Judge overturns California's ban on s...

Judge overturns California's ban on same-sex marriage

There are 201809 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.

Winston Smith

Temple Hills, MD

#162993 Oct 13, 2012
R Hudson wrote:
<quoted text>
Obammy's rescinding of Clintons "don't ask, don't tell" opened the door for the lesbians in the US Army, one of whom was ogling my niece in the shower from a tree the day before her grauation from Boot Camp. Answer that...Leching from a tree and denying same. True Story.
Whether or not your story is true, it isn't beyond reality to think that it is. OTOH, it isn't a valid argument against a policy that doesn't examine members of the military through a looking glass that attempts to be a screen for sexual preference. There are plenty of stories involving sexual impropriety directed toward young female troops by men in the armed forces. That it occurs betweem men in the role of superior against women in subordinate military ranks is no argument against heterosexuality. Why should sane people accept the counterpart as evidence against homosexualit?

Since: Jun 07

Location hidden

#162994 Oct 13, 2012
Winston Smith wrote:
<quoted text>
Ya know what AK? You and I differ in regards to which one of the two possibilities we're going to have as the next POTUS. What I'd be willing to wager is that the two of us are of the mind that the choices are dismal. And this is nothing new - in reality it is so old it is expected.
We have a choice? I'm still looking for the difference.

At least Romney said the words- "State Right" a few times during the debate, thought I feel he had to hold back a chuckle each time he did so.

So I guess he has that going for him?

Since: Jun 07

Location hidden

#162995 Oct 14, 2012
Winston Smith wrote:
<quoted text>
Whether or not your story is true, it isn't beyond reality to think that it is. OTOH, it isn't a valid argument against a policy that doesn't examine members of the military through a looking glass that attempts to be a screen for sexual preference. There are plenty of stories involving sexual impropriety directed toward young female troops by men in the armed forces. That it occurs betweem men in the role of superior against women in subordinate military ranks is no argument against heterosexuality. Why should sane people accept the counterpart as evidence against homosexualit?
The only issue/concern I see with the tossing of DADT is the effect it will have on housing.

We know that homosexuals have served honorably for, well, forever. So one is hard pressed to find any reason why one should be allowed to serve openly.

The only part which concerned me was the housing of troops. In Basic there are many troops housed in open bays together. In that situation we separate male from female for obvious reasons. We do the same in the dormitories and tents.

This was simple when gender was the only issue, as sexual orientation was assumed- albeit foolishly. The answer isn't as simple when we are dealing with homosexuality. How should they be segregated? Or should they?

I don't really know the answer to this question, and one could say since there have been no issues, publicly at least, that it is a non-issue. But I am not so sure that the lack of issues doesn't have more to do with homosexuals self-employing their own DADT policy?

But I do agree that sexual harassment occurs in both the heterosexual and homosexual community, and is not an argument either for or against this policy. But it did seem simpler when the answer was simply the separation of the sexes, which could be employed to at least attempt to quell and head off the issue before it occurred.

Since: Jun 07

Location hidden

#162996 Oct 14, 2012
****We know that homosexuals have served honorably for, well, forever. So one is hard pressed to find any reason why one should be allowed to serve openly.****

Should have read:

We know that homosexuals have served honorably for, well, forever. So one is hard pressed to find any reason why one shouldn't be allowed to serve openly.

“LIFE'S TO SHORT TO LET TOPIX”

Since: Aug 08

TROLLS GET YA DOWN:-)

#162997 Oct 14, 2012
akpilot wrote:
<quoted text>
The only issue/concern I see with the tossing of DADT is the effect it will have on housing.
We know that homosexuals have served honorably for, well, forever. So one is hard pressed to find any reason why one should be allowed to serve openly.
The only part which concerned me was the housing of troops. In Basic there are many troops housed in open bays together. In that situation we separate male from female for obvious reasons. We do the same in the dormitories and tents.
This was simple when gender was the only issue, as sexual orientation was assumed- albeit foolishly. The answer isn't as simple when we are dealing with homosexuality. How should they be segregated? Or should they?
I don't really know the answer to this question, and one could say since there have been no issues, publicly at least, that it is a non-issue. But I am not so sure that the lack of issues doesn't have more to do with homosexuals self-employing their own DADT policy?
But I do agree that sexual harassment occurs in both the heterosexual and homosexual community, and is not an argument either for or against this policy. But it did seem simpler when the answer was simply the separation of the sexes, which could be employed to at least attempt to quell and head off the issue before it occurred.
In my opinion, there is no need for separate berthing just because someone is Gay or Lesbian......that would be the same thing as when we separated troops based solely on skin color.

Gay men and straight men should be grown-up enough to handle the situation, besides.....it's not like Gay men are attracted or will hit on straight men and if straight men think they will, well, they shouldn't flatter themselves!!!

Since: Oct 12

Coolidge, AZ

#162998 Oct 14, 2012
So after he finally got my pants off, he said "Oh my God ! You aint stickin that huge thing in me !" And then he left.

And that ended our date.

:(

“KiMare'a the Monster Mutation”

Since: Nov 10

Location hidden

#162999 Oct 14, 2012
LYIN AYN RYAN wrote:
<quoted text>\
read slower
eventually when gay rights are actaully recognized by the federal government, they will add it to the constiution...
but many states will join those that have already made the plunge. like mass and vt.
it is great to see barney frank getting married as he retires from a long career of public service.
dont fight it, it is just natural for people to be different..
I beg you show tolerance.
no?
then enjoy irrelevancy, as those who just want to be treated the same as you, fight for(and gain) their rights!!
it has happened before, and equality will happen again..
why do you fools on the right, have to be on the wrong side of history all the time....
just look at all the progress on gay rights in the past 20 years!
huge!!
same with medicinal marijuana.
attitudes are changing....
dont be left behind!
There is no such thing as gay 'marriage'.

It is a simple denial of reality,

A foolish attempt to impose an imposter relationship on the single and only birthplace of every single other type of relationship.

Attitudes change for right and wrong reasons and there will always be idiots.

“KiMare'a the Monster Mutation”

Since: Nov 10

Location hidden

#163000 Oct 14, 2012
NorCal Native wrote:
<quoted text>
In my opinion, there is no need for separate berthing just because someone is Gay or Lesbian......that would be the same thing as when we separated troops based solely on skin color.
Gay men and straight men should be grown-up enough to handle the situation, besides.....it's not like Gay men are attracted or will hit on straight men and if straight men think they will, well, they shouldn't flatter themselves!!!
So you are saying that homosexuals don't have the same degree of sexual attraction that heterosexuals do? So it is fair that heterosexuals are segregated, but okay for homosexuals to not be?

You are saying that there is no risk of rape by homosexuals (in a overtly authoritarian setting), like the current problem in the military with heterosexual rape?

In my opinion, you are a lying idiot. Your gay twirl puts our nation and military at risk.

“LIFE'S TO SHORT TO LET TOPIX”

Since: Aug 08

TROLLS GET YA DOWN:-)

#163001 Oct 14, 2012
KiMare wrote:
<quoted text>
So you are saying that homosexuals don't have the same degree of sexual attraction that heterosexuals do? So it is fair that heterosexuals are segregated, but okay for homosexuals to not be?
You are saying that there is no risk of rape by homosexuals (in a overtly authoritarian setting), like the current problem in the military with heterosexual rape?
In my opinion, you are a lying idiot. Your gay twirl puts our nation and military at risk.
It's fair that the genders are segregated, if that was what you were getting at!!!

Did my post mention rape at all? I don't believe it did!!!

I know.....everyone who makes a post that you don't like makes it some gay twist or twirl.....what a true idiot you are!!!

Gays and Lesbians DON'T put our Nation or our Military at Risk.......but people like you should be considered a threat to National Security!!!

“ Ah see's lanlubbers Cap'n BT!”

Since: Oct 10

Location hidden

#163002 Oct 14, 2012
Jeeeesuuus christ!!! Don't you ever git tired of the damned sock routine??

WTF!!!
LIE Buster
Oscar Wilde 1->
Jedi 1->
mirror mirror
Martin T >
"Martina" T>
Chunky
Doctor 1->
Judge Monitor >
Gate Keeper 1->
Yadda Yadda Yadda Yadda Yadda???

Like I said kid-
Grow ta hell up!!!

“LIFE'S TO SHORT TO LET TOPIX”

Since: Aug 08

TROLLS GET YA DOWN:-)

#163003 Oct 14, 2012
Black Thunder 42 wrote:
Jeeeesuuus christ!!! Don't you ever git tired of the damned sock routine??
WTF!!!
LIE Buster
Oscar Wilde 1->
Jedi 1->
mirror mirror
Martin T >
"Martina" T>
Chunky
Doctor 1->
Judge Monitor >
Gate Keeper 1->
Yadda Yadda Yadda Yadda Yadda???
Like I said kid-
Grow ta hell up!!!
You ask to much of that particular poster......lol:-)

“ Ah see's lanlubbers Cap'n BT!”

Since: Oct 10

Location hidden

#163004 Oct 14, 2012
NorCal Native wrote:
<quoted text>
You ask to much of that particular poster......lol:-)
This guy is a nut case!
==========
@ Martina Navratilover

This is a guy by the way.


You should have never posted under my handle, let alone on multiple threads.
You should have never changed my posts on those threads.
I don't do it to anyone else, and I won't stand for anyone doing it to me.
It is against TOS rules for obvious reasons.

You have crossed the line, and you will suffer the consequences.

YOU did it-not me.

You NEVER learn

“LIFE'S TO SHORT TO LET TOPIX”

Since: Aug 08

TROLLS GET YA DOWN:-)

#163005 Oct 14, 2012
Black Thunder 42 wrote:
<quoted text>
This guy is a nut case!
==========
@ Martina Navratilover
This is a guy by the way.
You should have never posted under my handle, let alone on multiple threads.
You should have never changed my posts on those threads.
I don't do it to anyone else, and I won't stand for anyone doing it to me.
It is against TOS rules for obvious reasons.
You have crossed the line, and you will suffer the consequences.
YOU did it-not me.
You NEVER learn
I know......sad and pathetic that one!!!

“KiMare'a the Monster Mutation”

Since: Nov 10

Location hidden

#163006 Oct 14, 2012
NorCal Native wrote:
<quoted text>
It's fair that the genders are segregated, if that was what you were getting at!!!
Did my post mention rape at all? I don't believe it did!!!
I know.....everyone who makes a post that you don't like makes it some gay twist or twirl.....what a true idiot you are!!!
Gays and Lesbians DON'T put our Nation or our Military at Risk.......but people like you should be considered a threat to National Security!!!
Honey, go back and read what I wrote slowly. Think about it before you respond. Then think about again before you respond.

Here is some help;

-Genders are separated because of orientation.

-You are right, you didn't mention rape. You sanitized the issue by talking about 'gays and straights behaving'. My point is they don't and are not. There are already cases where gays in authority have violated their position. Or, maybe you missed the Navy vet politician who talked about 'pillow fights' with his subordinates BEFORE the repeal of DADT! Not to mention the horrendous problem with heterosexual rape occurring right now because of the mix of heterosexuals in the military setting.

The distinction of how the female POW was dealt at the beginning of the war with Iraq and male POW's since is a example of unintended and unplanned consequences that these idiotic decisions incur.

Your blissful and deliberate ignorance is putting the US at risk and makes you a traitor.

“LIFE'S TO SHORT TO LET TOPIX”

Since: Aug 08

TROLLS GET YA DOWN:-)

#163007 Oct 14, 2012
KiMare wrote:
<quoted text>
Honey, go back and read what I wrote slowly. Think about it before you respond. Then think about again before you respond.
Here is some help;
-Genders are separated because of orientation.
-You are right, you didn't mention rape. You sanitized the issue by talking about 'gays and straights behaving'. My point is they don't and are not. There are already cases where gays in authority have violated their position. Or, maybe you missed the Navy vet politician who talked about 'pillow fights' with his subordinates BEFORE the repeal of DADT! Not to mention the horrendous problem with heterosexual rape occurring right now because of the mix of heterosexuals in the military setting.
The distinction of how the female POW was dealt at the beginning of the war with Iraq and male POW's since is a example of unintended and unplanned consequences that these idiotic decisions incur.
Your blissful and deliberate ignorance is putting the US at risk and makes you a traitor.
Genders are separated STRICTLY because of the physical difference......nothing to do with their sexual orientation!!!

They actually do and can behave........and I was HARDLY sanitizing anything......as for your comment about Gays in authority violating their position......that has been happening by males in authority towards women for over 40 years......so, please don't make it sound as one is worse than the other.....both are equally wrong!!!
You have some proof to back up this story that was told, right?

Have you served? or are you just talking BS out of your azz?
DorN

La Puente, CA

#163008 Oct 14, 2012
KiMare wrote:
<quoted text>
So you are saying that homosexuals don't have the same degree of sexual attraction that heterosexuals do? So it is fair that heterosexuals are segregated, but okay for homosexuals to not be?
You are saying that there is no risk of rape by homosexuals (in a overtly authoritarian setting), like the current problem in the military with heterosexual rape?
In my opinion, you are a lying idiot. Your gay twirl puts our nation and military at risk.
----------
If men and women were quartered together, pregnancy would result.
LYIN AYN RYAN

Anderson, CA

#163009 Oct 14, 2012
KiMare wrote:
<quoted text>
There is no such thing as gay 'marriage'.
It is a simple denial of reality,
A foolish attempt to impose an imposter relationship on the single and only birthplace of every single other type of relationship.
Attitudes change for right and wrong reasons and there will always be idiots.
Ive seen two gay guys together many times......

it doesnt seem like they are in denial to me ...

by being together I dont think they are "imposing" anything on you.

try to explain that one a little better(but ill bet you cannot)

yes there will always be idiots...

those who cant roll with the changes (because of phony religious values) are the first to come to mind.

and from another lame post of yours??

people in power abusing their power??

ive never heard of that happening before(sarc)
I cant believe a gay guy was the first to abuse his power(sarc)

you sound a little sheltered.
LYIN AYN RYAN

Anderson, CA

#163010 Oct 14, 2012
KiMare wrote:
<quoted text>
Honey, go back and read what I wrote slowly. Think about it before you respond. Then think about again before you respond.
Here is some help;
-Genders are separated because of orientation.
-You are right, you didn't mention rape. You sanitized the issue by talking about 'gays and straights behaving'. My point is they don't and are not. There are already cases where gays in authority have violated their position. Or, maybe you missed the Navy vet politician who talked about 'pillow fights' with his subordinates BEFORE the repeal of DADT! Not to mention the horrendous problem with heterosexual rape occurring right now because of the mix of heterosexuals in the military setting.
The distinction of how the female POW was dealt at the beginning of the war with Iraq and male POW's since is a example of unintended and unplanned consequences that these idiotic decisions incur.
Your blissful and deliberate ignorance is putting the US at risk and makes you a traitor.
so now we're traitors because we want parity for those who serve.??
you need to pull yow head outa yow azzz..

Im sure id cringe to hear any more of your arcane values.
LYIN AYN RYAN

Anderson, CA

#163012 Oct 14, 2012
akpilot wrote:
<quoted text>
The only issue/concern I see with the tossing of DADT is the effect it will have on housing.
We know that homosexuals have served honorably for, well, forever. So one is hard pressed to find any reason why one should be allowed to serve openly.
The only part which concerned me was the housing of troops. In Basic there are many troops housed in open bays together. In that situation we separate male from female for obvious reasons. We do the same in the dormitories and tents.
This was simple when gender was the only issue, as sexual orientation was assumed- albeit foolishly. The answer isn't as simple when we are dealing with homosexuality. How should they be segregated? Or should they?
I don't really know the answer to this question, and one could say since there have been no issues, publicly at least, that it is a non-issue. But I am not so sure that the lack of issues doesn't have more to do with homosexuals self-employing their own DADT policy?
But I do agree that sexual harassment occurs in both the heterosexual and homosexual community, and is not an argument either for or against this policy. But it did seem simpler when the answer was simply the separation of the sexes, which could be employed to at least attempt to quell and head off the issue before it occurred.
wow you finally hit the nail on the head!!

since we havnt heard of any instances of problems from gay soldiers bunking with straight soldiers??

you can pretty much chalk it up to a "nontroversy"....(li ke the nyc mosque)...

if I had a dollar for every thing that rightwing thought was gonna end up being a huge issue(but wasnt) id be ready to retire.

“Formerly Frankie Rizzo”

Since: Sep 12

Canarsie, NY

#163013 Oct 14, 2012
LYIN AYN RYAN wrote:
<quoted text>
theyll never understand what civil rights are.
I loved michael in the green mile and "the island"
I was very sorry to see him go.
my condolences
You say "theyll never understand what civil rights are". Well help us out then. Are you claiming it's not against civil rights to murder our citizens in Benghazi but it is to deny someone gay marriage?

Is that what you're saying toots?

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.

Monterey Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
where can I find heroin in monterey? (Oct '14) May 30 jferapp 9
Monterey Public Officials VIOLATING FEDERAL LAWS May 26 Un agenda 21 and ... 4
public officials violating federal laws May 24 Un agenda 21 and ... 3
the music thread (Apr '12) May 23 Musikologist 19
News Ask the Auto Doctor (Mar '06) May 23 ikestubbs 1,535
News Letters: Charter application superior (Jan '11) May 21 Yin Simons 13
News Taking extraordinary measures to wear an extrao... May 18 outtogether 2
More from around the web

Monterey People Search

Addresses and phone numbers for FREE

Personal Finance

Mortgages [ See current mortgage rates ]