Judge overturns California's ban on s...

Judge overturns California's ban on same-sex marriage

There are 201865 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.

Huh

Faribault, MN

#215897 Sep 11, 2013
Old Grand Dad wrote:
<quoted text>
You got it by forcing it down our throats, you had to beg, sue and force. You shouldn't feel that America agrees with it.
You don't have to agree with it.. I mean I hate your KKK group. But you have right to your vile evil demonic hate. JUST KEEP IT OUT OF LAW AND BANS AND RULES..
Frankie Rizzo

Hayward, CA

#215898 Sep 11, 2013
Don Sclio wrote:
<quoted text>
Astrolube.
No shit. The stuff exists.
You sound like a man who would know. We'll defer to your expertise on sexual lubricants.
Frankie Rizzo

Hayward, CA

#215899 Sep 11, 2013
Ithappens wrote:
<quoted text>"
.... wow seems like heterosexual men have a problem keeping Jonny Long Dong in thier pants.
You would know. We'll defer to your expertise on that too.
Frankie Rizzo

Hayward, CA

#215901 Sep 11, 2013
commonpeeps wrote:
<quoted text>It takes 4 to make a daisy chain.
If a two man marriage is good a three or four man marriage is even better, but these hypocrites seem lukewarm on that. I mean tepid. I run it up the flagpole and they don't salute it. They mumble something and get mad.

YUK!YUK!YUK! Ah good times.
Frankie Rizzo

Hayward, CA

#215902 Sep 11, 2013
Don Sclio wrote:
<quoted text>
Really.
You seem to know a lot about those you've never met and claim to be a lot of things from the pulpit of the anonymous internet.
I myself don't give you much in terms of character but there you go bullshitter.
I met you before. You wanted to beat me into a greasy stain remember punk?

We do.
Frankie Rizzo

Hayward, CA

#215903 Sep 11, 2013
Don Sclio wrote:
<quoted text>
Well then move there you pillar of false valor.
LOL!!!
I said it's better than where you live. I didn't say it's better than where I live, on a boat on beautiful San Francisco Bay. It doesn't get much better than where I live. I also live in Brooklyn, my home town. Ah good times!

LOL!!!
Frankie Rizzo

Hayward, CA

#215904 Sep 11, 2013
Huh wrote:
<quoted text>
You must have been horrible in military.,...Bet you shot as many of our guys as there's. I state facts...yes I say them loud and make sure the bigots get that.
I AM NOT A BIGOT AT ALL...Prove I am....
No need for me to prove you are a bigot, you're doing quite well on your own.
Huh

Faribault, MN

#215906 Sep 11, 2013
Frankie Rizzo wrote:
<quoted text>
No need for me to prove you are a bigot, you're doing quite well on your own.
You cant and wont because I am not....RIGHT LIAR???????

When you played sports did you trip your own team mates?

We are on same side don't attack me attack the enemy IDIOT.
Ithappens

Rock Island, IL

#215907 Sep 11, 2013
Pietro Armando wrote:
<quoted text>
It doesn't need to b a requirement for it to be the basis upon which the state recognizes marriage. Hence the following:
From U.S. law.
“[T]he first purpose of matrimony, by the laws of nature and society, is procreation.” Baker v. Baker, 13 Cal. 87, 103 (1859).“he procreation of children under the shield and sanction of the law” is one of the “two principal ends of marriage.” Sharon v. Sharon, 75 Cal. 1 (1888)(quoting Stewart on Marriage and Divorce, sec. 103.“Procreation, if not the sole, is at least an important, reason for the existence of the marriage relation.” Davis v. Davis, 106 A. 644, 645 (N.J. Ch. Div. 1919).“The great end of matrimony is ... the procreation of a progeny having a legal title to maintenance by the father.” Laudo v. Laudo, 197 N.Y.S. 396, 397 (App. Div. 1919); Poe v. Gerstein, 517 F.2d 787, 796 (5th Cir. 1975)(“[P]rocreation of offspring could be considered one of the major purposes of marriage....”); Singer v. Hara, 522 P.2d 1187, 1195 (Wash. App. 1974)(“[M]arriage exists as a protected legal institution primarily because of societal values associated with the propagation of the human race.”); Baker v. Nelson, 191 N.W.2d 185, 186 (Minn. 1971), appeal dismissed for want of a substantial federal question, 409 U.S. 810 (1972)(“The institution of marriage as a union of man and woman, uniquely involving the procreation and rearing of children within a family, is as old as the book of Genesis.”); Heup v. Heup, 172 N.W.2d 334, 336 (Wis. 1969)(“Having children is a primary purpose of marriage.”); Zoglio v. Zoglio, 157 A.2d 627, 628 (D.C. App. 1960)(“One of the primary purposes of matrimony is procreation.”); Frost v. Frost, 181 N.Y.S.2d 562, 563 (Supr. Ct. New York Co. 1958)(discussing “one of the primary purposes of marriage, to wit, the procreation of the human species.”); Ramon v. Ramon, 34 N.Y.S. 2d 100, 108 (Fam. Ct. Div. Richmond Co. 1942)(“The procreation of off-spring under the natural law being the object of marriage, its permanency is the foundation of the social order.”); Stegienko v. Stegienko, 295 N.W. 252, 254 (Mich. 1940)(stating that “procreation of children is one of the important ends of matrimony”); Gard v. Gard, 169 N.W. 908, 912 (Mich. 1918)(“It has been said in many of the cases cited that one of the great purposes of marriage is procreation.”); Lyon v. Barney, 132 Ill. App. 45, 50 (1907)(“[T]he procreating of the human species is regarded, at least theoretically, as the primary purpose of marriage ...”); Grover v. Zook, 87 P.638, 639 (Wash. 1906)(“One of the most important functions of wedlock is the procreation of children.”); Adams v. Howerton, 486 F. Supp. 1119, 1124 (C.D. Cal. 1980), aff’d 673 F.2d 1036 (9th Cir. 1982)(observing that a “state has a compelling interest in encouraging and fostering procreation of the race”);
SCOTUS, 2013, Same sex marriage is equal, now get over it
Ithappens

Rock Island, IL

#215909 Sep 11, 2013
Frankie Rizzo wrote:
<quoted text>
You would know. We'll defer to your expertise on that too.
Good hearing, I rattle my zipper and here you are. Open wide.
Frankie Rizzo

Hayward, CA

#215910 Sep 11, 2013
Frankie Rizzo wrote:
<quoted text>
You sound like a man who does. Hope you get caught soon.
Prove I am pipsqueak.
Frankie Rizzo

Hayward, CA

#215912 Sep 11, 2013
Don Sclio wrote:
<quoted text>
Suuuure you did.
And where was this meeting?
At the bingo hall???
LOL!!!
It was your friend from Elk Grove who thought he'd play tough guy by telling me he wanted to meet at the local Home Depot you dolt claiming he was going to deliver some damage to my being. He did this in the internet idiot. The f-ing anonymous internet of all places.
LOL!!!
I advised 'Sure...just don't be surprised if I turn out to be your worst nightmare only to turn you into an oil stain'.
It wasn't even YOU...you're in the BAY AREA moron. Your buddy thought he'd play tough guy and you somehow decided to take it on as if I came out of the woodwork and challenged you like a kid wanting to brawl after school by the bike rack.
Get lost loser. Seriously.
As it is the idea of someone threatening another in this internet nonsense is laughable...like your friend. And you're even WORSE by fabricating a story to INCLUDE you.
BAH HAH HAH!!!!!!!!!!
Nope. It was you. You said same sex marriage was like a Chevrolet Malibu you owned and if someone messed with your dopey redneck-mobile Malibu or whatever silly name car, you'd beat them into a greasy stain.

Glad you remember threatening someone else too though.


Frankie Rizzo

Hayward, CA

#215913 Sep 11, 2013
Huh wrote:
<quoted text>
You cant and wont because I am not....RIGHT LIAR???????
When you played sports did you trip your own team mates?
We are on same side don't attack me attack the enemy IDIOT.
We both agree same sex marriage should be allowed but I am definitely not on the same side as you. You are a loudmouthed bigot.
Frankie Rizzo

Hayward, CA

#215914 Sep 11, 2013
Ithappens wrote:
<quoted text>Good hearing, I rattle my zipper and here you are. Open wide.
Great argument you have there spice boy.

“KiMare'a the Monster Mutation”

Since: Nov 10

Location hidden

#215915 Sep 11, 2013
Don Sclio wrote:
<quoted text>
Your opinion....but the fact is they're getting married left and right.
Next.
Yeah, but its either two lefts or two rights. Kind of silly stupid.

“KiMare'a the Monster Mutation”

Since: Nov 10

Location hidden

#215916 Sep 11, 2013
Don Sclio wrote:
<quoted text>
Again...your opinion.
As far as a condom fitting over my head???
Which head????
LOL!!!!!
They are both dicks, try the one it doesn't slip off of.

“KiMare'a the Monster Mutation”

Since: Nov 10

Location hidden

#215918 Sep 11, 2013
Ithappens wrote:
<quoted text>Wrong jerk, the essence of marriage is love. Look gay people won't tell you how to screw, stop telling them how to!
Most often marriage is work.

Scientifically marriage is a cultural constraint on mating behavior.

Homosexuals have dumbed it down to a contract and excluded children.

SS marriage is an oxymoron.
Frankie Rizzo

Hayward, CA

#215919 Sep 11, 2013
Huh wrote:
<quoted text>
You cant and wont because I am not....RIGHT LIAR???????
When you played sports did you trip your own team mates?
We are on same side don't attack me attack the enemy IDIOT.
I don't attack you because you support same sex marriage I attack you because you are a loudmouthed bigot.

“KiMare'a the Monster Mutation”

Since: Nov 10

Location hidden

#215920 Sep 11, 2013
Ithappens wrote:
<quoted text>Should have could have might have. The fact remains as this procreation is not a requirement of marriage. IF a married couple does not have children they do not qualify for extra deductions or benefits reguardless of thier sexual make up. Keep your Jesus off their balls!
Jesus???

Are you parroting gay twirl talking points without thinking them thru? That could be dangerous...

Why would anyone require children when married couples need protection NOT to have children?

And this from SS couples who can NEVER mutually procreate AND need protection just to abusively mimic intercourse???

Smile.
Frankie Rizzo

Hayward, CA

#215921 Sep 11, 2013
Don Sclio wrote:
<quoted text>
Oh I'm sure.
No doubt you've got a 8 car stable with exotic sportscars and mingle with Hollywood celebrities in between phone calls with foreign and domestic dignitaries after your workouts that keep your Mister Universe physique in place, etc...
You have yet to prove the multiple boasts you've already make in here "Frank"....-Shit buddy...you can't even use your real name..LOL!!!
So what "Don Sclio"?

"Even if that were true, it would be a non-issue" -Rose_NoHope.

Get a real argument loser.

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
Hartnell Janitors Must Clean Up Behavior by Rev... Jun 23 Reverend Patryse ... 1
(WORKING LINK HERE) BITCH DONALD: Go, Bitch, Go... Jun 23 Reverend Patryse ... 1
where can I find heroin in monterey? (Oct '14) Jun 21 dig 55
News Messianic Jews say they are persecuted in Israel (Jun '08) Jun 13 Joel 72,030
Where are the communal showers in Monterey? May 28 Jeremy 2
News Monterey working to prohibit alcohol, without a... May '16 DNTs 1
Review: Asian Filipino Market (Oct '12) May '16 amadeo urgonamiko 4
More from around the web

Personal Finance

Monterey Mortgages