Judge overturns California's ban on s...

Judge overturns California's ban on same-sex marriage

There are 201891 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

#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.

“Crusading Fundies r hilarious!”

Since: Feb 11

Location hidden

#198382 Jun 27, 2013
KiMare wrote:
<quoted text>
Under the dumbed down legal definition of marriage just issued, any number of people will be able to marry. To limit the number will be discrimination.
Moreover, according to the dissenting opinion, consenting adults, directly related (parent/child or siblings) will be able to marry.
That is simply a start.
Still making arguments based on other people's losing arguments!!! Wow. Nothing demonstrates your idiocy better than that!!

Married gay people are now recognized federally. DOMA is unconstitutional.

Smile.
Slingers

Covina, CA

#198383 Jun 27, 2013
I have the "Eureka" answer to California and any other states prison's over population and increased costs associated with that.

Transfer them to Texas, especially the "death row" inmates.

Texas marked a solemn moment in criminal justice Wednesday evening, executing its 500th inmate since it resumed carrying out capital punishment in 1982.

Problem solved, I should be a politician or a CPA or financial wizard.

But wait; who will lose out?

Guards and over time pay.
Construction companies building prisons.
Food service companies providing services.
Uniform companies.
Laundry service companies.
Shoe companies.
Electricity providers.
Water company providers.
Gasoline companies
Auto manufacturing companies
Repair companies.
Frankie Rizzo

Hayward, CA

#198384 Jun 27, 2013
Prop 8 discriminated against polygamy as sure as it discriminated against same sex marriage.

To claim it is off topic here is ridiculous. And there's no reason to complain it is off topic, except and attempt to reveal your hypocrisy.
Frankie Rizzo

Hayward, CA

#198385 Jun 27, 2013
Jonah1 wrote:
<quoted text>
F*CK your stupid bible. It's irrelevant, just like you.
Oh, you're not angry or off topic. Too funny!

P.S. Great argument!
Rose Feratu

Hoboken, NJ

#198386 Jun 27, 2013
Frankie Rizzo wrote:
<quoted text>
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.
Where do you see polygamy in the article being discussed? Judge overturns California's ban on same-sex marriage

You are one hot mess, shit-for-brains.
Frankie Rizzo

Hayward, CA

#198387 Jun 27, 2013
Broseph wrote:
<quoted text>
California is now going back with gay marriage again. You mad?
No I'm happy! I support equality. And it's one step closer to equality, but it's not done yet. There are still many good people being denied marriage. Think of them. They are just like you. But with less rights.
Frankie Rizzo

Hayward, CA

#198388 Jun 27, 2013
Jonah1 wrote:
<quoted text>
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.
Nearly 50 (FIFTY) countries allow polygamy. Most for hundreds if not thousands of years.
Rose Feratu

Hoboken, NJ

#198390 Jun 27, 2013
Frankie Rizzo wrote:
Prop 8 discriminated against polygamy as sure as it discriminated against same sex marriage.
To claim it is off topic here is ridiculous. And there's no reason to complain it is off topic, except and attempt to reveal your hypocrisy.
Prop 8 had no effect on polygamy. Prop 8 did not ban polygamy. The judge did not rule on polygamy. SCOTUS did not rule on polygamy.

Did you see all the reports on polygamists lining up to marry in California? Me neither.
Rose Feratu

Hoboken, NJ

#198391 Jun 27, 2013
Frankie Rizzo wrote:
<quoted text>
No I'm happy! I support equality. And it's one step closer to equality, but it's not done yet. There are still many good people being denied marriage. Think of them. They are just like you. But with less rights.
ahhaahahah
ahhahahahaha
ahahahahhaha

I bet you're confused by the menu at KFC.

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
Discount Tickets - Monterey Bay Aquarium Feb 20 howefortunate 1
News Trump's North Korea red line could come back to... Feb 14 Mikey 11
lovers point inn of pacific grove dangeroud Jan 30 STB 1
Lovers Point Inn DO NOT STAY Here Jan 29 Richard 1
where can I find heroin in monterey? (Oct '14) Jan 23 Dez1981 90
Review: David B Tolkan & Assoc - David B Tolkan... (Feb '09) Jan '17 Glades lake 31
News Ask the Auto Doctor (Mar '06) Dec '16 Smh 1,551

Monterey Jobs

More from around the web

Personal Finance

Monterey Mortgages