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.

Frankie Rizzo

Union City, CA

#177879 Jan 31, 2013
Big D wrote:
<quoted text>
well first you have to stop lying and say I have an objection to poly marriage, I have not said that.
Learn to read English, I have an objection of many of the adherents of it that use it for an excuse for child abuse and welfare fraud.
Take away those adherents ( which I think we should do ), and you take away a large number of the adherents and supporters of it.
What is am saying is that it just isnít an issue that will come up for the next decade or so.
The Big D "liar" straw man! It's old. And it's a lie.
Jane Dodo

Hoboken, NJ

#177880 Jan 31, 2013
Frankie Rizzo wrote:
<quoted text>
On what grounds do you insist on the traditional, ARBITRARY, discriminatory and indefensible number of two?
P.S. The answer is not "LMFAO@you"
How can you label it arbitrary? You think the number two was picked at random with no reasoning behind it? Out of all the numbers, why pick two? No reason? Seriously???????

INDEFENSIBLE???????? hahahahahahah

OK.... I'm done. You don't have the intellect to discuss this. You are unteachable and incorrigible.
Frankie Rizzo

Union City, CA

#177881 Jan 31, 2013
Jane Dodo wrote:
<quoted text>
ASSume, yes you do, and most of the time you are WRONG.
You can't even follow your posts from 5 minutes ago. How can you possibly remember something that I wrote over a year ago?
The funny thing is, I do remember the post you are referring to. It wasn't my opinion. I told you I didn't have an opinion either way. Then you asked what are some of the opinions given by people who DO think polygamy is bad. I Googled it and copy&pasted it for your lazy ass. Now, it becomes "my" opinion, eh? Your memory is fucked.
How many times do I have to tell you I have NO opinion about poygamy before it sinks in? I didn't care one year ago, I don't care today and I won't care in the future. Pointing out the errors in your reasoning is NOT the same thing as taking a stand against polygamy. I don't care.
So I am wrong? You fully support the legalization of polygamy?

Then why did you cut and paste others ignorance and bigotry about it? To prove you supported it? I think you are giving us an alternate history of your year old post. But at least NOW you admit you made it, you have been denying it until this point.
Frankie Rizzo

Union City, CA

#177882 Jan 31, 2013
Jane Dodo wrote:
<quoted text>
How can you label it arbitrary? You think the number two was picked at random with no reasoning behind it? Out of all the numbers, why pick two? No reason? Seriously???????
INDEFENSIBLE???????? hahahahahahah
OK.... I'm done. You don't have the intellect to discuss this. You are unteachable and incorrigible.
Translation- You lose. Bye!
Big D

Modesto, CA

#177883 Jan 31, 2013
Frankie Rizzo wrote:
<quoted text>
The Big D "liar" straw man! It's old. And it's a lie.
Ok point to the post where I said I was against poly marriage and not specifically certain adherents of it.

you either do that... or you were lying

up to you

Other people have already pointed out your dishonesty, so they will get to see this too.
Big D

Modesto, CA

#177884 Jan 31, 2013
Frankie Rizzo wrote:
<quoted text>
Translation- You lose. Bye!
Danths's Law ( chuckle )
Frankie Rizzo

Union City, CA

#177886 Jan 31, 2013
Big D wrote:
<quoted text>
Ok point to the post where I said I was against poly marriage and not specifically certain adherents of it.
you either do that... or you were lying
up to you
Other people have already pointed out your dishonesty, so they will get to see this too.
You rant against polygamy's "adherents" like some crazed fundie does against same sex marriage "adherents".

Calling them child molesters and other ignorant accusations. There are bad people of all stripes jackass. In same sex marriages too.

But I'm not going to go for your "you're a liar!" straw man today Big Dope. Fool me once, shame on you. Fool me twice, shame on me.
Big D

Modesto, CA

#177888 Jan 31, 2013
Frankie Rizzo wrote:
<quoted text>
You rant against polygamy's "adherents" like some crazed fundie does against same sex marriage "adherents".
Calling them child molesters and other ignorant accusations. There are bad people of all stripes jackass. In same sex marriages too.
But I'm not going to go for your "you're a liar!" straw man today Big Dope. Fool me once, shame on you. Fool me twice, shame on me.
I rant against what they do, or are you saying you are pro-child molestation and welfare fraud?

I never said all adherents, I said many, which is true.
Mocker

Novato, CA

#177889 Jan 31, 2013
Jane Dodo wrote:
<quoted text>

How many times do I have to tell you I have NO opinion about poygamy before it sinks in? I didn't care one year ago, I don't care today and I won't care in the future. Pointing out the errors in your reasoning is NOT the same thing as taking a stand against polygamy. I don't care.
Holy crap!! You guys have been having the gay/poly argument for a year? The damn horse is deader than VHS.

Personally, don't really care about polygamy except yeah, some people that practice it are fucked up in the head. The other issue is money. If you were to legalize polygamy you're basically saying employers have to cover all 14 of his wives (whoever "he" is) under his health care plan, right? In that regard it IS different than same sex marriage. I'm sure there are other areas where money would factor in as well.
Frankie Rizzo

Union City, CA

#177890 Jan 31, 2013
Jane Dodo wrote:
<quoted text>
How can you label it arbitrary? You think the number two was picked at random with no reasoning behind it? Out of all the numbers, why pick two? No reason? Seriously???????
INDEFENSIBLE???????? hahahahahahah
OK.... I'm done. You don't have the intellect to discuss this. You are unteachable and incorrigible.
Let's run your argument by replacing gender where you use number shall we? Aw hell you do it, you get my drift.

You think gender was picked at random with no reasoning behind it?????????? bla bla bla... You finish it Miss Thing.
Big D

Modesto, CA

#177892 Jan 31, 2013
Mocker wrote:
<quoted text>
Holy crap!! You guys have been having the gay/poly argument for a year? The damn horse is deader than VHS.
Personally, don't really care about polygamy except yeah, some people that practice it are fucked up in the head. The other issue is money. If you were to legalize polygamy you're basically saying employers have to cover all 14 of his wives (whoever "he" is) under his health care plan, right? In that regard it IS different than same sex marriage. I'm sure there are other areas where money would factor in as well.
It is a dead horse.

That second point is used by many of them constantly, they marry several young wives, each on welfare.

It is quite s scheme getting money from the government that way

I donít give a crap about it either, but I certainly donít like the way many adherents of it are using it.
Mocker

Novato, CA

#177894 Jan 31, 2013
Big D wrote:
<quoted text>
It is a dead horse.
That second point is used by many of them constantly, they marry several young wives, each on welfare.
It is quite s scheme getting money from the government that way
I donít give a crap about it either, but I certainly donít like the way many adherents of it are using it.
This is off topic but I had to read about the poly welfare abuse. Apparently because they AREN'T allowed to legally marry, all the other "moms" can obtain welfare by saying they're single parents. That's very screwed up but it actually makes a small argument for legalizing their marriages.

That said, I still see a LOT of other downsides (like the insurance/benefits issue I mentioned previously). Better they should go after the assholes for welfare abuse.
Rush

Columbus, NE

#177895 Jan 31, 2013
Largelanguage wrote:
<quoted text>
Typical of black or mexican immigrants, child!
Take your hate back to the UK. No room for it here Im still waiing to be struck down by lightning. That u provs tht YOU are the heathen, and Rachet dont listen to you.
Frankie Rizzo

Union City, CA

#177896 Jan 31, 2013
Big D wrote:
<quoted text>
It is a dead horse.
That second point is used by many of them constantly, they marry several young wives, each on welfare.
It is quite s scheme getting money from the government that way
I donít give a crap about it either, but I certainly donít like the way many adherents of it are using it.
Will you maybe listen to a one time disclaimer and then stop your straw man nonsense?

When I talk of legalizing same sex, poly, and incest marriage I am OF COURSE talking about honest, law abiding consenting and committed adults!

Since: Apr 11

North Hollywood, CA

#177897 Jan 31, 2013
Largelanguage wrote:
<quoted text>
Not sure your loved?
My loved what?
Largelanguage wrote:
You love being loved, is that why you say you love men? What a self absorbed women!
You've got serious issues.
Frankie Rizzo

Union City, CA

#177898 Jan 31, 2013
Mocker wrote:
<quoted text>
This is off topic but I had to read about the poly welfare abuse. Apparently because they AREN'T allowed to legally marry, all the other "moms" can obtain welfare by saying they're single parents. That's very screwed up but it actually makes a small argument for legalizing their marriages.
That said, I still see a LOT of other downsides (like the insurance/benefits issue I mentioned previously). Better they should go after the assholes for welfare abuse.
Right, go after the criminals, not the polygamists for chrissakes!

Some black people commit welfare fraud...see where I'm going with this?
Frankie Rizzo

Union City, CA

#177901 Jan 31, 2013
Big D wrote:
<quoted text>
It is a dead horse.
That second point is used by many of them constantly, they marry several young wives, each on welfare.
It is quite s scheme getting money from the government that way
I donít give a crap about it either, but I certainly donít like the way many adherents of it are using it.
You sure don't have anything god to say for something you claim not to give a crap about. And I think it even makes you angry.
Frankie Rizzo

Union City, CA

#177902 Jan 31, 2013
Big D wrote:
<quoted text>
It is a dead horse.
That second point is used by many of them constantly, they marry several young wives, each on welfare.
It is quite s scheme getting money from the government that way
I donít give a crap about it either, but I certainly donít like the way many adherents of it are using it.
The government does not give welfare checks to several wives you flaming bigot! Those women are on welfare anyway, they are not collecting as wives.

What a dumbass!
Frankie Rizzo

Union City, CA

#177903 Jan 31, 2013
Largelanguage wrote:
<quoted text>
Do you seek the love men have for you in order to feel loved?
I think she seeks the high hard one.
Rush

Columbus, NE

#177905 Jan 31, 2013
Largelanguage wrote:
<quoted text>
You haven't rejected God and ratchet yet. May I ask how old are you sir?
I reject Ratchet 100% witout a doubt, and I will stand outside with a lghtning rod for the next rain storm. Or will it happen just out of the blue? That would be alot more powerfull if you could have it happen when the sky is blue. Either way, let me know, Ill wait.

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
public officials violating federal laws 6 hr Un agenda 21 and ... 3
the music thread (Apr '12) Sat Musikologist 19
News Ask the Auto Doctor (Mar '06) Sat 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
News Police: Armed robbery at Santa Cruz sandwich sh... May 11 bump 1
News Business on hold for P.G. pot club (Mar '10) May 9 Mike 8
More from around the web

Monterey People Search

Addresses and phone numbers for FREE

Personal Finance

Mortgages [ See current mortgage rates ]