhrman Menifee City Council Aug 28 Quail Valley Resi... 8
•••

Menifee News Video

•••
•••

Menifee Jobs

•••
Enter and win $5000
•••
•••

Menifee People Search

Addresses and phone numbers for FREE

•••

Menifee News, Events & Info

Click for news, events and info in Menifee
•••

Personal Finance

Mortgages [ See current mortgage rates ]
•••