Judge overturns California's ban on same-sex marriage

Aug 4, 2010 Read more: www.cnn.com 201,838

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.

Read more

“KiMare'a the Monster Mutation”

Since: Nov 10

Location hidden

#179157 Feb 10, 2013
Rose_NoHo wrote:
<quoted text>
It's a non issue. You don't have to be able to procreate in order to marry. Next.
The differences between marriage with/without kids and gay couples;

A apple tree bearing fruit.
A apple tree not bearing fruit for some reason.
A walnut tree who never bears any fruit wanting to be a apple tree.
A walnut tree hanging apples on it's branches pretending to be a apple tree.

Even funnier?

The claim that if the government doesn't 'require' apple trees to bear fruit, then it is discrimination not to call walnut trees apple trees too!

Smirk.

“Vita e' Bella.”

Since: May 12

Location hidden

#179158 Feb 10, 2013
Rose_NoHo wrote:
<quoted text>
It's a non issue. You don't have to be able to procreate in order to marry. Next.
IT DOESN'T NEED TO BE!!!!!!! Sex between men and women makes babies. Human societies throughout history have recognized this, that is why marriage is privileged over other human relationships, and it has been, except for a few scattered historical examples of recognized as relationships, a male female union of either one man one woman, or one man many women. Its simply biology.

Since: Apr 11

Santa Monica, CA

#179159 Feb 10, 2013
KiMare wrote:
<quoted text>
The differences between marriage with/without kids and gay couples;
A apple tree bearing fruit.
A apple tree not bearing fruit for some reason.
A walnut tree who never bears any fruit wanting to be a apple tree.
A walnut tree hanging apples on it's branches pretending to be a apple tree.
Even funnier?
The fact you think you've made an apt analogy.
For one reason, walnut trees DO bear fruit, because nuts are fruits.
But even if they weren't, the ability to bear fruit is part of the definition of a fruit tree. But the ability to have kids isn't part of the definition of a marriage.
Are you so stupid because your brain is made from tissue with two different types of DNA, and it just doesn't work properly?
KiMare wrote:
The claim that if the government doesn't 'require' apple trees to bear fruit, then it is discrimination not to call walnut trees apple trees too!
Smirk.
Again, stupid, the ability to bear apples is part of the definition of an apple tree, in fact, that's pretty much it, but the ability to have kids isn't part of the definition of marriage.

Since: Apr 11

Santa Monica, CA

#179160 Feb 10, 2013
Pietro Armando wrote:
<quoted text>
IT DOESN'T NEED TO BE!!!!!!! Sex between men and women makes babies. Human societies throughout history have recognized this, that is why marriage is privileged over other human relationships, and it has been, except for a few scattered historical examples of recognized as relationships, a male female union of either one man one woman, or one man many women. Its simply biology.
It's a simple non issue. You don't have to be able to procreate in order to marry. Now, try to come up with an argument against gay marriage.

“Vita e' Bella.”

Since: May 12

Location hidden

#179161 Feb 10, 2013
Rose_NoHo wrote:
<quoted text>
It's a simple non issue. You don't have to be able to procreate in order to marry. Now, try to come up with an argument against gay marriage.
I have no argument against a gay man marrying a gay woman. See we both support gay marriage.
Frankie RIzzo

Union City, CA

#179162 Feb 10, 2013
Rose_NoHo wrote:
<quoted text>
It's a simple non issue. You don't have to be able to procreate in order to marry. Now, try to come up with an argument against gay marriage.
No, you don't understand. Gay marriage is a simple non issue. I mean it's simply not an issue, it just isn't.

Now see how silly that sounds? But it's exactly what you say about other's rights. Dismiss them. They're "non issues"!

Tell it to the judge toots. Probably lock up your dumbass for contempt.
Day Care

Monrovia, CA

#179163 Feb 10, 2013
Just look at all those LOUD, fat mouthed GOP, Republicans screaming and shouting.

Thats why these pieces of dung didn't gt elected and lost seats!

Screaming little children, them all.

“Vita e' Bella.”

Since: May 12

Location hidden

#179164 Feb 10, 2013
Day Care wrote:
Just look at all those LOUD, fat mouthed GOP, Republicans screaming and shouting.
Thats why these pieces of dung didn't gt elected and lost seats!
Screaming little children, them all.
Oh and the Dems are all slim mouthed adults? Pull-eeze
Frankie RIzzo

Union City, CA

#179165 Feb 10, 2013
Pietro Armando wrote:
<quoted text>
Oh and the Dems are all slim mouthed adults? Pull-eeze
In his town they are. It's those out of towners that cause all the trouble.

“Vita e' Bella.”

Since: May 12

Location hidden

#179166 Feb 10, 2013
Rose_NoHo wrote:
<quoted text>
The fact you think you've made an apt analogy.
For one reason, walnut trees DO bear fruit, because nuts are fruits.
But even if they weren't, the ability to bear fruit is part of the definition of a fruit tree. But the ability to have kids isn't part of the definition of a marriage.
Are you so stupid because your brain is made from tissue with two different types of DNA, and it just doesn't work properly?
<quoted text>
Again, stupid, the ability to bear apples is part of the definition of an apple tree, in fact, that's pretty much it, but the ability to have kids isn't part of the definition of marriage.
Who, or what defines "marriage"? It seems you wish to define it as a union of "two people" regardless of gender composition, and base your concept of "equal rights", on that definition.

“KiMare'a the Monster Mutation”

Since: Nov 10

Location hidden

#179167 Feb 10, 2013
Rose_NoHo wrote:
<quoted text>
The fact you think you've made an apt analogy.
For one reason, walnut trees DO bear fruit, because nuts are fruits.
But even if they weren't, the ability to bear fruit is part of the definition of a fruit tree. But the ability to have kids isn't part of the definition of a marriage.
Are you so stupid because your brain is made from tissue with two different types of DNA, and it just doesn't work properly?
<quoted text>
Again, stupid, the ability to bear apples is part of the definition of an apple tree, in fact, that's pretty much it, but the ability to have kids isn't part of the definition of marriage.
I know that a walnut tree normally bears walnuts. In this analogy though, like gay couples, it NEVER bears fruit. Heterosexual couples (Apple trees) most often do.

Gay couples want the fruit of a heterosexual couples (apples) so they can pretend they are just like apple trees; married and families. This is in the silly belief that other people won't notice they are barren walnut trees with apples stuck on them.

According to SCOTUS, the reason for government protection and provision of marriage is exactly because they are the natural and best source of human fruit.

Gay couples are simply one of numerous forms of friendships. If they can be equated to marriage, so can any friendship.

According to Evolution, marriage is a cross cultural constraint on evolutionary mating behavior.

Gay couples are a desolate defect of the fundamental purpose of evolution.

It is clear that on any level considered, gay couples and marriage are vastly distinct.

Smile.

Since: Mar 09

Location hidden

#179168 Feb 10, 2013
Pietro Armando wrote:
<quoted text>
Oh and the Dems are all slim mouthed adults? Pull-eeze
Can we agree that most, if not all, politicians are bottom feeders?

“Busting Kimare's”

Since: Feb 13

Clitty

#179169 Feb 10, 2013
KiMare wrote:
<quoted text>
I know that a walnut tree normally bears walnuts. In this analogy though, like gay couples, it NEVER bears fruit. Heterosexual couples (Apple trees) most often do.
Gay couples want the fruit of a heterosexual couples (apples) so they can pretend they are just like apple trees; married and families. This is in the silly belief that other people won't notice they are barren walnut trees with apples stuck on them.
According to SCOTUS, the reason for government protection and provision of marriage is exactly because they are the natural and best source of human fruit.
Gay couples are simply one of numerous forms of friendships. If they can be equated to marriage, so can any friendship.
According to Evolution, marriage is a cross cultural constraint on evolutionary mating behavior.
Gay couples are a desolate defect of the fundamental purpose of evolution.
It is clear that on any level considered, gay couples and marriage are vastly distinct.
Smile.
Illinois legislators disagree with you. Awkward.

“Vita e' Bella.”

Since: May 12

Location hidden

#179170 Feb 10, 2013
sheesh void of hate wrote:
<quoted text>
Can we agree that most, if not all, politicians are bottom feeders?
That they are, we get what we ask for.

“KiMare'a the Monster Mutation”

Since: Nov 10

Location hidden

#179171 Feb 10, 2013
Dusty Mangina wrote:
<quoted text>
Illinois legislators disagree with you. Awkward.
You mean the ones that bankrupted a whole state?

Really awkward...

Smirk smile.

“Busting Kimare's”

Since: Feb 13

Clitty

#179172 Feb 10, 2013
KiMare wrote:
<quoted text>
You mean the ones that bankrupted a whole state?
Really awkward...
Smirk smile.
No, the current ones. Awkward.
Randy -Rock- Hudson

Wooster, OH

#179173 Feb 10, 2013
Pietro Armando wrote:
<quoted text>
That they are, we get what we ask for.
We didn't ask for them, they just rigged the game, so as to get where they wanted to be. If elections were fair, they'd be worried about doing good jobs and having to explain their actions. Which they are not concerned with...
Randy -Rock- Hudson

Wooster, OH

#179174 Feb 10, 2013
KiMare wrote:
<quoted text>
You mean the ones that bankrupted a whole state?
Really awkward...
Smirk smile.
Yes, those legislators.. The same.
Randy -Rock- Hudson

Wooster, OH

#179175 Feb 10, 2013
Dusty Mangina wrote:
<quoted text>
No, the current ones. Awkward.
You don't have to sign "Awkward" to all your posts, we know who you are.
Frankie RIzzo

Los Angeles, CA

#179176 Feb 10, 2013
I've tongued a few chocolate starfish of choice select males in my youth, but that doesn't make me gay. Just curious. Nothing wrong with experiencing various forms of sexuality.

I'm a better person for doing so.

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
News Messianic Jews say they are persecuted in Israel (Jun '08) 6 hr Not that anyone c... 71,708
where can I find heroin in monterey? Mar 27 Rosiedosie 7
News Homicide suspect Victor Cabrera has long histor... (Oct '08) Mar 24 mando 12
News Carmel waste broker accused of bribery (Dec '08) Mar 20 Gary 16
Review: Salazar Auto Repair (Sep '13) Mar 10 fed up 3
News Ezekiel Lopez-Figueroa at his sentencing this m... (Dec '11) Mar 5 Carlos Slim 14
News Ask the Auto Doctor (Mar '06) Mar 3 Joe Balls 1,530
More from around the web

Monterey People Search

Addresses and phone numbers for FREE

Personal Finance

Mortgages [ See current mortgage rates ]