Judge overturns California's ban on s...

Judge overturns California's ban on same-sex marriage

There are 201480 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.

Frankie Rizzo

Hayward, CA

#202908 Jul 16, 2013
Poof wrote:
<quoted text>In what state can you find polygamy legal? The question is this Frank, who are the people arguing for polygamy and on what base.
Jizzy, are you are saying that polygamy should be illegal because it's illegal?

Jizzy, the question is why do you wish to keep polygamy illegal? It's a simple question really Jizzy. The answer is not "because it's illegal" Stop being such a moron Jizzy.

Jizzy, the people arguing for it are polyamorists and the "base" is marriage equality Jizzy.
Frankie Rizzo

Hayward, CA

#202909 Jul 16, 2013
Jizzy. Too funny! I like it when he posts his dopey stuff all mad at Frankie and sh!t.

“Vita e' Bella.”

Since: May 12

Location hidden

#202911 Jul 16, 2013
RiccardoFire wrote:
<quoted text>Show me the post where I'm wanting to know medical information pertaining your children? I simply wanted to know how 2 gay guys can have both their DNA on a child. I don't want to know anything about the kids. Why you so scared bro? "My husband and my children are genetically linked to both of us." Can you explain that?
It possibly means a female relative of his partner's is the biological mother, that would make the brother of the mother, the child's uncle.
Frankie Rizzo

Hayward, CA

#202913 Jul 16, 2013
KiMare wrote:
<quoted text>
I made both statements in regards to different points.
They are both accurate.
Idiot.
Joanie Baloney is having another bad hair day.
Frankie Rizzo

Hayward, CA

#202914 Jul 16, 2013
Poof wrote:
<quoted text>Please give a link, or a web page for those who wish that polygamy become legal.
Are they requesting it due to religious reasons?
Why do we hate loving adults just because they want to live and marry as a threesome?

On what rational basis do we pick the arbitrary number Two when other (allegedly) arbitrary distinctions have been declared the enemy of decency? Polygamy has a historical and social acceptance in many cultures which far surpasses gay marriage, a very recent phenomenon.

Why should the children of polygamous relationships have to live in shame and be subjected to discrimination, to paraphrase Justice Kennedy?

http://legalinsurrection.com/2013/06/polygamy...
Big D

Modesto, CA

#202915 Jul 16, 2013
Frankie Rizzo wrote:
<quoted text>
Why do we hate loving adults just because they want to live and marry as a threesome?
On what rational basis do we pick the arbitrary number Two when other (allegedly) arbitrary distinctions have been declared the enemy of decency? Polygamy has a historical and social acceptance in many cultures which far surpasses gay marriage, a very recent phenomenon.
Why should the children of polygamous relationships have to live in shame and be subjected to discrimination, to paraphrase Justice Kennedy?
http://legalinsurrection.com/2013/06/polygamy...
Why do people bitch and complain about it when they are not personally willing to lift a finger, get any signatures, or actually work toward making what they constantly wine and cry about happen?
Frankie Rizzo

Hayward, CA

#202916 Jul 16, 2013
Poof wrote:
<quoted text>Please give a link, or a web page for those who wish that polygamy become legal.
Are they requesting it due to religious reasons?
Religion has no place in a discussion of marriage equality Jizzy. Get your mind off of that. Take it to the fundie threads.

http://legalinsurrection.com/2011/06/on-what-...

http://www.gaypolygamist.com/

“Vita e' Bella.”

Since: May 12

Location hidden

#202917 Jul 16, 2013
Poof wrote:
<quoted text>Please give a link, or a web page for those who wish that polygamy become legal.
Are they requesting it due to religious reasons?
http://www.slate.com/articles/double_x/double...

http://marriage-equality.blogspot.com/p/polya...

“what are you talking about you”

Since: Mar 11

schlappington, by god

#202919 Jul 16, 2013
ho lee sheet!

frig my lifes!
Frankie Rizzo

Hayward, CA

#202920 Jul 16, 2013

Since: Nov 12

Elk Grove, CA

#202921 Jul 16, 2013
Pietro Armando wrote:
<quoted text>
It possibly means a female relative of his partner's is the biological mother, that would make the brother of the mother, the child's uncle.
Could be, I was just curious and he took it personal. But yet he brings it up. I guess that shut him up for awhile.
Big D

Modesto, CA

#202922 Jul 16, 2013
Poof wrote:
<quoted text>Please give a link, or a web page for those who wish that polygamy become legal.
Are they requesting it due to religious reasons?
There seem to be 4 camps

Those that want it for religious reasons
Those that want it for a way to collect extra government support checks
Those that want it as an excuse to molest children
Those that could care less about it but bring it up on forums that are about same sex marriage as a diversion.

None of those 4 reasons bode well for the idea, when folks get past those 4 reasons, then something might happen, but as long as those are the 4 camps, it will go nowhere.
Frankie Rizzo

Hayward, CA

#202923 Jul 16, 2013
Pietro Armando wrote:
Jizzy could easily find links supporting polygamy if he wasn't such a moron and learned how to use a search engine. He's just playing dumb, which comes naturally for him, he just acts normally!
Frankie Rizzo

Hayward, CA

#202924 Jul 16, 2013
Cooterbob wrote:
ho lee sheet!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v =vm5JGX2or-sXX
frig my lifes!
I almost pissed my pants the first time I heard that!

“Crusading Fundies r hilarious!”

Since: Feb 11

Location hidden

#202925 Jul 16, 2013
KiMare wrote:
<quoted text>
In other words,
Wait for it. This is the bigot's way of setting up a completely mis-representation of what was previous stated. Another example of this tired fundie routine is, "so what you are really saying...".

This allows the fundie to then go off on a tirade based upon something that they made up rather than what was actually stated.
KiMare wrote:
<quoted text>
a relative of you or your partner
Actually anyone with half an IQ would realize that it would have to be "of my spouse". The fact that you are confused and think it could be either "me" or "him" shows how ridiculously stupid you are.
KiMare wrote:
<quoted text>
was a surrogate who twice gave up her child
If she was a surrogate, it wasn't her child now was it pumpkin? Honestly, don't you get tired of showing off how stupid you are?
KiMare wrote:
<quoted text>
to a pretend half of a family.
No dear, we're a full family. Not a damn thing you can do about it. Well, other than childishly post like you are doing. Your pathetic attempts to goad demonstrate your true character. You're a complete c*nt who doesn't mind showing off that fact.

Smile dear.
KiMare wrote:
<quoted text>
I'm sure the children will understand when they realize what happened.
I'm sure the children already understand, since they were told and are now practically adults. But please, don't let facts get in the way of continuing your sanctimonious condescension! Watching fundamentalist Christians show off how truly vile they are makes me giddy!!
KiMare wrote:
<quoted text>
It is interesting that you make the information discrete.
Well, being the busy bodied fundie that you are, you do tend to find the stupidest things to be interesting. It's like watching a turkey get excited over something shiny.
KiMare wrote:
<quoted text>
Even you realize most people find that reprehensible.
No hon, I realize that c*nts like yourself find it reprehensible. I don't concern myself with what c*nts think.

But thank you hon, for demonstrating to anyone reading this thread what vile people fundamentalist Christians are. Bigots for Jesus!! Smile be-atch!
Frankie Rizzo

Hayward, CA

#202926 Jul 16, 2013
Frankie Rizzo1 wrote:
<quoted text>
Hey ahole why are YOU using MY registered LEGAL profile
I'm not allowed to have a registered profile. I'm not as equal as you are. That's why icehole.

Good that you asked though. Remember! There are no stupid posts. Only stupid dumbass moronic posters like yourself.

“Crusading Fundies r hilarious!”

Since: Feb 11

Location hidden

#202927 Jul 16, 2013
KiMare wrote:
<quoted text>
I made both statements in regards to different points.
They are both accurate.
Idiot.
No, they were not both accurate. I easily demonstrated that. I did so knowing that by admitting to being a father I could then anticipate your intentionally hateful posts about my family.

Thank you so much for not letting me down. Opening the door for ugly people like yourself to show off in all their splendor how truly hateful they are makes me giddy!!

Never think for a moment that fundamentalist Christians won't always show off how truly ugly they are if given the opportunity!

Smile.
Frankie Rizzo

Hayward, CA

#202928 Jul 16, 2013
Big D wrote:
<quoted text>
Why do people bitch and complain about it when they are not personally willing to lift a finger, get any signatures, or actually work toward making what they constantly wine and cry about happen?
Because it's a discussion forum. That's what it's for. Duh.

And polygamy is perfectly on topic in any discussion of marriage equality.
Frankie Rizzo

Hayward, CA

#202929 Jul 16, 2013
Big D wrote:
<quoted text>
There seem to be 4 camps
Those that want it for religious reasons
Those that want it for a way to collect extra government support checks
Those that want it as an excuse to molest children
Those that could care less about it but bring it up on forums that are about same sex marriage as a diversion.
None of those 4 reasons bode well for the idea, when folks get past those 4 reasons, then something might happen, but as long as those are the 4 camps, it will go nowhere.
The same stuff the bigots used against SSM. Different form of marriage, same (really worse) bigoted ad hominem attacks. I'm real proud of you bigot!(and hypocrite).
Poof

Madison, WI

#202930 Jul 16, 2013
Frankie Rizzo wrote:
<quoted text>
Religion has no place in a discussion of marriage equality Jizzy. Get your mind off of that. Take it to the fundie threads.
http://legalinsurrection.com/2011/06/on-what-...
http://www.gaypolygamist.com/
During the first fights over same sex marriage, the bible and religion where used as a way of denying marriage to gays and lesbians. In this nation we don't make laws based on religion. If the people whom want polygamy are doing so based on religion, the answer is no. Just as it was for denying same sex marriage. It works both ways. The question of polygamy was answered long ago.

Research Service 2
Christianity.6 These bodies of religious law may play as relevant a role in certain legal actions as
sharia might play in others.
In the United States, these religious laws have no legally binding effect on U.S. citizens because
religious laws cannot be adopted by federal, state, or local governments under the First
Amendment. Rather, individuals who identify with a particular religious group may voluntarily
subject themselves to such religious laws by their association with the community.7 For example,
if a particular religious sect or denomination requires its members to dress modestly, and an
individual who is a member of that particular group does not comply with the dress code, that
individual would be in violation of that groupís religious law. The individualís belief in the
religionís precepts would guide his or her individual actions, with any sanction for noncompliance
generally remaining a private matter between the individual and the religious group.
The individual would not be subject to any penalty by the government because the government
does not enforce such a dress code. Interestingly, this distinction between religious and secular
laws can become complicated when an action might be governed by both religious law and
secular law. For example, many religious denominationsí beliefs prohibit murder under their
religious code. Both federal and state laws also prohibit murder. Thus, an individual who
commits murder would be in violation of both a religious law and a secular law and may be
sanctioned by the religious group, the government, or both.

http://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/misc/R41824.pdf

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
News Messianic Jews say they are persecuted in Israel (Jun '08) Jun 12 Ben Avraham 72,097
News Successful Marina hotel owner asks city to forg... Jun 3 bubba b bobby 2
News Youngster dies in police chase on Highway 1 in ... (Jul '10) May 23 Trump supporter 831 30
Help finding old acquaintance? May 21 Barros 4
Sendy Russo May '18 Wondering 1
News Marina mayora s race: Incumbent Bruce Delgado v... (Nov '16) Apr '18 Kevin Saunders 2
Review: Francis Alwill General Contr (Jul '11) Apr '18 Bob Klinski 7

Monterey Jobs

Personal Finance

Monterey Mortgages