Judge overturns California's ban on s...

Judge overturns California's ban on same-sex marriage

There are 201880 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.

Rock Hudson

Wooster, OH

#189078 Apr 17, 2013
woodtick57 wrote:
<quoted text>one that uses a rational reason for not having SSm legal in the US. you have not put up even one of those yet.
why?
You ignore the most basic and rational of all. Nature has shown us that men were designed to be with women, and vice versa. Without one of each, the species would not survive. Marriage is a ritualistic ceremony to validate the coupling of 1 man and 1 woman. Period.

“Vita e' Bella.”

Since: May 12

Location hidden

#189079 Apr 17, 2013
Big D wrote:
<quoted text>
Or course, I know many churches that want to preform them and others that will not. I donít have a problem with that.
They can decide never to marry someone with blue eyes and I wonít complain, it is their little club, they can make all the rules they want to and apply them to their little flock. As long as people are only voluntarily in that flock... no problem.
I donít see that either, with DOMA I expect article 3 to be tossed, It is possible they will overturn all of DOMA, but that will have national consequences like states forced to recognize marriages performed in other states. I think that is the right decision, but I donít expect the supreme court to do that... not yet, that will happen, but not until a large majority of states recognize same sex marriage. That is coming but will take a while.
With Prop 8 I am not sure what to expect
1 Support the appellate court = prop 8 overturned
2 Decide the opponents have no standing = prop 8 overturned
3 Donít rule and toss it back to the state = prop 8 over turned
4 Support the opposition and Prop 8 stands until the next election cycle when it will be back on the ballot and overturned.
But the bottom line is, prop 8 is doomed, either this year... or in the very near future.
Waitaminit here! I thought the justices consulted with the mighty Big D, the stealth tenth justice, on a daily basis?
Rock Hudson

Wooster, OH

#189080 Apr 17, 2013
woodtick57 wrote:
<quoted text>it would show that it is not a logical conclusion that legalizing SSm would mean we have to legalize polygamous marriage.
logic is fun!
How can you call THAT logic? The logical implication of SSM means marriage restrictions are wrong. That means the bottom line is that no kind of restriction is valid, at all. Period. Any marriage can be legal, OR none but the prescribed 1 man/1woman type. THAT'S logic. Leave the thinking to the properly equipped adults. You promote arbitrary decision making, on who may bend the rules. This is ILLOGICAL.
Rock Hudson

Wooster, OH

#189081 Apr 17, 2013
woodtick57 wrote:
<quoted text>heterosexual marraige is in now way essential to social stability, as proven by the countries that have had it for a while and now have a higher standard of living, healthier, happier citizens and better educated kids.
facts are fun!!
your argument was proven wrong before you were told to parrot it...so sad.
Again, those aren't facts, they are "factoids", manufactured for your benefit. No society, that has disrupted the natural order of things, endures.
Rock Hudson

Wooster, OH

#189082 Apr 17, 2013
Big D wrote:
<quoted text>
Yes we all know the slippery slope arguments against same sex marriage, we have heard them for years.
but some of us are less afraid of that slippery slope than you are. Because the word "marriage" does not belong to a belief system. We will take the issues, one at a time.
This ones time has come, same sex marriage.
And you, who repeatedly mistakes the term "slippery slope" for "logical implication", are wrong again. If we bend the rules for one group, we must, in all fairness, bend them for all. Else, we become an arbitrary dispenser of rights. And, again, I state the your claims that most Americans support your game is nothing short of fraud, use of a "manufactured consensus". A prefabricated sham of a poll, using carefully pre-screened group, designed to achieve a predetermined result.
Rock Hudson

Wooster, OH

#189083 Apr 17, 2013
poledancer45 wrote:
I KNOW WHO THE BOSTON BOMBERS ARE... Ill bet they are connected to the army of god... ou know a christian hate group...
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/04/09/eric ...
the bigots brother who oh so sadly can't get the money from the book about his brother is pissed ....
Yeah......keep huffing the glue, darlin', it's making you more coherent every day.....It's really helping. Let me clue you in....It's another governmental tool for inching us closer to martial law. You watch.
Rock Hudson

Wooster, OH

#189084 Apr 17, 2013
REX 84. "Rex 84, short for Readiness Exercise 1984, was an alleged secretive "scenario and drill" developed by the United States federal government to suspend the United States Constitution, declare martial law, place military commanders in charge of state and local governments, and detain large numbers of American citizens who are deemed to be "national security threats", in the event that the President declares a "State of National Emergency". The plan states, events causing such a declaration would be widespread U.S. opposition to a U.S. military invasion abroad, such as if the United States were to directly invade Central America. To combat what the government perceived as "subversive activities", the plan also authorized the military to direct ordered movements of civilian populations at state and regional levels." Said camps being kept manned and in full readiness, for the illegals that are now receiving amnesty. The illegals that they will never house. They will be looking at us, inside and looking out. While they inherit our country.
Rock Hudson

Wooster, OH

#189085 Apr 17, 2013
And...Agenda 21: "During the last decade, opposition to Agenda 21 has increased within the United States at the local, state, and federal levels.[citation needed] The Republican National Committee has adopted a resolution opposing Agenda 21, and the Republican Party platform stated that "We strongly reject the U.N. Agenda 21 as erosive of American sovereignty." Several state and local governments have considered or passed motions and legislation opposing Agenda 21. Alabama became the first state to prohibit government participation in Agenda 21, but Arizona rejected a similar bill.

Activists, some of whom have been associated with the Tea Party movement by the The New York Times and The Huffington Post, have said that Agenda 21 is a conspiracy by the United Nations to deprive individuals of property rights. Columnists in The Atlantic have linked opposition to Agenda 21 to the property rights movement in the United States. A poll of 1,300 United States voters by the American Planning Association found that 9% supported Agenda 21, 6% opposed it, and 85% thought they didn't have enough information to form an opinion. Glen Beck said it was a means of instituting "centralized control over all of human life on planet Earth", a notion which Media Matters dismissed as a conspiracy theory.
Rock Hudson

Wooster, OH

#189086 Apr 17, 2013
The Missouri House of Representatives on Monday passed a ban on the United Nations sustainability plan Agenda 21 after a spirited discussion of space aliens and how Walmart could avoid zoning laws to build more stores.

The Republican-controlled House voted 110-40 to ban local governments from adopting the Agenda 21, a broad outline of planning goals and sustainability targets. Agenda 21 was passed by the U.N. in 1992, but has not been ratified by the U.S. Senate and does not contain the force of law in the U.S.
From http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/04/08/agen...
Rock Hudson

Wooster, OH

#189087 Apr 17, 2013
"Agenda 21 For Dummies ".
Frankie Rizzo

Hayward, CA

#189088 Apr 17, 2013
Rock Hudson wrote:
<quoted text>
And you, who repeatedly mistakes the term "slippery slope" for "logical implication", are wrong again. If we bend the rules for one group, we must, in all fairness, bend them for all. Else, we become an arbitrary dispenser of rights. And, again, I state the your claims that most Americans support your game is nothing short of fraud, use of a "manufactured consensus". A prefabricated sham of a poll, using carefully pre-screened group, designed to achieve a predetermined result.
Big D thinks if he calls it the slippery slope, that makes it not valid and dismisses it without argument.

He's very surprised when someone calls bullsh!t on that. And then he gets angry when they won't accept his simple and casual dismissal.
Rock Hudson

Wooster, OH

#189089 Apr 17, 2013
Google, or Wiki, "REX84" and "Agenda21". Yes, something has gone horribly wrong. And, for added emphasis, Google the new intiative "Our kids don't belong to us, anymore"

http://www.canadafreepress.com/index.php/arti...
Rock Hudson

Wooster, OH

#189090 Apr 17, 2013
Frankie Rizzo wrote:
<quoted text>
Drat! I'm slipping! You jackasses are agreeing with me.
Yeah. And I hope that I'm wrong, for once, but I fear where we are headed. DHS buying up ammo, NOAA doing the same thing. Our National Weather Service? Bulletproof "Stop and Go" booths, suspension of Posse Comitatus, and the new authority for the Prez to single-handedly impose Martial Law, it is adding up fast, and badly, for us. National traumas, on a weekly basis. That is exactly the justification neede for the single-handed imposition of Martial Law. If I'm wrong, then call me a fool, but if I'm right.....
Rock Hudson

Wooster, OH

#189091 Apr 17, 2013
Pietro Armando wrote:
<quoted text>
How about there's no rational reason to have it. None, niente....zip...how did western civilization survive into the 21st century, on this quaint notion that marriage is a union of husband and wife? Radical...before ya know it someone will suggesy that human reproduction is sexual. What a concept....sex between men and women makes babies. Who knows maybe one of those babies will grow up and call himself "Woodtick57"........ .hmmmmmm.....sounds like a steak sauce for insects.....
Bravo! And [email protected] "Woodtick57" steak sauce for insects.
Rock Hudson

Wooster, OH

#189092 Apr 17, 2013
Big D wrote:
<quoted text>
I am afraid mother nature is opposed to your position, homosexuality is common among many mammals.
Or are you arguing that any marriage is against mother nature, that is a better argument I suppose there are some monogamous mammals, but not nearly as many.
Neither. Mother Nature simply tolerates your side, while refusing to reward it, with perpetuity. To use small words, she doesn't allow your kind to reproduce. She simply allows a few of you to appear. Now, if SSM types could reproduce.....I-yi-yi...
Rock Hudson

Wooster, OH

#189093 Apr 17, 2013
heartandmind wrote:
<quoted text>
let's highlight this from the above :
"In response, Olson tried to set up a clear distinction between same-sex marriage and polygamy, suggesting that the kinds of governmental interests that justify a prohibition of polygamy are irrelevant in the case of same-sex marriage."
Olson's argument was not disputed.
Ahem..."Olson tried to set up a clear distinction " clearly implies that he FAILED to do so..."Olson TRIED to set up a clear distinction"...."TRI ED". It's right there, in black and white..."TRIED", "TRIED"...
Frankie Rizzo

Hayward, CA

#189094 Apr 17, 2013
Pietro Armando wrote:

"Woodtick57"........ .hmmmmmm.....sounds like a steak sauce for insects....

Too funny!

Wonder what year the silly jackass was born? 1957? You think?
Rock Hudson

Wooster, OH

#189095 Apr 17, 2013
Big D wrote:
Which reminds me... Mother Nature is a great argument for Poly supporters.
...I "herd" that...
:-D
and, Mother Nature gives more rewards to incestuous couples, than to SSSB types. At least, they get a new baby, as a reward.
Rock Hudson

Wooster, OH

#189096 Apr 17, 2013
Big D wrote:
<quoted text>
I never said I was angry with you, only sorry for you
After he taught you that you are a hypocrite? You should thank him.

Since: Dec 09

Knoxville, TN

#189098 Apr 17, 2013
Pietro Armando wrote:
Dear SSMers
I am puzzled by your attitudes regarding legal polygamy/plural marriage. They seem to range from outright hostility to tepid support. "Marriage equality" is the mantra of the movement, yet there is a strong reluctance to include polygamy. Why? A seldom mentioned yet obvious objective within the movement is to shatter the monogamous conjugal (husband and wife) marital standard forever. To fundamental alter the very legal concept as a unique privileged union of one man and one woman as husband and wife. It stands to reason once that's changed, ssm is not the only logical path.
Polygamy is a valid form of marriage throughout time and place, far, far older than SSM, and more widely practiced. Why shouldn't it be considered? Is there a fear that to embrace it would undermine the SSM movement? A reluctance to share the spotlight? A sense of superiority?
Speaking only for myself, I am not the kind of person who could ever see himself in a plural relationship or marriage.

However I am very interested in a monogamous marriage.

So I don't see plural marriage as being a fight that I wish to undertake.

This is a personal decision.

And I think you're going to find that the "SSMers" aren't going to speak in a unified voice on plural marriage.

By the very definition of the term "SSMers", we are all in favor of SSM.

But to ask our opinion on plural marriage--to ask for a unified opinion--would be like asking us, "As SSMers, how do you feel about vanilla ice cream versus chocolate ice cream?"

There is no relationship between Same-Sex Marriage and Plural marriage.

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
Is dr Carl Bergstrom out of prison Sep 13 Marino 1
News Ask the Auto Doctor (Mar '06) Sep 8 Tberruiser 1,555
Lost wedding ring on Carmel beach Sep 6 Rey 1
East Garrison ... Gold or Ghetto? Aug '17 NoJigsPlease 1
who is the best hung man in Carmel Jul '17 Joe 4
Marina infested with gang boys (Mar '11) Jul '17 Losers join gangs 19
News Trump's North Korea red line could come back to... (Jan '17) Jul '17 Mark 12

Monterey Jobs

More from around the web

Personal Finance

Monterey Mortgages