Judge overturns California's ban on same-sex marriage

Aug 4, 2010 Full story: www.cnn.com 201,038

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.

Full Story
Randy -Rock- Hudson

Wooster, OH

#182220 Mar 1, 2013
Frankie Rizzo wrote:
Can you imagine the loser who rates Rose_NoHo's posts "Brilliant"?
Anyone?
I found one.
http://images.search.yahoo.com/images/view;_y...
Randy -Rock- Hudson

Wooster, OH

#182221 Mar 1, 2013
akpilot wrote:
<quoted text>
Prop 8 banned any marriage save that of one man and one woman.
I thought you wanted to deal with "what is?"
Not when it gets in his/her way...
Randy -Rock- Hudson

Wooster, OH

#182222 Mar 1, 2013
Edgar wrote:
<quoted text>
(Also, the fact that you focus so much on aspects of gay sex really makes me wonder...)
Oh ? What about ?
Randy -Rock- Hudson

Wooster, OH

#182223 Mar 1, 2013
Quest wrote:
<quoted text>
Is it "gay sex" if lots of straight people do it, and most gay people don't? I believe it's called anal sex.
If you want the government to directly intervene and prevent all anal sex, then wouldn't that apply to straight folks as well? What kind of testing and regulation would you require the government to engage in to deny marriage license to any anal sex practitioners? Who would run it?
Who would pay for it?
And most importantly, who else but you would support it?
It is not a valid reason to grant a title of legitimacy. To a defunct, and clearly perilous, coupling.
Randy -Rock- Hudson

Wooster, OH

#182224 Mar 1, 2013
Quest wrote:
<quoted text>
Of course, that's patently absurd, since of COURSE gay men and lesbian women are disproportional disadvantages and burdened by such bans.
This reasoning counted only exist if there were no such thing as people who can only be attracted to the same gender.
Try proving that one.
That's why this type of reasoning has fallen out of favor legally.
Deal with it.
Did you mean "disproportionately disadvantaged and burdened by such" disqualifications to lay claim to a title of legitimacy ?

Since: Jun 07

Location hidden

#182225 Mar 1, 2013
Quest wrote:
<quoted text>
You mean like there was no discrimination in preventing interracial marriages, since all black and white people could already marry someone of the same race?
Did you read my post? The court explained the difference, and why Loving v Virgina as well as the race argument is not the same.

I am sorry that you have comprehension problems.
Randy -Rock- Hudson

Wooster, OH

#182226 Mar 1, 2013
Jazybird58 wrote:
<quoted text>Sorry to hear that. Was it a hot LZ? Where you in the 101, or 82nd
Don't even speak to him about it. You have no right to do so. "Was it a hot LZ?"....What the hell do you think, you moron ? That he was jumping for fun ?

Since: Jun 07

Location hidden

#182227 Mar 1, 2013
Quest wrote:
<quoted text>
Of course, that's patently absurd, since of COURSE gay men and lesbian women are disproportional disadvantages and burdened by such bans.
This reasoning counted only exist if there were no such thing as people who can only be attracted to the same gender.
Try proving that one.
That's why this type of reasoning has fallen out of favor legally.
Deal with it.
I don't need to prove anything you moron, that was the decision of the COURT..

I'm sorry that you don't like it.
Randy -Rock- Hudson

Wooster, OH

#182228 Mar 1, 2013
Dan wrote:
<quoted text>
Maybe.
Maybe not.
I might be Superman who wanders the land for days given there are so few phone booths anymore.
Go back to Japan. We do not need you to add add to our "Dumb-ass" problem. And, cast no aspersions on a veteran. You should be so brave, as to enlist....punk.

Since: Jun 07

Location hidden

#182229 Mar 1, 2013
Edgar wrote:
<quoted text>
But this is factually untrue in some states, akpilot, and soon to be so in more. Gay marriage is expanding.
Civil rights movements throughout history do not have a history of being snuffed out easily, at least in this country. Maybe in North Korea or China they do, but not here.
Sorry.
Again, that was the decision of the court, I am sorry you don't like it.

And as far as same sex marriage spreading through the State's, it just may, but it should do so the correct way. The way our founders intended it, through the will of the people.

Funny how marriage is somehow a "right" that cannot be infringed when marriage is found nowhere in the Constitution, yet the right to bear arms which is in the Constitution can be trampled at will.

Interesting.

Since: Jun 07

Location hidden

#182230 Mar 1, 2013
Xavier Breath wrote:
<quoted text>Polygamy was already banned.
So?
Randy -Rock- Hudson

Wooster, OH

#182231 Mar 1, 2013
Dan wrote:
<quoted text>
No need to look at any links.
Loser punks like you spouting off ignorant statements have more "detractors" than a stray dog in Detroit has fleas little buddy.
Jesus H Christ wannabe, pedalling around Sacramento in a clown car with garish paint, and a calliope in the background, looking for gay blond men to blo, are you still here ?
Randy -Rock- Hudson

Wooster, OH

#182232 Mar 1, 2013
Dan wrote:
<quoted text>
Dumb?
LOL!!!
Everyone from the President to Clint Eastwood want that bullshit ruling stricken.
Funny thing. We don't have racial segregation in schools anymore either.
Evolution my little cro-magnon. Happens.
You've got more lies than a Chongo, on crack, on a Friday "Gubmint check came today" night. Not everyone. Stop your lies, little man.

Since: Jun 07

Location hidden

#182233 Mar 1, 2013
Jazybird58 wrote:
<quoted text>On February 7, 2012, in a 21 decision, a Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals panel affirmed Walker's decision declaring the Proposition 8 ban on same-sex marriage to be unconstitutional.
That ruling said nothing of or about polygamy, now did it?
Funny, I don't remember there being anything in Obama-care about a "tax", yet the SCOTUS said there was?

I guess reality doesn't really matter when dealing with the liberal social agenda?
Randy -Rock- Hudson

Wooster, OH

#182234 Mar 1, 2013
Dan wrote:
<quoted text>
Fancy with the language.
LOL!!!
Yeah....that's it.
Listen dummy....hang around. It's only going to get worse each year for those who think gays should not marry.
Keep talking a bunch of stupid smack, you've got your fan club rooting for you now, with all the Lucky Charms. You're about as funny as a broke-dick dog let loose in the hen-house in Alabama on a cold night.....

Since: Jun 07

Location hidden

#182235 Mar 1, 2013
Xavier Breath wrote:
<quoted text>
No need to try, it's simple. Polygamy was illegal BEFORE Prop 8. Therefore, Prop 8 did not ban polygamy. It was already banned. How much simpler can we make this for you?
My you do have a simple mind don't you.

Suppose the illegality of poly-marriages was removed tomorrow, based on Prop 8 would or would not poly marriages be legal in California?

I know this is hard for you, but perhaps if you get your crayons out you can connect the dots.

The "agenda" behind the proposition does not effect the result of its passage, it most certainly bans EVERY marriage aside from one man and one woman.

You can belabor the point all you like, you would still be wrong.
Randy -Rock- Hudson

Wooster, OH

#182236 Mar 1, 2013
Dan wrote:
<quoted text>
You couldn't find your missing IQ so I for one doubt it.
Aww, you're just trying to show off, to impress all the little boi's in here. And they adore their Danny-boi.
Randy -Rock- Hudson

Wooster, OH

#182237 Mar 1, 2013
Jazybird58 wrote:
<quoted text>Having seen his wife, ummm all I can say is Dayummm
Yeah, I saw that exhibit at the zoo, as well.

Since: Jun 07

Location hidden

#182238 Mar 1, 2013
Rose_NoHo wrote:
<quoted text>
That's like saying everyone was treated equally under Jim Crow because everybody could sit in the section assigned to their race.
Sorry, LOLSER, the "opposite sex" is not the same for men and women, so men and women are not being treated equally.
<quoted text>
They are wrong. And I've shown that.
<quoted text>
And by restricting who whites could marry, it restricted who non whites could marry, because some non whites couldn't marry whites.
<quoted text>
Men are allowed to marry women, but women aren't.
Women are allowed to marry men, but men aren't.
Men tend to make more money, so men are disadvantaged when it comes to choosing who to marry.
Go argue with the court Rose, that's what they said, and the SCOTUS had NO problem with it.

Since: Jun 07

Location hidden

#182239 Mar 1, 2013
Rose_NoHo wrote:
<quoted text>
Stupid, Skinner v OK was not a case about marriage, but about using forced sterilization as punishment for crime. Marriage and procreation were legally tied together back then, as it was against the law to have sex if you weren't married.
But you don't have to be able to procreate in order to marry, you don't now, and you didn't then.
Loving v VA was a case about marriage.
What case did Loving v Virginia cite when they stated marriage was a "right?"

They didn't make it up themselves, they copied it from somewhere. I'll give you a hint, it starts with Skinner and ends with Oklahoma.

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
CA CA Proposition 23 - Global Warming (Oct '10) 5 hr Misty Me 7,968
Messianic Jews say they are persecuted in Israel (Jun '08) 9 hr HughBe 69,541
CA California Proposition 19: the Marijuana Legali... (Oct '10) 20 hr do it here 16,011
CA California seeks to ban free, single-use carryo... (Jun '10) Sep 28 No Time for Tea 5,084
Carmel waste broker accused of bribery (Dec '08) Sep 23 Shelly 12
Suri Cruise's dog is missing in Los Angeles Sep 21 fancy 3
CA Jury reaches verdict in Oakland BART shooting t... (Jul '10) Sep 21 theos 2,275
Monterey Dating
Find my Match

Monterey Jobs

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 ]