Judge overturns California's ban on s...

Judge overturns California's ban on same-sex marriage

There are 201878 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.

“Crusading Fundies r hilarious!”

Since: Feb 11

Location hidden

#198362 Jun 27, 2013
veryvermilion wrote:
<quoted text>
Folks, for those of you who are interested, this is a clear example of what "denial" looks like.
A person is presented with undeniable facts and he believes the opposite is true.
It's sad when your world comes crashing down around you and all you can turn to is delusional thinking.
It's called the fundie-twirl! It's a requirement for people that think that everything written in that ridiculous Christian bible is actual truth!!!!
Frankie Rizzo

Hayward, CA

#198363 Jun 27, 2013
Jonah1 wrote:
<quoted text>
Sugarlips, pointing out that you have ASSumed things you don't have any clue about (like my feelings and opinions on matters that I've never uttered a word) isn't expressing anger, it's simply demonstrating your complete lack of integrity. So sorry you dislike that, but, tough shyt.
In which post were you discussing marriage equality and not trying to represent multiple marriages as being the same as a singular marriage. Please provide the post number.
Poly marriage is marriage too. It is not off topic in a discussion of marriage. Duh. Your anger at it's mere mention speaks volumes.

Polygamy deserves the same respect and consideration as same sex marriage.
Anonymous

Vallejo, CA

#198364 Jun 27, 2013
2016: Chris Christie blasts gay-marriage ruling
http://www.politico.com/story/2013/06/chris-c...
Frankie Rizzo

Hayward, CA

#198365 Jun 27, 2013
Jonah1 wrote:
<quoted text>
Sowing discord. Jesus hates you bitch!
Smile.
And you say you're not angry. And you complain of my posts being off topic when I attempt to discuss marriage equality without your fear, anger, ridicule and attempts at censorship.
Rose Feratu

Hoboken, NJ

#198366 Jun 27, 2013
Frankie Rizzo wrote:
<quoted text>
Why do you take joy in good people not being allowed to marry? Isn't that what you have been fighting for?
Oh hell, I know why. It's because you are a hypocrite.
The ONLY joy I take is repeatedly pointing out to you that this had NOTHING to do with polygamy, you flaming dumbass. Now go take another pain pill and OD.

“Crusading Fundies r hilarious!”

Since: Feb 11

Location hidden

#198367 Jun 27, 2013
Frankie Rizzo wrote:
<quoted text>
I buy it. It's not crap. Polygamy deserves the same respect and consideration as SSM.
Then find a forum where others are interested in it. This one isn't it. Oh, and please Sally, before you start your tired routine, a lack of interest does not imply disapproval or approval. Play your routine somewhere else.
Frankie Rizzo

Hayward, CA

#198368 Jun 27, 2013
What harm would a loving marriage of three men cause Jonah1 or anyone else?
Rose Feratu

Hoboken, NJ

#198369 Jun 27, 2013
Frankie Rizzo wrote:
<quoted text>
Poly marriage is marriage too.
Not in the USA it isn't. Are you stuck on stupid?
Rose Feratu

Hoboken, NJ

#198370 Jun 27, 2013
Frankie Rizzo wrote:
<quoted text>
And you say you're not angry. And you complain of my posts being off topic when I attempt to discuss marriage equality without your fear, anger, ridicule and attempts at censorship.
aw.......... here's a tissue.
If you don't wish to be ridiculed, stick to the topic.

“Crusading Fundies r hilarious!”

Since: Feb 11

Location hidden

#198371 Jun 27, 2013
Frankie Rizzo wrote:
<quoted text>
Polygamy deserves the same respect that same sex marriage does. Spin that, troll.
Next.
We aren't required to spin it pussy. It's been made very clear to you that it isn't an issue of interest. That does not imply or convey approval or disapproval of any type. The majority of people in this sting have made it quite clear to you. We aren't interested in a discussion about polygamy.

But, because you're a complete asshat, you continue to pretend that our lack of interest means more than it does. Because you got nothing else, and quite frankly, because it appears that stirring the kettle in Topix appears to be your only source of interaction with other human beings.

You have stated your point. You believe polygamy deserves respect. Great for you. We have stated our point - we aren't here to discuss polygamy. If we wanted to discuss polygamy, we would find a string and other Topix members that were intentionally seeking to discuss this issue. What we wouldn't do is hijack an existing string about one thing (same-sex marriage) in order to steer it to be about something else (polygamy). That would be rude.
Frankie Rizzo

Hayward, CA

#198372 Jun 27, 2013
Jonah1 wrote:
<quoted text>
Then find a forum where others are interested in it. This one isn't it. Oh, and please Sally, before you start your tired routine, a lack of interest does not imply disapproval or approval. Play your routine somewhere else.
No. This is a perfectly good marriage equality forum. You are the problem, not I. All we've seen from you is angry irrelevant ad hominem.

As far as a lack of interest, that's not true. Witness you, vv, rose Feratu and Big D et al interest in my posts. Not only interest but PASSION!

Hope that helps junior.
Repaytrate

Covina, CA

#198373 Jun 27, 2013
Keep the pressure on them to return to their country of origin, and repair the Islam based country.

Pamela Geller and Robert Spencer of the American Freedom Defense Initiative, the group responsible for last year's controversial Anti-Muslim subway ads in NYC.
Frankie Rizzo

Hayward, CA

#198374 Jun 27, 2013
Rose Feratu wrote:
<quoted text>
The ONLY joy I take is repeatedly pointing out to you that this had NOTHING to do with polygamy, you flaming dumbass. Now go take another pain pill and OD.
Marriage has nothing to do with polygamy? Please tell that to a high school graduate. Do you know what "gamy" means dummy? It means marriage. So poly marriage has nothing to do with marriage? Oh boy.

No, The reason you complain so loudly and get so upset at the mere mention of polygamy is you know you are a hypocrite and your mentally ill mind blames it on me. But it's on you. Be mad at yourself, not me.
Don't shoot the messenger.
Broseph

Newark, DE

#198375 Jun 27, 2013
Frankie Rizzo wrote:
<quoted text>
No. This is a perfectly good marriage equality forum. You are the problem, not I. All we've seen from you is angry irrelevant ad hominem.
As far as a lack of interest, that's not true. Witness you, vv, rose Feratu and Big D et al interest in my posts. Not only interest but PASSION!
Hope that helps junior.
California is now going back with gay marriage again. You mad?
Frankie Rizzo

Hayward, CA

#198376 Jun 27, 2013
Rose Feratu wrote:
<quoted text>
Not in the USA it isn't. Are you stuck on stupid?
That's how it was for SSM not too long ago. Congratulations! Look how far you came in such a short time.

But it's not over yet, good people are still being denied marriage. You should be sympathetic to them. Why are you not?

“Crusading Fundies r hilarious!”

Since: Feb 11

Location hidden

#198377 Jun 27, 2013
Pietro Armando wrote:
<quoted text>
Uhhhhhhh huh. Dissmissiveness on your part reveals either arrogance, or ignorance, on your part. Obviously there are polygamists who view this as beneficial to their cause. Besides it means more press coverage for them. Imagine the irony if the state of Utah, which had to disavow polygamy in order to be admitted into the Union because the federal government at the time demanded it, now could force the feds to recognize it, should they decide to legalize it. The Supreme Court taketh away in 1878, and giveth it back in 2013. All thanks to the efforts of Waste Water and the rainbow flag wavers.
Pietro,
There are 15 countries that allow gays to marry. Some of them for over 10 years now. Please present the room with information on which of those 15 countries now accepts multiple marriages. Thanks. When you do that, we will engage in further conversation.

Oh, and just fyi, you might want to look up the meaning of the word "obviously". It's apparent from your post you currently don't know how to employ it correctly.

Here's another idea. Since you and Rizzo seem to have such a passion for the concept of multiple marriages, why don't you create a thread of your own. Find some like minded individuals, and individuals that strongly disagree, and have at it! But speaking for most of the gay folk and gay supporters in this string, most of us don't give a flying fig. Nor are we required to. If you or Rizzo would like to paint that as selfishness, knock yourself out. But calling is selfishness doesn't alter our complete disinterest in the topic.

Have a good day.
Frankie Rizzo

Hayward, CA

#198378 Jun 27, 2013
Jonah1 wrote:
<quoted text>
We aren't required to spin it pussy. It's been made very clear to you that it isn't an issue of interest. That does not imply or convey approval or disapproval of any type. The majority of people in this sting have made it quite clear to you. We aren't interested in a discussion about polygamy.
But, because you're a complete asshat, you continue to pretend that our lack of interest means more than it does. Because you got nothing else, and quite frankly, because it appears that stirring the kettle in Topix appears to be your only source of interaction with other human beings.
You have stated your point. You believe polygamy deserves respect. Great for you. We have stated our point - we aren't here to discuss polygamy. If we wanted to discuss polygamy, we would find a string and other Topix members that were intentionally seeking to discuss this issue. What we wouldn't do is hijack an existing string about one thing (same-sex marriage) in order to steer it to be about something else (polygamy). That would be rude.
Polygamy is a perfectly relevant topic in any discussion of marriage equality. Your angry outbursts aren't.

With a 200 word angry post, you tell me there is no interest in my posts! Too funny! That's why I like this thread.

“Crusading Fundies r hilarious!”

Since: Feb 11

Location hidden

#198379 Jun 27, 2013
KiMare wrote:
<quoted text>
The Supreme Court decision is based on the assertion that imposing an imposter relationship on marriage will rectify the self-esteem of homosexuals, and telling a child that duplicate genders are exactly the same as mom and dad.
The Supreme Court decision had nothing to do with the self-esteem of gays. Nor did it have anything to do with telling children things. You really should study up on how law is practiced. It's obvious from your posts you're currently clueless.
KiMare wrote:
<quoted text>
The context of this verse is no accident. Romans 1:22 (NJB)
While they claimed to be wise, in fact they were growing so stupid.
F*CK your stupid bible. It's irrelevant, just like you.
Frankie Rizzo

Hayward, CA

#198380 Jun 27, 2013
Rose Feratu wrote:
<quoted text>
aw.......... here's a tissue.
If you don't wish to be ridiculed, stick to the topic.
I am on topic. You aren't. When all you can respond with is ridicule, you're losing.
Frankie Rizzo

Hayward, CA

#198381 Jun 27, 2013
Jonah1 wrote:
<quoted text>
We aren't required to spin it pussy. It's been made very clear to you that it isn't an issue of interest. That does not imply or convey approval or disapproval of any type. The majority of people in this sting have made it quite clear to you. We aren't interested in a discussion about polygamy.
But, because you're a complete asshat, you continue to pretend that our lack of interest means more than it does. Because you got nothing else, and quite frankly, because it appears that stirring the kettle in Topix appears to be your only source of interaction with other human beings.
You have stated your point. You believe polygamy deserves respect. Great for you. We have stated our point - we aren't here to discuss polygamy. If we wanted to discuss polygamy, we would find a string and other Topix members that were intentionally seeking to discuss this issue. What we wouldn't do is hijack an existing string about one thing (same-sex marriage) in order to steer it to be about something else (polygamy). That would be rude.
My point is that you are a hypocrite and yes, I have made it.

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
where can I find heroin in monterey? (Oct '14) Jun 20 Sickandtarred 126
who is the best hung man in Carmel Jun 18 Republicana 1
News Police briefs: Beaten body found on Old Stage Road (Dec '09) May 28 Oreo 16
News Ask the Auto Doctor (Mar '06) May '17 RichAndrewd 1,553
Marina infested with gang boys (Mar '11) May '17 NorteXIVgang 18
News Seaside closes access to makeshift toy car trac... Apr '17 Jsherratt831 1
News Brown names Laird as Resource Agency chief (Jan '11) Apr '17 wmcnatt 8

Monterey Jobs

More from around the web

Personal Finance

Monterey Mortgages