Judge overturns California's ban on same-sex marriage

Aug 4, 2010 Full story: www.cnn.com 200,977

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

“KiMare'a the Monster Mutation”

Since: Nov 10

Location hidden

#199309 Jul 1, 2013
veryvermilion wrote:
<quoted text>
Isn't it interesting that you are schooling me on law when you INSISTED that same-sex couples don't have the right to have their marriages validated by federal law?
I guess it's fair to say that you were a tad off the mark on how the Constitution would be interpreted by the justices.
I'm willing to bet that the following phrases will utilized to push states to legalize same-sex marriage:
--"DOMA’s demonstrated purpose is to ensure that if any State decides to recognize same-sex marriages, those unions will be treated as second-class marriages for purposes of federal law"
and
--"makes it even more difficult for the children to understand the integrity and closeness of their own family and its concord with other families in their community and in their daily lives"
The justices clearly believe that same-sex couples are being treated like second-class citizens. And they clearly believe that DOMA laws negatively impact the children of same-sex couples.
Since I was right about how this would turn out, I think I'll keep my opinions about how I understand the law and you can keep yours.
While proclaiming state rights, they circumvented them using the same maneuver used for the Roe vs Wade ruling. The first deprived unborn children of their right to life, the second deprives born children of their parents and marriage of it's legitimate identity.

“KiMare'a the Monster Mutation”

Since: Nov 10

Location hidden

#199310 Jul 1, 2013
veryvermilion wrote:
<quoted text>
Obviously you believe that opposite-sex couples are better. You believe they make better parents. You believe that same-sex couples are "defective". You say too-may-toe and then say too-mah-toe, but you're really saying the same thing; namely that opposite-sex couples are superior.
I've proven numerous times that your "facts" are untrue. I just don't have the interest or energy to do it again.
And with regards to your final comment, the way I see it, you've justified your own rot by claiming over and over that marriage can only be defined as a cross-cultural constraint on evolutionary mating behavior. Anything else just doesn't cut the mustard for you.
You don't own--never will own--the definition of marriage. Marriage is what happens when two people decide to marry. Marriage means many different things to different people.
Finally, I think a perfect example of reprobate would be the millions upon millions of so-called Christians who have attacked gays and lesbians (physical and verbally) over the centuries in the name of God.
You insist that we change orientation or become celibate. You demand that only YOU can define marriage--claiming it should be only available to heterosexuals.
Every time a gay person wants to move a little closer to happiness and personal fulfillment, there you are, trying to knock us back "in our place".
I'll submit again... This is not Christianity. This is not what Christ commanded you to do. It isn't how He commanded you to interact with society.
Call our gatherings "debauchery". I don't give a damn what you call it. It was a wonderful day. And millions of gays and straights reveled in Pride Celebrations around the globe.
Just as when blacks began to finally taste freedom and women began to taste equality, gays and lesbians are enjoying both.
Not a bad time to be living in...
I've simply listed the distinctions, you've judged them. You only prove what I've noted many times, that imposing a fake relationship by gays is a foolish attempt to justify insecurity.

As to the other pontification, been there, exposed the gay twirl.

Here is the bottom line;

Marriage is a cross cultural constraint on evolutionary mating behavior.

Ss couples are a defective failure of mating behavior.'Ss marriage' is clearly an oxymoron.
Nomomo

Marina Del Rey, CA

#199311 Jul 1, 2013
MORMONS ARE FREAKING THE CLUCK OUT! All that money that they've wasted fighting this. Hahahahahahahahahahahahahaha!! !
laughing man

UK

#199312 Jul 1, 2013
koo wrote:
<quoted text>
Put down the crack pipe.
What a truly incredibly original post. Surely it's headed to the Smithsonian.

Judged:

10

10

10

Reply »
Report Abuse Judge it!
Mikey

Fullerton, CA

#199313 Jul 1, 2013
Frankie Rizzo wrote:
<quoted text>
Didn't do it for you. Wouldn't have done it for you.
You can sit down now troll.
Aww, You mad Bro?
Mikey

Fullerton, CA

#199314 Jul 1, 2013
KiMare wrote:
<quoted text>
I've simply listed the distinctions, you've judged them. You only prove what I've noted many times, that imposing a fake relationship by gays is a foolish attempt to justify insecurity.
As to the other pontification, been there, exposed the gay twirl.
Here is the bottom line;
Marriage is a cross cultural constraint on evolutionary mating behavior.
Ss couples are a defective failure of mating behavior.'Ss marriage' is clearly an oxymoron.
Such bigoted twirl.....Yawn

Since: Dec 09

Knoxville, TN

#199315 Jul 1, 2013
KiMare wrote:
<quoted text>
I've simply listed the distinctions, you've judged them. You only prove what I've noted many times, that imposing a fake relationship by gays is a foolish attempt to justify insecurity.
As to the other pontification, been there, exposed the gay twirl.
Here is the bottom line;
Marriage is a cross cultural constraint on evolutionary mating behavior.
Ss couples are a defective failure of mating behavior.'Ss marriage' is clearly an oxymoron.
If your comment was translated to sound, all I would hear is flatulence.
Ramrod

Chico, CA

#199316 Jul 1, 2013
In the last year, there have been more than a dozen hazing incidents around the country involving high school boys who have sodomized other boys with foreign objects, reports Bloomberg. Over 40 boys have been reported victims. Most have been younger students.

There’s a dearth of data concerning the size and scope of the national boy-on-boy anal hazing problem. Astonishingly, though, a study published in the Journal of Youth and Adolescence has claimed that nearly 10 percent of high school males report suffering some form of sexual assault including, in some cases, forced oral sex or rape.
laughing man

UK

#199317 Jul 1, 2013
veryvermilion wrote:
<quoted text>
If your comment was translated to sound, all I would hear is flatulence.
Which means it would be a mating call and he'd be in imminent danger from stampeding Perverts.

Imbecile.
laughing man

UK

#199318 Jul 1, 2013
Ramrod wrote:
In the last year, there have been more than a dozen hazing incidents around the country involving high school boys who have sodomized other boys with foreign objects, reports Bloomberg. Over 40 boys have been reported victims. Most have been younger students.
There’s a dearth of data concerning the size and scope of the national boy-on-boy anal hazing problem. Astonishingly, though, a study published in the Journal of Youth and Adolescence has claimed that nearly 10 percent of high school males report suffering some form of sexual assault including, in some cases, forced oral sex or rape.
You're not going to hear anything because of the activist Media and also because the AMA and APA, etc, has been totally compromised by the Perverts.

Since: Mar 07

The entire US of A

#199320 Jul 1, 2013
laughing man wrote:
<quoted text>
You're not going to hear anything because of the activist Media and also because the AMA and APA, etc, has been totally compromised by the Perverts.
The straight kids who try to dominate, demean and bully the gay kids (or weaker kids perceived as gay) in this horrible manner are indeed mentally ill, and when they are caught, they are punished/treated.

Since: Mar 07

The entire US of A

#199321 Jul 1, 2013
Ramrod wrote:
In the last year, there have been more than a dozen hazing incidents around the country involving high school boys who have ...
And gay kids (or kids perceived as gay) are more often the victims, than the perpetrators. What do you propose to so to change this? Stop teaching bullies that it's okay to brutalize others?
Bruno

Westminster, CA

#199322 Jul 1, 2013
Joanah 1 is one pissed off little Biach!!
laughing man

UK

#199324 Jul 1, 2013
Quest wrote:
<quoted text>
The straight kids who try to dominate, demean and bully the gay kids (or weaker kids perceived as gay) in this horrible manner are indeed mentally ill, and when they are caught, they are punished/treated.
Yeah, let's start another day with an imbecile reading from the GLAAD and GLSEN script, the "safety" propaganda.

No mention of the lesbian gangs, shillboi?
Dorn

La Puente, CA

#199325 Jul 1, 2013
veryvermilion

Since: Dec 09

3,670

That is the best post of the poll! It really says it al.

God AKA the Creator has ways of solving the problems of the Creation. We humans have been overpopulating, and gay marriage will slow that down and give the Earth a chance to recover from our folly. The numbers of gays waiting to get married is staggering. All these good people coming out of the closet is really surprising.
Green an Black

Monrovia, CA

#199326 Jul 1, 2013
No need to try and figure out who the nation will be saying about the event that unfolded in AZ, June 30, 2013..

“Crusading Fundies r hilarious!”

Since: Feb 11

Location hidden

#199327 Jul 1, 2013
Pietro Armando wrote:
<quoted text>
As long as the interracial marriage is the same form, one man and one woman, it is the same, form and function, as everybody else's.
What "function" are you referring to KiMMy? Is this "function" mandated? Or simply more of your pseudo psycho babble?!

“Crusading Fundies r hilarious!”

Since: Feb 11

Location hidden

#199328 Jul 1, 2013
Sorry, I addressed that to KiMMy. IT was so stupid I just assumed it was her post. Pietro,
please provide information on this "function" of marriage that you refer to and whether or not that "function" is mandated?

Are their more than one "function" of marriage Pietro? Or only just one? Please provide the state or federal rulings that acknowledge this "function" and that express the participants are under mandate once they enter into marriage to fulfill this "function".

We'll all anxiously await your well supported response!!!!

“Crusading Fundies r hilarious!”

Since: Feb 11

Location hidden

#199329 Jul 1, 2013
KiMare wrote:
Naw, I'm just going to keep pointing out reality to your bogus legal ruling.
The ruling was bogus? Really? According to whom? You?!!! LOL!

The ruling stands. Not a damned thing you can do about it.

Smile!
KiMare wrote:
Sure annoys you for something you think is untrue...
You don't annoy us cur. You exemplify the reason we don't accept 2nd status handouts. It's because of the efforts of bigots like yourself that we smile as we continue our civil journey. Watching as you bitch and moan every time we advance is hilarious!!

It started with one country, now we have 15. It started with one state, now we have 13 and DC. And what do your ilk do? They piss and moan about how its not real!!!! They quote the losers!!! They try and intentionally agitate and sow discord. Know why? Cause they got NOTHING!!!

But you keep trying to convince yourself that you are annoying us!!! Your need for self importance is hilarious!!!
BTW, acknowledging that you think you are annoying us verifies the intent of your "stating facts". The intent is to sow discord. Your god HATES your behavior. Enjoy hell KiMMy!!

Smile!

“Vita e' Bella.”

Since: May 12

Location hidden

#199330 Jul 1, 2013
Earl wrote:
Question for all: I understand that The Supreme Court ruled Prop 8 illegal and struck down the law, but is there a state law giving gays the right to marry?
Same law that allows any other man and women to marry.
What I am saying is, there was no law giving gays the right to marry before prop 8 came along
Gays, had, and have the right to marry, enter into a legally recognized union of husband and wife. No different than anyone else.
. Prop 8 was meant to block any future laws that tried to give gays the right to marry.The court struck down the ban (Prop 8)on gay marriage, but there is no state law giving gays the right to marry. So can some right wing group come along and again challenge the legalities of all these marriages? Do we need to force the politicians to finally get some guts and vote in a law?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Proposition_22

Proposition 22 was a law enacted by California voters in March 2000 to restrict marriages to only those between opposite-sex couples. In May 2008, it was struck down by the California Supreme Court as contrary to the state constitution.
The Act was proposed by means of the initiative process. It was authored by the state senator William "Pete" Knight and is known informally as the Knight initiative. Voters adopted the measure on March 7, 2000 with 61% in favor to 39% against.[1] This large margin of victory surprised many, since a Field Poll immediately prior to the election estimated support at only 53%, with 40% against and 7% undecided.[2]
The Act added Section 308.5 of the Family Code, which read "Only marriage between a man and a woman is valid or recognized in California". Because the Act was an ordinary statute, it could be struck down if it were inconsistent with the state constitution. This occurred on May 15, 2008 when the state supreme court, ruling on In re Marriage Cases, declared that same-sex couples had a constitutional right to marry.[3] This 4–3 decision invalidated Proposition 22 and some related California laws.
Despite the brevity of Proposition 22 (it added only fourteen words to the Family Code) its effect provoked debate long after its passage. In November 2008 California voters overturned the In re Marriage Cases decision by approving an amendment of the state constitution called Proposition 8. On June 2010, Proposition 8 was declared unconstitutional by U.S district judge Vaughn Walker based on the Due Process and Equal Protection clauses of the Fourteenth Amendment of the United States Constitution.[4] On June 2013, the United States Supreme Court in Hollingsworth v. Perry ruled that the Intervenor-Defendants had no Article III standing to appeal Walker's ruling, keeping Proposition 8 unforceable throughout California and enabling same-sex marriage to resume just two days after the decision.[5]

"Only marriage between a man and a woman is valid or recognized in California".
I'm just worried that there might be a loophole and we should address this as soon as possible.
Worry about the consequences of redefining marriage for the next generation.

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
Suri Cruise's dog is missing in Los Angeles 5 hr bubba 69 2
Dennis W (Veeser) from Krakow Wi. 8 hr Mia 1
Messianic Jews say they are persecuted in Israel (Jun '08) 15 hr Eric 69,397
CA Jury reaches verdict in Oakland BART shooting t... (Jul '10) 20 hr scoop 2,273
CA California seeks to ban free, single-use carryo... (Jun '10) Thu zhuzhamm 5,079
CA California Proposition 19: the Marijuana Legali... (Oct '10) Thu Pizza 16,000
CA CA Proposition 23 - Global Warming (Oct '10) Sep 17 Blazing saddles 7,954
•••
•••
•••

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 ]
•••