Judge overturns California's ban on same-sex marriage

[heartandmind]

Big D wrote:

<quoted text>
All I know is someone was talking about the fall and making a whole lot of incorrect statements about it.
Why it fell was an interesting discussion, as it is opinions, but someone was making blatantly incorrect statements as if they got their info from some cult Sunday school

maybe they'll read & educate themselves.

i doubt it, but at least it's there for those that prefer to educate themselves.

i love it when the proclaim just how it fell....and historical fact proves them wrong. typically those guys go off in a huff-n-puff, trying to protest that what is written, vetted and published is wrong and that they are the correct ones in the discussion, yet have nothing to substantiate their claims. LOL. makes me think of how a balloon sounds when it looses it's air. pffffffft.

have a great weekend, bigD

[Big D]

Mikey DiRucci wrote:

<quoted text>
Yet another liar?

Oh no, just someone terribly misinformed

A lair would be someone that makes up something and says that someone else said that when they did not.

A mistake, or lack of education is one thing, falsifying what others say is something totally different.

[KiMare]

KiMare wrote:
<quoted text>
You are playing irresponsible games.
Demanding we head down a road while ignoring the destination.
Not only do you once again expose the weakness of your argument, you expose the lack of character that goes with it.
Smirk.

heartandmind wrote:

<quoted text>
and you're not playing games yourself? you're dilluting a relationship two consenting adult want to solemnize with vows and obtain those rights the GAO listed a few yrs back (totaling to just over 1300) that are extended to only legally married couples. you're the one trying to tell us that anything other than a male/female married relationship isn't worthy of those vows to one another. you're the one that's smirking at you own (lack) of with, chum, not us.
the issues at hand are regarding the legal contract between 2 consenting adults that wish to marry. stick to the topic. when you can rationally discuss with insulting people, then chime in. without the smartasz smirks and ridiculous comparisons. until then, let the grownups talk at the grown up table.

I ask two serious pertinent questions, and you recklessly slough them off, claiming it's okay because "you play games too".

Once again you expose the weakness of your argument, the lack of character you possess, and now you add to it silly immaturity.

You mistake the sinking of the knife of reality to the hilt into the belly of denial and twisted with a smirk for a cheap smartasz comment. Hardly the same.

Go back to your video games and gay porn.

Smirk.

[Redux]

Tin Foil clowns from out of towners are psoting again.

[heartandmind]

KiMare wrote:

<quoted text>
So you would have preferred Europe be Islamic much sooner than it will be? Read about the Ottoman Empire for a taste of what is coming.
Do you know anything but gay twirl and bigotry about history?
But the bottom line is, you are excusing the slaughter of innocent people in horrific barbarity by equating it to a dissimilar situation that may or may not be horrific. Put simply, you are saying two wrongs make a right.
Wrong.

the effect of the Crusades :

http://www.the-orb.net/encyclop/religion/crus...

[heartandmind]

KiMare wrote:

KiMare wrote:
<quoted text>
You are playing irresponsible games.
Demanding we head down a road while ignoring the destination.
Not only do you once again expose the weakness of your argument, you expose the lack of character that goes with it.
Smirk.
<quoted text>
I ask two serious pertinent questions, and you recklessly slough them off, claiming it's okay because "you play games too".
Once again you expose the weakness of your argument, the lack of character you possess, and now you add to it silly immaturity.
You mistake the sinking of the knife of reality to the hilt into the belly of denial and twisted with a smirk for a cheap smartasz comment. Hardly the same.
Go back to your video games and gay porn.
Smirk.

sounds like you know a lot about that sort of stuff. good luck with that chum.

the reality is that judges have ruled in favor of striking down Prop 8 and DOMA is teetering on it's last lungfuls of air as we wait until March when the Supreme Court considers the cases.

your opinions indeed mean nothing in light of the writings of judges. you, in the end, are a mere internet stranger with no credibility, in stark contrast to that of seated judges.

[Big D]

heartandmind wrote:

<quoted text>
maybe they'll read & educate themselves.
i doubt it, but at least it's there for those that prefer to educate themselves.
i love it when the proclaim just how it fell....and historical fact proves them wrong. typically those guys go off in a huff-n-puff, trying to protest that what is written, vetted and published is wrong and that they are the correct ones in the discussion, yet have nothing to substantiate their claims. LOL. makes me think of how a balloon sounds when it looses it's air. pffffffft.
have a great weekend, bigD

Yes, I have found that most people that have it THAT wrong are more interested in believing what is not true, than knowing what is.

You too, looking forward to a nice weekend!:)

[Mikey DiRucci]

Big D wrote:

<quoted text>
Oh no, just someone terribly misinformed
A lair would be someone that makes up something and says that someone else said that when they did not.
A mistake, or lack of education is one thing, falsifying what others say is something totally different.

It seems everyone who disagrees with you is a liar. We've all allegedly "made up something and said that you said it when you did not".

And it always happens just as you are losing the argument. And you never accuse anyone who agrees with you of it. Funny that.

[Rose_NoHo]

KiMare wrote:

<quoted text>
You mean the slaughter of Christians in arenas deserved to go on?
No one screamed 'what about the children' just like you.
Do you even understand what you are defending?
Ho.

I just stated a truth, that Christianity helped to destroy Rome. Not saying what, if anything, should or shouldn't have been done about it.

[Rose_NoHo]

KiMare wrote:

<quoted text>
Circular reasoning about flat (also a pun referring to your chest, and not your ass).
Snicker.

My chest, flat? LOL! You are such an idiot.

[Rose_NoHo]

Jane Dodo wrote:

<quoted text>Because he's not really interested in polygamy. He's interested in whining.

He's just trolling.

[Randy Hudson]

Marram wrote:

<quoted text>
Looks like Topix mimics life. You are officially a loser that no one what’s around. Good riddance mike/rock, I won’t miss you.

The only reason that you would not miss me is because I make a you look like the idiot that you are.

[Randy Hudson]

Mikey DiRucci wrote:

<quoted text>
I'm right behind you. With 4 times. And working on 5! WOO HOOO!
It means you're hitting the sweet spot for sure!

:-D

[Mikey DiRucci]

Rose_NoHo wrote:

<quoted text>
He's just trolling.

Limiting the number of husbands a woman has seems to me just as much an infringement as limiting the gender of whom that woman can marry.

[Randy Hudson]

Rose_NoHo wrote:

<quoted text>
Well, stupid, polygamy is a red herring. It's not the issue, the issue is gay marriage. Why not start a forum to talk about polygamy? Too dumb to know how to do that? That's my guess.

That would be about as far as you can get, in your pursuit of critical thinking skills...guesswork, blundering about, in the dark. Lost and clueless. Like when you thought you'd gotten the better of me, asking to name some of the books I'd made mention of, and i gave you about 50, or so, titles. And then you had to drop the subject, because you'd been made a fool of. And you knew...I mean, guessed it.

[Randy Hudson]

Rose_NoHo wrote:

<quoted text>
Reported.

What, exactly, can you mean by that ? As if you haven't had me banned already, you think that you have something to report ? OMG, what a fool you are.
Uh-oh, if you have reported me, do you think that they might ban me ? Heavens to murgatroyd, that would hurt me, right in my heart, where I'm sensitive, and shit.....

[KiMare]

heartandmind wrote:

<quoted text>
the effect of the Crusades :
http://www.the-orb.net/encyclop/religion/crus...

It seems to me you agree with me, as the article does.

Does that still neutralize the barbarity of the Roman arena?

Smile.

[Rose_NoHo]

Brian_G wrote:

<quoted text>^^^That's untrue; Rose has posted this lie many times before.
Most same sex marriage supporters don't care about the truth and will post anything to 'win' the argument. If you care about truth, keep marriage male/female.

I believe the person who said you are divorced, not you.
You are a vile person, and I often find the "save marriage" folks are divorced.
And your "argument" in this post makes no sense. Even if I were the biggest lair on earth, that wouldn't be a good reason to deny US citizens basic, equal, human rights, you dumb b1tch.

[Randy Hudson]

Rose_NoHo wrote:

<quoted text>
Reported.

Ooohh, Chongo is reporting me, for what ? Dissatisfaction at being banned ?

[KiMare]

heartandmind wrote:

<quoted text>
sounds like you know a lot about that sort of stuff. good luck with that chum.
the reality is that judges have ruled in favor of striking down Prop 8 and DOMA is teetering on it's last lungfuls of air as we wait until March when the Supreme Court considers the cases.
your opinions indeed mean nothing in light of the writings of judges. you, in the end, are a mere internet stranger with no credibility, in stark contrast to that of seated judges.

Child, child, child.

Can a judge overrule reality? Commonsense?

You have no answer for two simple assertions;

1. The government has NO interest in protecting or supporting a friendship.

2. It is unconstitutional bias to selectively support friendships.

Moreover, you deny the most basic roots of marriage. A cross cultural constraint on evolutionary mating behavior.

Snicker.