Judge overturns California's ban on same-sex marriage

[Jane Dodo]

Frankie Rizzo wrote:

<quoted text>
Sure Miss Thing.
So, why do you think the judge's decision has absolutely no bearing on the future of legalized polygamy?
Type slowly maybe I'll understand your answer. But you have to give me an answer before I can understand it silly!

Because the trial testimony was about SSM and NOT poly, the ruling was about SSM, not poly, the appeal was about SSM, not poly, the appeals court ruling was about SSM and not poly. The appeal to SCOTUS is about SSM, not poly. When SCOTUS overturns Prop 8, SSM will be legal again, poly will NOT.

[Frankie Rizzo]

Big D wrote:

<quoted text>
I always knew that was where you were going, and have been saying so for weeks.
Standard bait and switch tactic, all the opponents of same sex marriage use, and the funny part is the comparison they make is to religious people.
dishonest to the core
Your argument will get no where you relies
Same sex marriage is happening and will continue to happen in more and more states and countries.
Your pet issue is going exactly nowhere.

I am not opposed to same sex marriage. I fully support it. I have been to several gay weddings (have you?) I have friends and family that I love who are in same sex marriages. I resent your dishonest attempts to demonize me.

I am trying to discuss marriage equality. The only reason you will not engage is because you are attempting to avoid revealing your hypocrisy. And failing, I might add.

[Jane Dodo]

Frankie Rizzo wrote:

<quoted text>
Thanks! You're not. Evidence your comedy career fail! Boy you were bad!
But let's get on topic, you always go off. Why do you feel the judge's decision has absolutely no relevance to the future of legalizing poly?

Maybe because there was NOTHING about polygamy in his decision..... geez.

[Frankie Rizzo]

Bruno wrote:

Pizzo, you are a real wack job ...

It's better than being a SECOND CLASS JACKASS like you!

YUK!YUK!YUK!

[Frankie Rizzo]

Jane Dodo wrote:

<quoted text>Maybe because there was NOTHING about polygamy in his decision..... geez.

You hate polygamists because "there was NOTHING about polygamy in his decision..... geez."?

Do you rest your case?

[Frankie Rizzo]

Jane Dodo wrote:

<quoted text>
What legally married gay couple is getting multiple government assistence checks?
You're about as bright as a black hole.

I just replace poly in his hateful rant with same sex marriage to see how he liked the sound of it dummy.

What a dope!

[Frankie Rizzo]

Jane Dodo wrote:

<quoted text>
Because the trial testimony was about SSM and NOT poly, the ruling was about SSM, not poly, the appeal was about SSM, not poly, the appeals court ruling was about SSM and not poly. The appeal to SCOTUS is about SSM, not poly. When SCOTUS overturns Prop 8, SSM will be legal again, poly will NOT.

So you think the judge's decision bodes poorly for the future of legalized poly?

I think you are wrong. I think allowing same sex marriage will help the case for allowing poly. It's just common sense.

[Big D]

Frankie Rizzo wrote:

<quoted text>
I am not opposed to same sex marriage. I fully support it. I have been to several gay weddings (have you?) I have friends and family that I love who are in same sex marriages. I resent your dishonest attempts to demonize me.
I am trying to discuss marriage equality. The only reason you will not engage is because you are attempting to avoid revealing your hypocrisy. And failing, I might add.

You go ahead and rant and rave, Same sex marriage is already a reality and will continue to spread.

Your pet rant is going nowhere, not because of any objection of mine ( I don’t have an objection to the concept of it ), but because of the actions of far tooo many of the adherents of it.

There may come a time a couple of decades down the road when this changes, but it is not changing yet, regardless of what you, I or another else in this forum thinks
.

As religion becomes less and less a force in American politics the current adherents of it will sink further into oblivion.

Until a more mature, and more human group champions it, it is moot.

[Frankie Rizzo]

Jane Dodo wrote:

<quoted text>Maybe because there was NOTHING about polygamy in his decision..... geez.

We know that Miss Thing! Duh! You need to get up to speed. Perhaps you cannot read well?

[Jane Dodo]

Frankie Rizzo wrote:

<quoted text>
You hate polygamists because "there was NOTHING about polygamy in his decision..... geez."?
Do you rest your case?

Another fine example of your reading comprehension problem. Where did you see me write write anything about hating poly? See how you are? When you get an answer you can't dispute, you just make something else up to argue about.

[Jane Dodo]

Frankie Rizzo wrote:

<quoted text>
I just replace poly in his hateful rant with same sex marriage to see how he liked the sound of it dummy.
What a dope!

So you wrote something you didn't mean. Surprise.

[Jane DooDoo]

Draw up a plank and set yourself on it.

[Jane Dodo]

Frankie Rizzo wrote:

<quoted text>
So you think the judge's decision bodes poorly for the future of legalized poly?
I think you are wrong. I think allowing same sex marriage will help the case for allowing poly. It's just common sense.

Again? <shakes head> Where did I say the judge's decision bodes poorly for poly? I didn't. I said the decision wasn't about poly.

Yeah, common sense.... the decision had nothing to do with poly so it's "common sense" that it does. got it.

[Big D]

Jane Dodo wrote:

<quoted text>
So you wrote something you didn't mean. Surprise.

and he also lied about my hatred of the concept

I don’t... I hate what far to many of the adherents do with it, child molestation and welfare fraud.

[Frankie Rizzo]

Big D wrote:

<quoted text>
You go ahead and rant and rave, Same sex marriage is already a reality and will continue to spread.
Your pet rant is going nowhere, not because of any objection of mine ( I don’t have an objection to the concept of it ), but because of the actions of far tooo many of the adherents of it.
There may come a time a couple of decades down the road when this changes, but it is not changing yet, regardless of what you, I or another else in this forum thinks
.
As religion becomes less and less a force in American politics the current adherents of it will sink further into oblivion.
Until a more mature, and more human group champions it, it is moot.

It's not moot jackass. There are real people being denied equal protection. Good people. Despite your ignorance and bigotry.

You just wish it was moot. You're dismissed.

[Frankie Rizzo]

Jane Dodo wrote:

<quoted text>
Another fine example of your reading comprehension problem. Where did you see me write write anything about hating poly? See how you are? When you get an answer you can't dispute, you just make something else up to argue about.

I assume it because of your avoidance of the issue.

And I know it because of your infamous anti poly rant of a year or so ago. You can deny it but you and I both know it's true.

[Frankie Rizzo]

Jane Dodo wrote:

<quoted text>
So you wrote something you didn't mean. Surprise.

So your being dishonest. Surprise.

[Jane Dodo]

Frankie Rizzo wrote:

<quoted text>
It's not moot jackass. There are real people being denied equal protection. Good people. Despite your ignorance and bigotry.
You just wish it was moot. You're dismissed.

Yeah.... it's arbitrary, ain't it? LMFAO@you

[Frankie Rizzo]

Jane Dodo wrote:

<quoted text>Again? <shakes head> Where did I say the judge's decision bodes poorly for poly? I didn't. I said the decision wasn't about poly.
Yeah, common sense.... the decision had nothing to do with poly so it's "common sense" that it does. got it.

When I say the judges decision bodes well for poly you disagree. That's where.

[Frankie Rizzo]

Big D wrote:

<quoted text>
and he also lied about my hatred of the concept
I don’t... I hate what far to many of the adherents do with it, child molestation and welfare fraud.

Here comes the Big D "you're a liar" straw man!

Priceless.