Judge overturns California's ban on s...

Judge overturns California's ban on same-sex marriage

There are 201860 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.

Since: Sep 13

Location hidden

#220086 Oct 5, 2013
Poof wrote:
<quoted text>LOL, and not all who say they are female, are (wink wink) What a putz
You don't know Jack sheet about me.
But apparently I know about you.....
Honorary Lesbian!

Since: Sep 13

Location hidden

#220087 Oct 5, 2013
Frankie Rizzo wrote:
<quoted text>You're not a female?(wink wink).
Only when he wears his wife's dresses!
Mikey the ER regular

Pulaski, TN

#220088 Oct 5, 2013
Hey, they found my Dad's car keys!

Since: Sep 13

Location hidden

#220089 Oct 5, 2013
Poof wrote:
<quoted text>LOL, and not all who say they are female, are (wink wink) What a putz
Hey Jizzzz. MYOB
Just because you are faux Man,
doesn't mean I'm not a woman...
Everyone isn't a liar here.You are
one of the biggest.Now go have
a hit off your bong and STHU!
Poof

Rock Island, IL

#220090 Oct 5, 2013
Cali Girl 13 wrote:
<quoted text>
Honorary Lesbian!
Yes I am, thanks

Since: Sep 13

Location hidden

#220091 Oct 5, 2013
Poof wrote:
<quoted text>Yes I am, thanks
Congratulations because the men
don't acknowledge your shiet
Lack of personality.....
Tuurdords

La Puente, CA

#220092 Oct 5, 2013

“No Allah: know peace”

Since: Jun 07

A sacred grove in Tujunga, CA

#220093 Oct 5, 2013
Pietro Armando wrote:
<quoted text>
No but one can vote on how a significant social, cultural, historical, and/or religious institution, is legally defined. Last I knew the civil right to marry was based on the male female understanding of marriage and applied to all men and women equally. I guess your point it, some are more equal than others.
Why do you deliberately try to invert the simple facts?

Yes, a religion gets to determine for itself who qualifies to use that religion as a basis for any religious ritual. But your church does NOT get to define any of that for my church, and vice versa.

Beyond that, people DO NOT get to vote away the civil rights of others.

And no, the civil right to marry is based on two people forming a union that involves numerous rights and privilages that are not available in other manner. The gender of those people is of no concern of yours.
Pietro Armando wrote:
So if a state votes in favor of SSM and someone sued to have it overturned in court, and the court agreed, would you support that? Or is it only you agree when the vote is in favor of an issue you support?
If the courts attempt to take away any person's or group's civil rights, there must be a COMPELLING state intrest in so doing. Compelling as in - others will be injured in some demonstable manner. If the courts operate in any other manner, they are guilty of judicial malfesiance.

“No Allah: know peace”

Since: Jun 07

A sacred grove in Tujunga, CA

#220094 Oct 5, 2013
Pietro Armando wrote:
<quoted text>
One does not need the state to "form stable, committed partnerships". No one is demanding gays not marry, or marry. It's a matter of what marriage is, and why it's defined they way it is.
...
No, one does not need state recognition to form a committed relationship, but one DOES need state recognition to gain the rights and privileges that are automatically part of the committed relationship called "marriage". Now, I can certainly agree that it IS a matter of the way marriage is defined. As I said above, your church gets to define its rituals in whatever manner it chooses. However, when it comes to the government, ALL citizens MUST be given equal access to the laws, rights and privileges of our society, because that is what our Constitution demands.
drink The hive

New York, NY

#220095 Oct 5, 2013
God Bless U All And I Hope U Receive The Help U Need 2 Turn Away From Your Live' Of Sin - Amen...

http://seoppc.co.za/wp-content/uploads/2011/0...

“No Allah: know peace”

Since: Jun 07

A sacred grove in Tujunga, CA

#220096 Oct 5, 2013
Pietro Armando wrote:
<quoted text>
Gays, as individual men and women, have the same right to marry,as nay other man or woman.
<quoted text>
So who's lying here? The same right has always existed. There are some who do not wish to exercise it the same way, as any other man or woman.
The only one lying here is you. Yet again. It is getting rather tiresome.

I have the right to marry the person that I love and for whom I feel a sexual attraction. Love does not even need to be a part of it. I can marry anyone I choose, as long as we are both consenting adults, etc, etc, etc.

Until the state starts telling people who they will marry, based on breeding concerns, the state MUST allow ALL citizens the right to pick the person that they wish. Gender is NOT a valid grounds for discrimination.

“No Allah: know peace”

Since: Jun 07

A sacred grove in Tujunga, CA

#220097 Oct 5, 2013
Gustavo wrote:
<quoted text>
Ok I assume you are gay, now don't you lie, where in the consitution does it say you can not marry?
Minor point, but I am straight...

Major point, the Constitution REQUIRES that ALL people have equal access to the laws of the land. Since marriage is part of that body of laws, gays must have the right to marry just like straights do - and that includes the person of their choice.
Frankie Rizzo

Hayward, CA

#220099 Oct 5, 2013
Poof wrote:
<quoted text>Yes I am, thanks
You might as well be!

“Vita e' Bella.”

Since: May 12

Location hidden

#220100 Oct 5, 2013
Liam R wrote:
<quoted text>
The only one lying here is you. Yet again. It is getting rather tiresome.
I have the right to marry the person that I love and for whom I feel a sexual attraction. Love does not even need to be a part of it. I can marry anyone I choose, as long as we are both consenting adults, etc, etc, etc.
You can marry a few women if they'll have you, and the state not need be involved. However if you wish to legally marry, you must abide by the state rules, and requirements.
Until the state starts telling people who they will marry, based on breeding concerns, the state MUST allow ALL citizens the right to pick the person that they wish.
Oh so you can marry your sister?
Gender is NOT a valid grounds for discrimination.
Exactly, no legally sanctioned gender segregation in marriage. Insist on both genders being included.

“Vita e' Bella.”

Since: May 12

Location hidden

#220101 Oct 5, 2013
Liam R wrote:
<quoted text>
Minor point, but I am straight...
Major point, the Constitution REQUIRES that ALL people have equal access to the laws of the land.
Please show where in the constitution those words exist.
Since marriage is part of that body of laws, gays must have the right to marry just like straights do - and that includes the person of their choice.
Of the opposite sex.....just....like....straig hts! See equal access to the laws of the land.

“Vita e' Bella.”

Since: May 12

Location hidden

#220102 Oct 5, 2013
Liam R wrote:
<quoted text>
Why do you deliberately try to invert the simple facts?
I ask you the same.
Yes, a religion gets to determine for itself who qualifies to use that religion as a basis for any religious ritual. But your church does NOT get to define any of that for my church, and vice versa.
Beyond that, people DO NOT get to vote away the civil rights of others.
Did you actually read what I wrote AND understand it?
Pietro Armando wrote:
No but one can vote on how a significant social, cultural, historical, and/or religious institution, is legally defined. Last I knew the civil right to marry was based on the male female understanding of marriage and applied to all men and women equally.
And no, the civil right to marry is based on two people forming a union that involves numerous rights and privilages that are not available in other manner.
That's so clever....did you think that up yourself?
. The gender of those people is of no concern of yours.
It is to the state if those people choose to legally marry, and to the people who voted on what definition of legal marriage should either be maintained, or replaced.
If the courts attempt to take away any person's or group's civil rights, there must be a COMPELLING state intrest in so doing. Compelling as in - others will be injured in some demonstable manner. If the courts operate in any other manner, they are guilty of judicial malfesiance.
Helllllooooooo.....McFly...no civil right was taken away. The right to marry, enter into a legally recognized union of husband and wife, valid on all fifty states, is available to ALL MEN AND WOMEN.
120 or DC 240

La Puente, CA

#220103 Oct 5, 2013
Remember, the Republicans, GOP, RNC and the Tea Party member's use the same sex machine over and over again, that's how they get use to screwing the public over and over again.
Testing

Salem, OR

#220104 Oct 6, 2013
Just a toss up
Gustavo

Hawthorne, CA

#220105 Oct 6, 2013
Ban GOP wrote:
Republicans need to stop hurting our country because they are in a bizarre state of denial over the Affordable Care Act, also know as Obamacare. As they stamp their feet and rant, millions of Americans have started the process of finally obtaining health insurance -- but the government is in a massive shutdown.
Neither of the two parties knows much about anything, they both suck and are bad for this country. Obammy and his brown nosers don't know any more about the plan than any one else and they wrote it. Have you seen the application? they have designated deferent levels of coverage, it's not a blanket affordable plan for America as they sold it to be, even the poor, who this plan was custome made for will have to qualify. Why do you think the politicians themselves wont use this plan, because it has too many qualifing demands and they want to continue see the doctors of their choice. So in this case the Demos will be holding Americans as hostage once again the Republicans are only trying to prevent that in this case.

“KiMare'a the Monster Mutation”

Since: Nov 10

Location hidden

#220106 Oct 6, 2013
Gustavo wrote:
<quoted text>
Neither of the two parties knows much about anything, they both suck and are bad for this country. Obammy and his brown nosers don't know any more about the plan than any one else and they wrote it. Have you seen the application? they have designated deferent levels of coverage, it's not a blanket affordable plan for America as they sold it to be, even the poor, who this plan was custome made for will have to qualify. Why do you think the politicians themselves wont use this plan, because it has too many qualifing demands and they want to continue see the doctors of their choice. So in this case the Demos will be holding Americans as hostage once again the Republicans are only trying to prevent that in this case.
REad the opinion piece in the Wall STreet Journal this weekend on the default situation.

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 Monterey working to prohibit alcohol, without a... Wed DNTs 1
Review: Asian Filipino Market (Oct '12) May 20 amadeo urgonamiko 4
News Ask the Auto Doctor (Mar '06) May 16 doug Gifford 1,542
News Redwood City approves highway undercrossing: Pa... May 14 Lives in Redwood ... 2
where can I find heroin in monterey? (Oct '14) May 13 Cdub94 48
Where are the communal showers in Monterey? May 12 billy 1
News Messianic Jews say they are persecuted in Israel (Jun '08) May 6 operation greylord 72,025
More from around the web

Personal Finance

Monterey Mortgages