Judge overturns California's ban on same-sex marriage

Big D wrote:

<quoted text>
...welfare cheats...
...child molesters...
...obsessed anti-social raving lunatics...

Nice!

Big D wrote:

<quoted text>
No I am a very rational human being that is not opposed to the concept, but is horrified at the actions and disposition of everyone he knows of that is an adherent either actual or supporter of the practice.
Including you

Yeah, and Bruno is also a very rational human being that is horrified at the actions and disposition of everyone he knows of that is an adherent either actual or supporter of the practice of same sex marriage.

Including you.

Love your new sidekick Bruno! Tell him I said he's a third rate jackass! Just like you!

It's about time to over come the failures of the USPS.

Big D wrote:

<quoted text>
All we have seen so far are
Welfare cheats
Child Molesters
and someone that screams insults at anyone that might vote in favor of it depending on how it is written
Still waiting for a more civilized advocate of it
Go get enough signatures to put it on a ballot, or make a civil rights case so we can see the text of what you are talking about ( like the gay community has already done ) and we might have something to talk about, but a blanket endorsement that covers those mentioned above?
Nope... not without a more civilized and serious advocate making an actual case.

They aren't going to actually DO anything. They're just here to derail the forum and all their bluster is merely attention seeking behavior. They'd never get up from their computer and actually DO something.

Neil Andblowme wrote:

<quoted text>It would be VERY interesting to see them asking for signatures at the Mall. "Please sign my petition to legalize polygamy!" Very interesting indeed.

"Marriage Equality" is dependent on petitions signed in shopping malls?

Neil Andblowme wrote:

<quoted text> They aren't going to actually DO anything. They're just here to derail the forum and all their bluster is merely attention seeking behavior. They'd never get up from their computer and actually DO something.

I'm trying to discuss marriage equality. Too bad if other forms of marriage besides monogamous make you uncomfortable. This is a discussion forum not subject to your censorship.

You and Big D don't get all bent out of shape when someone mentions opposite sex marriage. Why do you do so when someone mentions poly marriage?

You cannot censor poly away. Don't try, just grin and bear it. Like the bigots against same sex have learned to do.

Pietro Armando wrote:

<quoted text>
"Marriage Equality" is dependent on petitions signed in shopping malls?

Typical of ignorant bigots, Big D And Janey-Doody are often grasping at straws.

Neil Andblowme wrote:

<quoted text> They aren't going to actually DO anything. They're just here to derail the forum and all their bluster is merely attention seeking behavior. They'd never get up from their computer and actually DO something.

Nope. Big D can discuss space travel without actually doing it. You can discuss drag comedy without actually doing it (properly!). And I can discuss polygamy without taking it to SCOTUS. Or to the "Mall".

You are acting so stupid because you are trying to avoid revealing your hypocrisy. Big D isn't even bothering to hide his. You shouldn't either. Come clean! Let it all out!

Pietro Armando wrote:

<quoted text>
"Marriage Equality" is dependent on petitions signed in shopping malls?

I know you wish to hijack the thread with the use of the term "marriage equality." Unfortunately for you, this forum is about overturning Prop 8. So why don't you ask the sponsors of Prop 8 your question about petitions?

Neil Andblowme wrote:

<quoted text>I know you wish to hijack the thread with the use of the term "marriage equality." Unfortunately for you, this forum is about overturning Prop 8. So why don't you ask the sponsors of Prop 8 your question about petitions?

For chrissakes you can talk about same sex marriage without asking the sponsors of prop 8 questions, so can he.

Why don't you spin around three times whistling Dixie? Or better yet, Neil Andblowme!

YUK!YUK!YUK! What a jerk!

Neil Andblowme wrote:

<quoted text>I know you wish to hijack the thread with the use of the term "marriage equality." Unfortunately for you, this forum is about overturning Prop 8. So why don't you ask the sponsors of Prop 8 your question about petitions?

Is it arrogance or naiveté? What you think don't anyone else is going to apply language, "marriage equality", from the SSM movement for their own cause? Every victory for SSM, is a victory for plural marriage. We both know it. Why fight it? Deny it all you want, but we both know its true. Just as Kody Brown and the Missuses Brown. You must cringe every time they give an interview expressing support for SSM.

Neil Andblowme wrote:

<quoted text>I know you wish to hijack the thread with the use of the term "marriage equality." Unfortunately for you, this forum is about overturning Prop 8. So why don't you ask the sponsors of Prop 8 your question about petitions?

Any opinion other than yours and that dopey Big D is "hijacking this thread"?

Neil Andblowme wrote:

<quoted text>Because they think it's cute and that it lets them off the hook for not having a real answer.

Makes sense.

Brian_G wrote:

Same sex marriage causes harm with a new standard of gender segregation where before, California's marriage law was always integrated, allowing marriage of one man and one woman, for gender diversity.
If you love integration and diversity; keep marriage male female, like it was for mom and dad.

When will the forced marriages between members of pro sports teams start? After all gay marriages are legal in several states and countries. You said there will be forced marriages in pro sports teams, and prison rape will become legal. Do you have a timeline?

Pietro Armando wrote:

<quoted text>
Why not offer an opinion now?
<quoted text>
Why are you afraid to even offer an opinion. Why shouldn't "marriage equality" include plural marriage?

Everybody already has marriage equality when it comes to plural marriages.

http://m.youtube.com/#/watch...

Rose_NoHo wrote:

<quoted text>
Everybody already has marriage equality when it comes to plural marriages.

Noooooooo they don't Rosie. Explain why an intimate emotional sexual relationship between two men/women should be called "marriage", but an intimate emotional sexual relationship a man/woman has with more than one woman/man should not?

Frankie RIzzo wrote:

<quoted text>
I'm trying to discuss marriage equality. Too bad if other forms of marriage besides monogamous make you uncomfortable. This is a discussion forum not subject to your censorship.
You and Big D don't get all bent out of shape when someone mentions opposite sex marriage. Why do you do so when someone mentions poly marriage?
You cannot censor poly away. Don't try, just grin and bear it. Like the bigots against same sex have learned to do.

Wow you are winning votes now. You still don't get what this thread is about.

Pietro Armando wrote:

<quoted text>
Noooooooo they don't Rosie.

Yes, they do. Everyone is treated equally when it comes to plural marriage.

Pietro Armando wrote:

Explain why an intimate emotional sexual relationship between two men/women should be called "marriage", but an intimate emotional sexual relationship a man/woman has with more than one woman/man should not?

Straw man.

Rose_NoHo wrote:

<quoted text>
Everybody already has marriage equality when it comes to plural marriages.

You mean that same kind of equality homosexuals have where they can marry the one opposite sex partner of their choice?