Judge overturns California's ban on same-sex marriage

Aug 4, 2010 | Posted by: Topix | Full story: www.cnn.com

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.

Comments (Page 8,325)

Showing posts 166,481 - 166,500 of200,205
|
Go to last page| Jump to page:

Since: Jun 07

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#190649
Apr 30, 2013
 

Judged:

8

8

8

Marram wrote:
<quoted text>
You make that statement as though anyone in American as the right to vote on others rights.
You must first make marriage a "right". So long as the Government has the power to regulate, define, and sanction the act of marriage it is nothing more than a PRIVILEGE!!

And since in this country the "Government" is WE THE PEOPLE, we certainly have to RIGHT to VOTE on how our government will regulate, define, and sanction a PRIVILEGE!

Now if you are truly interested in once again making marriage a "RIGHT" I am behind you 100%, but since you aren't you are on your own.

Since: Jun 07

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#190650
Apr 30, 2013
 

Judged:

8

8

8

veryvermilion wrote:
<quoted text>
Oh, and another thing... We aren't necessarily putting our faith in the Supreme Court's decision.
If the Supreme Court comes back and upholds DOMA and Prop. 8, don't think for one second that the LGBT community will run for the hills, tails between our legs.
We're hopeful that the Supreme Court makes it easy on us so that we don't have to pursue the issue for the next 10 or so years. But we're willing to stay the course and go the distance.
Isn't it funny how you base the quality of a Supreme Court decision on if you get your way or not and not on the constitutionality of the decision?

BTW, your opinion on the direction of this country is irrelevant to this discussion. The Constitution isn't changed by social changes, it is changed through the Amendment process.

Oh, and another thing. If the SCOTUS upholds DOMA based on the opinion of the lower court which is- THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT LACKS THE ENUMERATED POWER TO DEFINE MARRIAGE, IT IS A STATE ISSUE PER THE 10th AMENDMENT OF THE US CONSTITUTION-- how then can they possibly mandate, as a federal entity, to the State how it defines marriage? The two decision are completely contradictory.
Frankie Rizzo

Union City, CA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#190651
Apr 30, 2013
 

Judged:

9

9

9

Marram wrote:
<quoted text>
Relax, Hater.
If I get any more relaxed, I'll turn into rubber tough guy.

Why are you a hypocrite?
Frankie Rizzo

Union City, CA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#190652
Apr 30, 2013
 

Judged:

9

9

9

Marram wrote:
<quoted text>
You make that statement as though anyone in American as the right to vote on others rights. Besides, you assume all the ignorant haters who voted against other American’s rights will be alive or able to do the same in the future. If you weren’t such an arrogant, self-important windbag you might pause long enough to realize that. The USA is changing whether you like it or not. And there will be Gay Marriage Rights in all 50 states whether you “vote” for it or it gets jammed down your throat. Pontificate on that douche bag.
Too funny!

Try and relax, Fruitcake.
Frankie Rizzo

Union City, CA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#190653
Apr 30, 2013
 

Judged:

10

10

10

veryvermilion wrote:
<quoted text>
Back in the days before widespread media access, the nation went from passing an amendment to prohibit the sale and use of alcohol to allowing the sale and use of alcohol in a period of 13 years.
That's a pretty quick change of heart for an entire nation, don't you think?
The pace of the momentum to support same-sex marriage has quickened over the past decade. People's minds have changed considerably, as indicated by every reliable statistic and poll on the subject.
What people felt about gays and gay rights ten years ago have changed. You can't deny that.
The LGBT Community and its allies have made great headway into demystifying who we are. So many of us have come out of the closet that most people now either have a family member or know someone closely who is gay.
One of the few positive outcomes of the HIV/AIDS crisis over the past 30 years has been to bring LGBT issues to the forefront. Since the disease largely began in the gay male community, we had to fight for political recognition in order to get adequate medical care and benefits that would help those who were suffering from the disease.
Rights and protections for LGBT people are now on the minds of most Americans. They either oppose them or support them. But unlike times in the past, they are at the very least thinking about LGBT issues.
That's progress...
Look... We all know where this is going to end. Same-Sex marriages will be legal throughout the U.S. within the decade, if not sooner. About 12 of the 25 First World Nations have passed laws that legalize Same-Sex Marriage.
Can you see a trend?
It's only a matter of time.
Too wordy.

Since: Dec 09

Knoxville, TN

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#190657
May 1, 2013
 

Judged:

7

7

7

akpilot wrote:
<quoted text>
Isn't it funny how you base the quality of a Supreme Court decision on if you get your way or not and not on the constitutionality of the decision?
BTW, your opinion on the direction of this country is irrelevant to this discussion. The Constitution isn't changed by social changes, it is changed through the Amendment process.
Oh, and another thing. If the SCOTUS upholds DOMA based on the opinion of the lower court which is- THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT LACKS THE ENUMERATED POWER TO DEFINE MARRIAGE, IT IS A STATE ISSUE PER THE 10th AMENDMENT OF THE US CONSTITUTION-- how then can they possibly mandate, as a federal entity, to the State how it defines marriage? The two decision are completely contradictory.
1.) You keep saying that the Constitution isn't changed by way of social input. Rather, there is a specific process through which change must occur. However, where do you think the specific process begins? I'll tell you... It's through grassroots efforts, election processes, and political wins that put lawmakers in power to amend the Constitution.

2.) You say that marriage is a states issue. But when the Supreme Court heard the Loving case, they found that the state of Virginia's laws against interracial marriage were unconstitutional. Their decision didn't change state laws, but it in essence made them unenforceable.

3.) The Supreme Court's role is to interpret the Constitution. And any activity that occurs in the U.S. is open for interpretation by the Supreme Court. The Court would be within its power to look at the law in CA that denies same-sex couples the right to marry and determine that it is Unconstitutional--just like in the Loving case.

4.) If states then want to try to muster the power to create an Amendment against same-sex marriage, then good luck with that. It failed before 7 years ago and failed under what was probably one of the most conservative points in recent history. I just don't think the political atmosphere is such that an amendment would pass now.

Since: Dec 09

Knoxville, TN

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#190658
May 1, 2013
 

Judged:

7

7

7

Frankie Rizzo wrote:
<quoted text>
Too wordy.
Frances, you're making a fool of yourself again...

“KiMare'a the Monster Mutation”

Since: Nov 10

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#190659
May 1, 2013
 

Judged:

9

9

9

veryvermilion wrote:
<quoted text>
You know, I just adore when you respond in this way. It only makes you seem more bizarre with each passing day.
At what point do I "lie".
You asked a question and I answered it.
Do you know of any pair of legal contracts that are exactly the same in every way, but are called by completely different names?
They are not 'exactly the same in every way'.

I listed several of numerous core differences.

To deny those differences,'husband and wife' was changed to partners. There is an attempt to deny the terms 'mother and father' also.

Moreover, you again dumb down marriage to a 'contract'? How romantic.

You know these things VV, but sell your soul to deny reality and pretend. The simplest thing in the world is to keep putting simple points of reality on the table and watch your gay twirl hissy fits squirm.

Smirk.

Since: Apr 13

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#190660
May 1, 2013
 

Judged:

7

7

7

KiMare wrote:
<quoted text>
They are not 'exactly the same in every way'.
I listed several of numerous core differences.
To deny those differences,'husband and wife' was changed to partners. There is an attempt to deny the terms 'mother and father' also.
Moreover, you again dumb down marriage to a 'contract'? How romantic.
You know these things VV, but sell your soul to deny reality and pretend. The simplest thing in the world is to keep putting simple points of reality on the table and watch your gay twirl hissy fits squirm.
Smirk.
Are you still tilting at the gay windmills?

Will you invite me to your imaginary victory celebration?

Snark.

“KiMare'a the Monster Mutation”

Since: Nov 10

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#190661
May 1, 2013
 

Judged:

10

10

9

_-Alice-_ wrote:
<quoted text>
Are you still tilting at the gay windmills?
Will you invite me to your imaginary victory celebration?
Snark.
Yes.

No.

Smile.

Since: Apr 13

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#190662
May 1, 2013
 

Judged:

7

7

7

KiMare wrote:
<quoted text>
Yes.
No.
Smile.
It's OK. I wouldn't attend.

What would I wear?

;p

Since: Aug 12

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#190664
May 1, 2013
 

Judged:

8

7

7

KiMare wrote:
<quoted text>
I appreciate the sincerity you approach with.
1. I have no problem with GLBT's facing the reality of who they are. I continue that reality acceptance, and find that 'different' people appreciate the consistency. I share my reality with a brashness when dealing with denial. Many GLBT's do exactly the same thing. The fact of the matter is, I AM a monster mutation.
2. I have never limited marriage to procreation. That is really a dishonest assertion about me... I simply take marriage to it's fundamental essence. In fact, if I take marriage to it's earliest roots, it is the reunion of gender to it's prehistoric genderless simple life form. I also use the issue of anal sex for the same purpose; expose the silliness of trying to equate ss couples to marriage.
Here is the bottom line; The union of a heterosexual couple, and the fruit that is most often the result are described as marriage and family. Those words describe a situation like no other. If the words marriage and family are subverted by a different type of relationship (as you suggest), there is no longer a description that expresses that distinction.
This begs the question, why don't ss couples establish their own identity and legal rights? Why the demand that we pretend that marriage and family are the same as ss couples? Do you have an answer?
I wouldn't use the word Monster, why monster? are we living in an anime. Mutation?, may be, but really I think diversity, genetic rarity. Monster has obvious negative implications and mutation, well were you born with regular DNA then something happened to change it. You've said chimera, I'm thinking this is what I call mosaic: a variable mix of XX and XY in any given sample. If that's the case then why use the term monster mutation, other than for dramatic effect. Well, you have the right to call yourself what you like, I was questioning the mental health of it, but then if you're happy I suppose it doesn't matter. Personally I call myself Intersexed with a genetic mosaic.
Back to the gay subject and marriage...
I've read your repeats on anal sex and yes, I disagree. If it was a complete afront to nature and design then it wouldn't feel good, and yes it does to many. To those who like it it isn't demeaning and is not inherently harmful, as this to me implies harm is a given which it is not.
SS couples did try with their own alternative to marriage and that was 'Civil partnerships'. I do agree this would have been a good thing and in some ways better than extending traditional marriage to everybody, but it ended up being a second class marriage, with many of the legal rights and attitudes afforded marriage not afforded to couples in civil partnerships. I think this is why the GLB then set their sights on marriage. In a way I do see your point about marriage being changed so much with the inclusion of SS as to be unrecognisable, but like I said from a personal viewpoint if this is the way things are going (and it's come so far now, with SSM being legal in so many places) then I look at a potential bonus positive of oneday having the wording of man and woman replaced with two people and so including not only the trans community but intersex too.

Since: Dec 09

Knoxville, TN

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#190665
May 1, 2013
 

Judged:

8

7

7

KiMare wrote:
<quoted text>
They are not 'exactly the same in every way'.
I listed several of numerous core differences.
To deny those differences,'husband and wife' was changed to partners. There is an attempt to deny the terms 'mother and father' also.
Moreover, you again dumb down marriage to a 'contract'? How romantic.
You know these things VV, but sell your soul to deny reality and pretend. The simplest thing in the world is to keep putting simple points of reality on the table and watch your gay twirl hissy fits squirm.
Smirk.
You said that we should pursue our own legal relationship status with our own set of benefits and protections.

Same-Sex Couples will pursue the exact same set of benefits and protections that Opposite-Sex Couples possess in marriage.

So, our relationships would be identical in every way to your relationships from a legal standpoint.

That being the case, you would have two identical contracts with different names (if you get your way).

Name two other legal contracts that are identical in every way, except in name.

Answer the question.

“Busting Kimare's”

Since: Feb 13

Clitty

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#190666
May 1, 2013
 

Judged:

7

7

7

veryvermilion wrote:
<quoted text>
You said that we should pursue our own legal relationship status with our own set of benefits and protections.
Same-Sex Couples will pursue the exact same set of benefits and protections that Opposite-Sex Couples possess in marriage.
So, our relationships would be identical in every way to your relationships from a legal standpoint.
That being the case, you would have two identical contracts with different names (if you get your way).
Name two other legal contracts that are identical in every way, except in name.
Answer the question.
Kuntmary already knows that the battle is lost. She's merely being obtuse as a means to fill the great void in zher personal life.
Rock Hudson

Washington, DC

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#190667
May 1, 2013
 

Judged:

8

8

8

Marram wrote:
<quoted text>
Relax, Hater.
Hush,child.
Rock Hudson

Washington, DC

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#190668
May 1, 2013
 

Judged:

8

8

8

Marram wrote:
<quoted text>
Don't get you panties in a twist, Hater. Just Relax.
We all know that you could contribute to the debate. Maybe, one day, you'll get your chance...
Rock Hudson

Washington, DC

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#190669
May 1, 2013
 

Judged:

8

8

8

veryvermilion wrote:
<quoted text>
Do all straight people speak for you? Are there differing opinions re: same-sex marriage within the straight community? Why would you think that all gay people speak with a unified voice?
You guys have Obummer to speak for you. He spent more time on the phone, congratulating your latest cracked egg, than he did on the phone with families of victims..
Boston..
Benghazi..
Etc..
I even heard a lesbian from Denver, yesterday, on the radio, blasting Jason Collins, for being a coward, "priming the talk show pump" (as she put it) and questioning the need for any of you to come out, at all. A big publicity stunt. "Sexualizing everything" was the phrase I heard, and "robbing kids of their innocence", as well, 13 year olds, needing to focus more on orientation, than the game...
Hmm.. As I've said before. We always congratulate the broken ones for admitting their flaws in public. Hence, the big "I'm proud of you" speeches..
Big D

Modesto, CA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#190670
May 1, 2013
 

Judged:

7

7

7

Dusty Mangina wrote:
<quoted text>
Kuntmary already knows that the battle is lost. She's merely being obtuse as a means to fill the great void in zher personal life.
I find that amusing as well, they know they have already lost. Now it is only a matter of time. But they keep beating their chests and holding onto pipe dreams that are impossible.

And the more they promote hate, the further down the drain their churches go.

It just does not sell as well as it used to
LatterDays

Covina, CA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#190671
May 1, 2013
 

Judged:

7

7

6

Look now it will soon become the new norm across the land.

Midnight marriage unions for gay couples as Colorado law takes effect.

Get to know your Mormon next door, political come back attempt after their "full Exposure" in their leader calling himself Mitt Romney's attempt at becoming the president of the USA.

Suggest you do what you do best, take multiple wives and produce kids coming out the diaper pail.
Frankie Rizzo

Union City, CA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#190673
May 1, 2013
 

Judged:

8

8

8

veryvermilion wrote:
<quoted text>
Frances, you're making a fool of yourself again...
Promoting true marriage equality makes one look like a fool in veryvermillion La La Happy Land?

Red, You're looking stupid again.

Tell me when this thread is updated: (Registration is not required)

Add to my Tracker Send me an email

Showing posts 166,481 - 166,500 of200,205
|
Go to last page| Jump to page:
Type in your comments below
Name
(appears on your post)
Comments
Characters left: 4000
Type the numbers you see in the image on the right:

Please note by clicking on "Post Comment" 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.

Other Recent Monterey Discussions

Search the Monterey Forum:
Topic Updated Last By Comments
Messianic Jews say they are persecuted in Israel (Jun '08) 6 min JOEL COOL DUDE 68,098
CA California seeks to ban free, single-use carryo... (Jun '10) 17 hr Punk a s Murabito 4,834
CA CA Proposition 23 - Global Warming (Oct '10) Jul 2 skeets give more 7,839
CA California Proposition 19: the Marijuana Legali... (Oct '10) Jul 1 Oinkie 15,910
Ask Dr. Gott: Shingles pain difficult to contro... (May '09) Jun 27 William 4
Marina man twice convicted in 2014Marina man tw... Jun 26 AZ AMIGA 1
White Trash teams with Mexican Banger (Apr '11) Jun 25 Third Party 5
•••
•••
•••
•••

Monterey Jobs

•••
Enter and win $5000
•••
•••

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 ]
•••