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 (Page 7,192)

Showing posts 143,821 - 143,840 of199,068
|
Go to last page| Jump to page:
TunaCharlie

Covina, CA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#163127
Oct 14, 2012
 

Judged:

7

7

7

Weather's great.
LYIN AYN RYAN

Anderson, CA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#163128
Oct 14, 2012
 

Judged:

6

6

6

Mike DiRucci wrote:
<quoted text>
What the hell is Obama doing with his war on people who use a legally doctor recommended medicine? Is this his philosophy? Or is it a political deal? Either way, it stinks.
no kidding huh??

ill bet president G.johnson would try to repeal the controled substance act of 1970...

Obama and his election year crack down...

remember when paul Ryan went to colorado early last month and was "pro-states" , deciding this issue, for like a day?? before he had to walk it back.

both candidates obvious suck on this issue...

luckily for me?? im not self interested enough to vote on that issue alone.....

it isnt REALLY part of the mainstrem american debate at the moment.

although at least half of all americans want to see pot decriminalized(which I think would be a smart first step, right?)

“KiMare'a the Monster Mutation”

Since: Nov 10

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#163129
Oct 14, 2012
 

Judged:

7

7

7

My gosh!!! Four blondes in a row!
Please explain the specific similarity between denying blacks the right to serve and my reasoning for not mixing orientation attraction in a military setting.
So far, all you did was a partial quote with an ad homoan attack. I'll be real interested to see my hallucinations and non-rationality exposed Marsha.
Winston Smith wrote:
<quoted text>
You, just like the racists way back in history, are making cause and effect claims that have no rational basis. This is just the sort of steaming pile of BS that seems to occur with an alarming degree of frequency from the dogma kennel. Blacks will revolt if we let them in the military. The society will be turned on its head if we give women the vote. Blacks will be raping your white daughters if we recognize them as human beings. Gays will be converting your sons if we allow them out of the closet. That is the similarity. Why I need to point that out for you defies all logic.
Living paranoid? Why not just roll yourself up in bubble wrap & pull a blanket over your head? Tinfoil hats for everyone! You might not think 9/11 wuz an inside job. You may not be of the mind that Obama, the Muslim terrust, ain't no US citizen. But you're suckin' on the same teats.
We already know that there is a huge problem with heterosexual abuse and rape in the military. This is WITH the genders separated.

Now we add homosexuals NOT separated. And you assert there is no rational basis for concern.

Moreover, you equate my reasoning to blacks will revolt, woman will rule (they already did), blacks will rape whites(some do) and gays will convert boys (gay pedophiles do). I have asserted none of these things.

On the other hand, you asserted that butch lesbians dress and act like men to be 'comfortable'. Another denial of human mating behavior. The same behavior you deny would/is occurring in the military.

You are not in a bubble, you are simply gay twirling no matter how utterly idiotic it becomes.

Here is the simple reality. You claim that two gays serving in closer quarters than heterosexuals are allowed to will never be attracted. Really.

The Greeks recognized the implications of that situation and used it in limited measures. Placing two sexually bonded men in a life and death situation incurred extreme commitment to protect their lover. You deny that tendency in this situation. Why? Because you know it undermines the more important requirement of obedience to leadership in a modern army.

You are supporting the weakening of our military. That is point blank traitorous.
LYIN AYN RYAN

Anderson, CA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#163130
Oct 14, 2012
 

Judged:

6

6

6

Mike DiRucci wrote:
<quoted text>
No, it's because you act like a girl.
I hold a grudge toots, you're gonna have to work it, maybe someday I'll get over it but I doubt it. You'd be better off not trying. I won't be cutting you any slack. When you f*ck up, I'll be there.
if wanting to debate is acting like a girl??

then the candidate are a bunch of girlie men, arnt they!!!

lighten up mike, it will do ya good...

so I roughed ya up a little on the foreign issues??

get over it and join the humans...

ps: im counting on you to be there to critique my left leaning rants!!

that is why you have "post comment button", in front of you to voice your veiws....

take a shot at it!

i promise, ill take it easy.
LYIN AYN RYAN

Anderson, CA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#163131
Oct 14, 2012
 

Judged:

5

5

5

akpilot wrote:
<quoted text>
Let me help you:
[W]ow [,] I get your point already!
If I have[,] let[']s hope he has.
get over it.

Since: Jun 07

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#163132
Oct 14, 2012
 

Judged:

6

6

6

LYIN AYN RYAN wrote:
<quoted text>
if wanting to debate is acting like a girl??
What you do could hardly be confused with debate.

Since: Jun 07

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#163133
Oct 14, 2012
 

Judged:

6

6

6

LYIN AYN RYAN wrote:
<quoted text>
get over it.
Get educated, and I will.
LYIN AYN RYAN

Anderson, CA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#163134
Oct 14, 2012
 

Judged:

5

5

5

KiMare wrote:
My gosh!!! Four blondes in a row!
Please explain the specific similarity between denying blacks the right to serve and my reasoning for not mixing orientation attraction in a military setting.
So far, all you did was a partial quote with an ad homoan attack. I'll be real interested to see my hallucinations and non-rationality exposed Marsha.
<quoted text>
We already know that there is a huge problem with heterosexual abuse and rape in the military. This is WITH the genders separated.
Now we add homosexuals NOT separated. And you assert there is no rational basis for concern.
Moreover, you equate my reasoning to blacks will revolt, woman will rule (they already did), blacks will rape whites(some do) and gays will convert boys (gay pedophiles do). I have asserted none of these things.
On the other hand, you asserted that butch lesbians dress and act like men to be 'comfortable'. Another denial of human mating behavior. The same behavior you deny would/is occurring in the military.
You are not in a bubble, you are simply gay twirling no matter how utterly idiotic it becomes.
Here is the simple reality. You claim that two gays serving in closer quarters than heterosexuals are allowed to will never be attracted. Really.
The Greeks recognized the implications of that situation and used it in limited measures. Placing two sexually bonded men in a life and death situation incurred extreme commitment to protect their lover. You deny that tendency in this situation. Why? Because you know it undermines the more important requirement of obedience to leadership in a modern army.
You are supporting the weakening of our military. That is point blank traitorous.
you were a little vague there??

were you promoting the spartan tradition of gay warriors??

mabey that is what we need....

in the mean time, I wouldnt worry about the repeal of dont ask dont tell......
ive been here on this thread, 3 days??

and no one has presented a link to a story chronicling any friction(about gays bunking with striaghts) in the 13 months since the ban was lifted...

mabey our soldiers are getting over it......

........so get OVER IT!!
LYIN AYN RYAN

Anderson, CA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#163135
Oct 14, 2012
 

Judged:

6

6

6

KiMare wrote:
My gosh!!! Four blondes in a row!
Please explain the specific similarity between denying blacks the right to serve and my reasoning for not mixing orientation attraction in a military setting.
So far, all you did was a partial quote with an ad homoan attack. I'll be real interested to see my hallucinations and non-rationality exposed Marsha.
<quoted text>
We already know that there is a huge problem with heterosexual abuse and rape in the military. This is WITH the genders separated.
Now we add homosexuals NOT separated. And you assert there is no rational basis for concern.
Moreover, you equate my reasoning to blacks will revolt, woman will rule (they already did), blacks will rape whites(some do) and gays will convert boys (gay pedophiles do). I have asserted none of these things.
On the other hand, you asserted that butch lesbians dress and act like men to be 'comfortable'. Another denial of human mating behavior. The same behavior you deny would/is occurring in the military.
You are not in a bubble, you are simply gay twirling no matter how utterly idiotic it becomes.
Here is the simple reality. You claim that two gays serving in closer quarters than heterosexuals are allowed to will never be attracted. Really.
The Greeks recognized the implications of that situation and used it in limited measures. Placing two sexually bonded men in a life and death situation incurred extreme commitment to protect their lover. You deny that tendency in this situation. Why? Because you know it undermines the more important requirement of obedience to leadership in a modern army.
You are supporting the weakening of our military. That is point blank traitorous.
so now were traitors because we believe in equality??

btw, moon bat??

our national security rests with our technology and our diplomacy, not how gay our soldiers are......sheeeesh!!!!
Mona Lott

Hoboken, NJ

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#163136
Oct 14, 2012
 

Judged:

6

6

6

KiMare wrote:
My gosh!!! Four blondes in a row!
Please explain the specific similarity between denying blacks the right to serve and my reasoning for not mixing orientation attraction in a military setting.
So far, all you did was a partial quote with an ad homoan attack. I'll be real interested to see my hallucinations and non-rationality exposed Marsha.
<quoted text>
We already know that there is a huge problem with heterosexual abuse and rape in the military. This is WITH the genders separated.
Now we add homosexuals NOT separated. And you assert there is no rational basis for concern.
Moreover, you equate my reasoning to blacks will revolt, woman will rule (they already did), blacks will rape whites(some do) and gays will convert boys (gay pedophiles do). I have asserted none of these things.
On the other hand, you asserted that butch lesbians dress and act like men to be 'comfortable'. Another denial of human mating behavior. The same behavior you deny would/is occurring in the military.
You are not in a bubble, you are simply gay twirling no matter how utterly idiotic it becomes.
Here is the simple reality. You claim that two gays serving in closer quarters than heterosexuals are allowed to will never be attracted. Really.
The Greeks recognized the implications of that situation and used it in limited measures. Placing two sexually bonded men in a life and death situation incurred extreme commitment to protect their lover. You deny that tendency in this situation. Why? Because you know it undermines the more important requirement of obedience to leadership in a modern army.
You are supporting the weakening of our military. That is point blank traitorous.
Whatever your "reasoning" is, the Pentagon disagrees with you. I think I'll take their word over yours.
Shroud

Covina, CA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#163137
Oct 14, 2012
 

Judged:

6

6

6

Still hiding out are ya?

“KiMare'a the Monster Mutation”

Since: Nov 10

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#163138
Oct 14, 2012
 

Judged:

7

7

7

http://www.csmonitor.com/USA/Military/2012/01...

"The rate of violent sexual crime has increased 64 percent since 2006 according to the US Army report, which noted that “rape, sexual assault, and forcible sodomy were the most frequent violent sex crimes committed in 2011.”

"The study warns that reports of crimes such as forcible sodomy may increase among males in the coming year with the repeal of the law that barred openly gay troops from serving in the military.“Now victims may be more likely to report sexual offenses in the absence of the former Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell policy,” since troops no longer have to fear being removed from the military if it is discovered that they are gay."

"Even in the face of increasing rates of rape and aggravated assault in the military, Mr. Panetta emphasized that “we assume this is a very underreported crime,” and that incidents of sexual assault are roughly six times as high as reports of the crime. Last year there were 3,191 reports of sexual assault throughout the US military, but Panetta said that, realistically, the estimate for assaults “actually is closer to 19,000.”

“KiMare'a the Monster Mutation”

Since: Nov 10

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#163139
Oct 14, 2012
 

Judged:

7

7

7

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/10/06/mili...

Note that male victims are 12%. GLBT represent 4% of population.

“Formerly Frankie Rizzo”

Since: Sep 12

Canarsie, NY

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#163140
Oct 14, 2012
 

Judged:

7

7

7

LYIN AYN RYAN wrote:
<quoted text>
if wanting to debate is acting like a girl??
then the candidate are a bunch of girlie men, arnt they!!!
lighten up mike, it will do ya good...
so I roughed ya up a little on the foreign issues??
get over it and join the humans...
ps: im counting on you to be there to critique my left leaning rants!!
that is why you have "post comment button", in front of you to voice your veiws....
take a shot at it!
i promise, ill take it easy.
No. You act like a girl. Not a girly man. A girl.

Stick a fork in yourself toots, you're done.

“KiMare'a the Monster Mutation”

Since: Nov 10

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#163141
Oct 14, 2012
 

Judged:

7

7

7

LYIN AYN RYAN wrote:
<quoted text>
you were a little vague there??
were you promoting the spartan tradition of gay warriors??
mabey that is what we need....
in the mean time, I wouldnt worry about the repeal of dont ask dont tell......
ive been here on this thread, 3 days??
and no one has presented a link to a story chronicling any friction(about gays bunking with striaghts) in the 13 months since the ban was lifted...
mabey our soldiers are getting over it......
........so get OVER IT!!
Did you see the links I posted?

Maybe you were one who judged the Huffington Post article?

Did you see that gay assaults (no clear indication yet of lesbian assaults) are three times the percentage they represent in society? Not a good sign for DADT is it.

Just curious. At what rate of sexual assault would you suggest we repeal gays serving?

“KiMare'a the Monster Mutation”

Since: Nov 10

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#163142
Oct 14, 2012
 

Judged:

8

8

7

The military is not exempt from theses statistics;

http://www.ibiblio.org/rcip/lgbtq.html

Woman on woman sexual assault

Overview:

Rape: When the assailant is one of our own

"Sexual assault isn't committed just by men. Lesbians who have been raped by other lesbians are beginning to speak out, but they're finding support slow in coming--from the legal system, victim support lines and our own community"

Woman on Woman sexual assault.

http://www.sfwar.org/node/view/33

"Did you know that....

women can be raped by other women?
women can sexually assault other women?
violence occurs in 1 out of 4 lesbian relationships?
lesbian domestic violence often includes lesbian rape?
lesbian rape is almost always unreported?"


Lesbian domestic violence

http://lesbianlife.about.com/od/lesbianhealth...

"30% of LGBT couples experience domestic violence"
Winston Smith

Rosedale, MD

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#163143
Oct 14, 2012
 

Judged:

6

6

6

KiMare wrote:
My gosh!!! Four blondes in a row!
Please explain the specific similarity between denying blacks the right to serve and my reasoning for not mixing orientation attraction in a military setting.
So far, all you did was a partial quote with an ad homoan attack. I'll be real interested to see my hallucinations and non-rationality exposed Marsha.
<quoted text>
We already know that there is a huge problem with heterosexual abuse and rape in the military. This is WITH the genders separated.
Now we add homosexuals NOT separated. And you assert there is no rational basis for concern.
Moreover, you equate my reasoning to blacks will revolt, woman will rule (they already did), blacks will rape whites(some do) and gays will convert boys (gay pedophiles do). I have asserted none of these things.
On the other hand, you asserted that butch lesbians dress and act like men to be 'comfortable'. Another denial of human mating behavior. The same behavior you deny would/is occurring in the military.
You are not in a bubble, you are simply gay twirling no matter how utterly idiotic it becomes.
Here is the simple reality. You claim that two gays serving in closer quarters than heterosexuals are allowed to will never be attracted. Really.
The Greeks recognized the implications of that situation and used it in limited measures. Placing two sexually bonded men in a life and death situation incurred extreme commitment to protect their lover. You deny that tendency in this situation. Why? Because you know it undermines the more important requirement of obedience to leadership in a modern army.
You are supporting the weakening of our military. That is point blank traitorous.
I equate them all because they're all the same. Bullshxt, nothing more and nothing less. Letting gays serve openly doesn't change anything regarding rape and other untoward behavior. It is already taking place. Whether or not someone is openly gay has no bearing on the quantity of this behavior. You've got just as much cause and effect shown as I have stating that sitting on park benches and feeding pigeons peanuts makes you age because you never see young people doing it.

You go on to make the spurious claim (a reflection of the claims made by some 1000+ officials before the repeal of DADT) that the military will be weakened.
link wrote:
“Repeal… would undermine recruiting and retention, impact leadership at all levels, have adverse effects on the willingness of parents who lend their sons and daughters to military service, and eventually break the All-Volunteer Force.”
— March 2009 statement signed by
1,167 retired admirals and generals

“The flag and general officers for the military, 1,167 to date, 51 of them former four-stars, said that this law, if repealed, could indeed break the All-Volunteer Force. They chose that word very carefully. They have a lot of military experience… and they know what they’re talking about.”
— Elaine Donnelly, Center for Military
Readiness, May 2010.
Amazingly enough:
link wrote:
Conclusion
Based on the substantial evidence we gathered in our research, we conclude that, during the one-year period following implementation of the policy change, DADT repeal has had no negative impact on overall military readiness or its component parts: unit cohesion, recruitment, retention, assaults, harassment or morale. While repeal produced a few downsides for some military members—mostly those who personally opposed the policy change—we identified important upsides as well, and in no case did negative consequences outweigh advantages. On balance, DADT repeal appears to have slightly enhanced the military’s ability to do its job by clearing away unnecessary obstacles to the development of trust and bonding.
http://www.palmcenter.org/files/One%20Year%20...

1 year post repeal don't reflect what you claim. A group of people much more versed in the matter disagree with you.
Dan

Tokyo, Japan

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#163144
Oct 14, 2012
 

Judged:

7

7

7

LYIN AYN RYAN wrote:
<quoted text>
you can just say you disagree?? and add something interesting..
but im gonna pull the 1st on ya!! because it is so close to election time as well..
but by all means carry on....
how does this election(in your humble opinion) effect the march towards parity for the LGBT community, in regards to civil rights??
in my opinion?? electing romney would be a step BACK for the gay community.
i think I have alot of agreement on that WITHIN the lgbt community.
thannx
Go ahead and play the fool.

But posting your asshat views on politics which are in no way connected to gay marriage in a forum based on just that is not only off topic but ignorant.

No different than if you were to walk into Baskin Robbins and advise you wanted your burger cooked medium you idiot.

FYI.

“TAKIA AND TA TONKA”

Since: Aug 08

HAPPY TOGETHER!!!

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#163145
Oct 14, 2012
 

Judged:

7

7

7

KiMare wrote:
http://www.csmonitor.com/USA/M ilitary/2012/0119/Pentagon-rep ort-Sexual-assault-in-the-mili tary-up-dramatically
Your source is about as reliable as World Nut Daily or Lifesitenews......here's what it says in the about us:
No, it’s a real news organization owned by a church – The First Church of Christ, Scientist, in Boston, Mass., USA.

I'd rather you provide a credible news source......thanks!!!
Winston Smith

Rosedale, MD

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#163146
Oct 14, 2012
 

Judged:

6

6

6

KiMare wrote:
http://www.csmonitor.com/USA/M ilitary/2012/0119/Pentagon-rep ort-Sexual-assault-in-the-mili tary-up-dramatically
"The rate of violent sexual crime has increased 64 percent since 2006 according to the US Army report, which noted that “rape, sexual assault, and forcible sodomy were the most frequent violent sex crimes committed in 2011.”
"The study warns that reports of crimes such as forcible sodomy may increase among males in the coming year with the repeal of the law that barred openly gay troops from serving in the military.“Now victims may be more likely to report sexual offenses in the absence of the former Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell policy,” since troops no longer have to fear being removed from the military if it is discovered that they are gay."
"Even in the face of increasing rates of rape and aggravated assault in the military, Mr. Panetta emphasized that “we assume this is a very underreported crime,” and that incidents of sexual assault are roughly six times as high as reports of the crime. Last year there were 3,191 reports of sexual assault throughout the US military, but Panetta said that, realistically, the estimate for assaults “actually is closer to 19,000.”
Did you bother reading the entire article or did you just mine it for your argument?
YourLink wrote:
While women comprise 14 percent of the Army ranks, they account for 95 percent of all sex crime victims.

The study warns that reports of crimes such as forcible sodomy may increase among males in the coming year with the repeal of the law that barred openly gay troops from serving in the military.“Now victims may be more likely to report sexual offenses in the absence of the former Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell policy,” since troops no longer have to fear being removed from the military if it is discovered that they are gay.
Pay particular attention to this:
YourLink wrote:
At the time of the study’s publication,“There were no discernible trends regarding same gender sex crimes.”
Nothing in your link gives any substance to your argument.

BTW, rape is not a crime of sexual desire. It is about control. You're using the actions of criminals to marginalize the innocent.

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

Add to my Tracker Send me an email

Showing posts 143,821 - 143,840 of199,068
|
Go to last page| Jump to page:
Type in your comments below
Name
(appears on your post)
Comments
Characters left: 4000
Type the numbers you see in the image on the right:

Please note by clicking on "Post Comment" 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 Jobs

•••
•••
•••

Monterey People Search

Addresses and phone numbers for FREE

•••

Personal Finance

Mortgages [ See current mortgage rates ]
•••