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
144,521 - 144,540 of 200,564 Comments Last updated 5 hrs ago
FT record

La Puente, CA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#163992
Oct 19, 2012
 

Judged:

7

7

7

For the record, it was President Obama who authorized the mission; it happened on his watch, so he gets credit.
Tata

Westminster, CA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#163993
Oct 19, 2012
 

Judged:

7

7

7

Big D wrote:
Last time I looked there were some 18,000 legal gay marriages in the state of California, I donít happen to be gay, but I noticed their getting married didnít hurt my marriage in any way at all, I feel sorry for the religious folks whose marriage are so fragile that they claim it hurt theirs.
Take a closer look at your utility bills, and any other public service bill or fees (tax), these are state wide. Although these extra costs are above and beyond your actual utility usage, they off set the cost to finance meds to the Aids/HIV patients for one example, there are others however. Most company health insurance will not pay for a pre-existing illness such as and AIDS/HIV patient. The state very carefully blends these hidden costs in you monthly bills, clever huh ??? It's obvious that SSM is taking advantage of this thinking that by marring they can get double coverage. It sounds complicating because it is most people don't look at the real reasont for tax/fee increases they just pay them.

“TAKIA AND TA TONKA”

Since: Aug 08

HAPPY TOGETHER!!!

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#163995
Oct 19, 2012
 

Judged:

6

6

6

Tata wrote:
<quoted text>
Take a closer look at your utility bills, and any other public service bill or fees (tax), these are state wide. Although these extra costs are above and beyond your actual utility usage, they off set the cost to finance meds to the Aids/HIV patients for one example, there are others however. Most company health insurance will not pay for a pre-existing illness such as and AIDS/HIV patient. The state very carefully blends these hidden costs in you monthly bills, clever huh ??? It's obvious that SSM is taking advantage of this thinking that by marring they can get double coverage. It sounds complicating because it is most people don't look at the real reasont for tax/fee increases they just pay them.
Yep, hidden medical costs in our utility bills.......are you paranoid? or just simply an azz Bruno?

“TAKIA AND TA TONKA”

Since: Aug 08

HAPPY TOGETHER!!!

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#163996
Oct 19, 2012
 

Judged:

6

6

6

FT record wrote:
For the record, it was President Obama who authorized the mission; it happened on his watch, so he gets credit.
And it was the House Republicans who failed to provide funding for the extra security that was asked for.......so, yes the President is overall responsible for the mission.......but the Republicans have blood on their hands as well......Boehner has done everything in his power to make the President look as bad as he can!!!

“No Allah: know peace”

Since: Jun 07

A sacred grove in Tujunga, CA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#163997
Oct 19, 2012
 

Judged:

6

6

6

akpilot wrote:
<quoted text>
Not once have I used religion as a point in this debate, so again:
This has nothing to do with religion, so come up with a rational argument.
Perhaps you missed my point. I was saying that the only arguments that anyone has been able to come up with are based on religion. Without using false translations of the Bible, the anti-SSM crowd looses any semblance of validity.

And of course, the religious argument fails since the rules of one person's religion have NO bearing on the behavior of people who believe differently.

Beyond that, it simply comes down to the application of the 14th amendment. ALL citizens, INCLUDING unpopular minorities, are entitled to equal protection under the law. Discrimination against a minority requires a compelling state interest, but there is no compelling state interest in denying gays their right to marry.

This would hold true even if sexual orientation were merely a matter of choice, but the current scientific evidence shows that there is a genetic or epigenetic nature to orientation. Thus, the situation is completely analogous to allowing different races to marry, which the courts have already declared a basic right.

Some people vainly attempt to claim that the lack of children (without artificial aid) inhibits the right of gays to marry, yet there is no fertility test for heterosexual couple prior to marriage, not even a question of intent to have children is required. Thus, the lack of intrinsic childbearing capability cannot be viewed as a valid argument against SSM.

“No Allah: know peace”

Since: Jun 07

A sacred grove in Tujunga, CA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#163998
Oct 19, 2012
 

Judged:

6

6

5

akpilot wrote:
<quoted text>
What is your point? That the Federal government extended the practice of voting to women?
That in and of itself shows that it is not a "right", it is a privilege.
But if it makes us feel better to call it a "right" so be it, doesn't change reality.
No, it does NOT change voting from a right to a privilege. It merely indicates that prior to that time, women were categorically DENIED their right to vote, for no valid reason beyond the mere fact that they were of a different gender than the Founding Fathers. Hey, the Founding Fathers were good. Considering that they had to invent all of this from scratch, they were incredibly good. But they still suffered from the prejudidices of their time.

“No Allah: know peace”

Since: Jun 07

A sacred grove in Tujunga, CA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#163999
Oct 19, 2012
 

Judged:

7

7

5

R Hudson wrote:
<quoted text>
If you think I am a child, then you are delirious. How can you promote something "icky" ?
Silly child, I refer to your mental age...

As for promoting something "icky", I don't. I do not "promote" anal sex, oral sex, vaginal sex, or axillary sex (that's: "armpit"). What I DO promote, indeed I insist upon, is that consenting adults have the right to perform and and all sexual actions to which they can agree. Note that KEY phrase: "consenting adults".

“Reality bites”

Since: Dec 11

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#164000
Oct 19, 2012
 

Judged:

6

6

6

Mike DiRucci wrote:
<quoted text>
Nope. Don't need to. Got what I need. You?
Are you comming out? Well good for you. I am sure you can and will find love, just not from me. My wife does not share her fella.
Edgar

Los Angeles, CA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#164001
Oct 19, 2012
 

Judged:

6

6

6

Liam R wrote:
<quoted text>
Silly child, I refer to your mental age...
As for promoting something "icky", I don't. I do not "promote" anal sex, oral sex, vaginal sex, or axillary sex (that's: "armpit"). What I DO promote, indeed I insist upon, is that consenting adults have the right to perform and and all sexual actions to which they can agree. Note that KEY phrase: "consenting adults".
I take it then that you and yours are okay with her being filmed with burros and you fellating black men since you are both consenting adults.

Right?

“No Allah: know peace”

Since: Jun 07

A sacred grove in Tujunga, CA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#164002
Oct 19, 2012
 

Judged:

7

6

5

R Hudson wrote:
<quoted text>
OK, wise guy, how about prostitution ?
well, what about it? It is an act between consenting adults, an agreement to exchange a service for payment.

Oh, there are certainly potential complicating factors, like the possibility of one person being breaching a promise of fidelity to an outside party. And of course, sex trafficking removes the point of consent from one party. And of course, since it involves some degree of promiscuity, even with safe sex precautions, there is a risk of disease. But even with these considerations, there are remedies within the legal framework that raise serious questions regarding the validity of the laws creating a blanket prohibition of prostitution.
Tata

Los Angeles, CA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#164003
Oct 19, 2012
 

Judged:

7

7

6

NorCal Native wrote:
<quoted text>
Yep, hidden medical costs in our utility bills.......are you paranoid? or just simply an azz Bruno?
Fkk off.

“Formerly Frankie Rizzo”

Since: Sep 12

Canarsie, NY

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#164004
Oct 19, 2012
 

Judged:

7

6

6

Jazybird58 wrote:
<quoted text>Are you comming out? Well good for you. I am sure you can and will find love, just not from me. My wife does not share her fella.
Like I said, I have what I need. I'm real proud that you do too!

I certainly don't need or want your gnarly ass or your wife's either. Why would you ask?

P.S. Maybe I am gay. So what? You some kind of homophobe or something?

TOO FUNNY!
Edgar

Los Angeles, CA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#164005
Oct 19, 2012
 

Judged:

7

7

6

Jazybird58 wrote:
<quoted text>Are you comming out? Well good for you. I am sure you can and will find love, just not from me. My wife does not share her fella.
You're nuts. I cyber boned your missus two nites ago. She's a great on-line ho!
Edgar

Spring, TX

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#164006
Oct 19, 2012
 

Judged:

6

5

4

Edgar wrote:
<quoted text>
I take it then that you and yours are okay with her being filmed with burros and you fellating black men since you are both consenting adults.
Right?
nice try, bro.

next time, hide your location. I don't live in LA.

“Formerly Frankie Rizzo”

Since: Sep 12

Canarsie, NY

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#164007
Oct 19, 2012
 

Judged:

6

6

5

Edgar wrote:
<quoted text>
I take it then that you and yours are okay with her being filmed with burros and you fellating black men since you are both consenting adults.
Right?
That Jazzybird58 jackass might want some of that action. He and his wife just hit on me.

“No Allah: know peace”

Since: Jun 07

A sacred grove in Tujunga, CA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#164008
Oct 19, 2012
 

Judged:

6

6

6

LBer wrote:
Hay all (what up Rose!),
Sorry, been away on business; too busy.
Found this article in the Military Press; note how our liberal left media continued the Vietnam war:
General Vo Nguyen Giap, the North Vietnamese general, the architect of the military campaign that finally drove the U.S. out of South Vietnam in 1975, is cited as crediting Presidential aspirant John Kerry and his VVAW with helping them achieve victory. In Giap's 1985 memoir about the war, he wrote that if it weren't for organizations like Kerry's Vietnam Veterans Against the War, Hanoi would have surrendered to the U.S." Giap was quoted as saying, "What we still don't understand is why you Americans stopped the bombing of Hanoi. You had us on the ropes. If you had pressed us a little harder, just for another day or two, we were ready to surrender! It was the same at the battles of TET. You defeated us! We knew it, and we thought you knew it. But, we were elated to notice the media were definitely helping us. They were causing more disruption in America than we could in the battlefields. Yes, we were ready to surrender. You had won!"
Old news. Any body who looks at the facts knows that we had won the military campaign. In fact, when we called them to the table to negotiate our withdrawal, they were expecting us to open up with a demand to surrender.

But it is purely partisan politics to try and place the blame on Kerry and the VAW. The American press was broadcasting the war right into people's livingrooms every night on the news. People were tired of the images of death and destruction. The VAW was only one group among many who were protesting the war.

“No Allah: know peace”

Since: Jun 07

A sacred grove in Tujunga, CA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#164009
Oct 19, 2012
 

Judged:

6

6

5

Edgar wrote:
<quoted text>
I take it then that you and yours are okay with her being filmed with burros and you fellating black men since you are both consenting adults.
Right?
What an incredibly stupid question, on numerous points, but most specifically: I have no interest in fellating men of ANY race, she has no interest in beastiality,(and the burro CANNOT consent in any event), and neither of us is interested in creating film for public consumption.

“No Allah: know peace”

Since: Jun 07

A sacred grove in Tujunga, CA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#164010
Oct 19, 2012
 

Judged:

6

6

5

akpilot wrote:
<quoted text>
We all have a creator Rose, do you think we just pop out of thin air?
Unlike the Founding Fathers, we now have science that shows that a creator is not necessary for our existence...

No, the Big Bang theory and evolution do not, in and of themselves, "prove" that there is no creator (science can not do that!), but they work quite well to explain existence without invoking supernatural actions.
Big D

Modesto, CA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#164011
Oct 19, 2012
 

Judged:

7

7

6

Tata wrote:
<quoted text>
Take a closer look at your utility bills, and any other public service bill or fees (tax), these are state wide. Although these extra costs are above and beyond your actual utility usage, they off set the cost to finance meds to the Aids/HIV patients for one example, there are others however. Most company health insurance will not pay for a pre-existing illness such as and AIDS/HIV patient. The state very carefully blends these hidden costs in you monthly bills, clever huh ??? It's obvious that SSM is taking advantage of this thinking that by marring they can get double coverage. It sounds complicating because it is most people don't look at the real reasont for tax/fee increases they just pay them.
What are you talking about, heterosexuals get HIV the same as homosexuals, last time I looked more HIV victims were heterosexual in the world than homosexual.

You need to become a tad more educated before you post garbage.

I am in favor of research into the cures of a lot of diseases including HIV, but then I am actually a compassionate person, not a member of the current day Spanish Inquisition
Big D

Modesto, CA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#164012
Oct 19, 2012
 

Judged:

6

6

6

Liam R wrote:
<quoted text>
Unlike the Founding Fathers, we now have science that shows that a creator is not necessary for our existence...
No, the Big Bang theory and evolution do not, in and of themselves, "prove" that there is no creator (science can not do that!), but they work quite well to explain existence without invoking supernatural actions.
Interesting to note, the one of the greatest early advocates of the "Big Bang" was a religious individual and saw it as a positive for creationism.

Georges LemaÓtre

However that is not what they are told to say from the pulput today so it has sort of gone by the wayside.

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.

Monterey Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
Messianic Jews say they are persecuted in Israel (Jun '08) 1 hr Eric 68,912
clint 10 hr ubietron 1
CA CA Proposition 23 - Global Warming (Oct '10) 12 hr Donny B 7,922
Mills brothers face new lawsuits over loans (Nov '08) Tue Plain Simple 16
clint Tue ubietron 1
MONTEREY HERALD LOSS monterey bay, monterey cit... Tue roensoledad 2
CA California Proposition 19: the Marijuana Legali... (Oct '10) Tue matches lighters 15,961
•••
•••
Monterey Dating

more search filters

less search filters

•••

Monterey Jobs

•••
Enter and win $5000
•••
•••

Monterey People Search

Addresses and phone numbers for FREE

•••

Monterey News, Events & Info

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

Personal Finance

Mortgages [ See current mortgage rates ]
•••