Judge overturns California's ban on same-sex marriage

Aug 4, 2010 | Posted by: Topix | Full story: www.cnn.com

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.

Comments
157,441 - 157,460 of 200,366 Comments Last updated 2 hrs ago
Frankie Rizzo

Union City, CA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#180458
Feb 20, 2013
 

Judged:

7

6

6

On the basis of one anonymous phone call (that later appeared to be a hoax), Texas authorities forcibly removed more than 460 children from their parents without evidence of actual abuse in each case. Parents and children were ordered to undergo DNA testing (Who knows how long the state will maintain the DNA database, or to what uses it will be put?), and the children were summarily consigned to the notorious Texas foster-care system. They were subsequently reunited with their parents on order of Texas courts, which rightly held that the state had acted unlawfully, but who knows how much damage was done?

“Reality bites”

Since: Dec 11

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#180459
Feb 20, 2013
 

Judged:

5

5

5

Big D wrote:
<quoted text>
I donít need to prove it, it was already proved by the people that removed them, go do your own research, I donít report to you.
I am not ordering you do to anything, I am suggesting you actually take up the cause, or stop your incessant whining
posting in a forum whining that you donít have poly marriage wonít do anything for you, zip.... nada.
Supporters of same sex marriage organized, brought lawyers to bear on civil action and are making progress.
You have nothing.. and you do nothing but whine and cry and complain that someone else doesnít take up your cause for you.
well screw you kiddo, you want something done... go do it. Donít whine around here for others to do it for you, we arenít into the kind of welfare you are asking for.
I am already educated on the subject, you donít seem to know anything at all. You donít even comprehend the image problem your pet cause has, so.... the way to teach you is to have you go out and get the signatures, after a couple of weeks of that, you just might be aware that you have an image problem.
http://www.google.com/imgres?q =duct+tape&hl=en&biw=1 024&bih=618&tbm=isch &tbnid=kn70Ltv7saMNCM: &imgrefurl=http://wehearti t.com/entry/30337068&docid =UR9BrWtNa_QRCM&imgurl=htt p://data.whicdn.com/images/303 37068/the-truth-about-duct-tap e_large.jpg&w=460&h=49 8&ei=uQMlUdT5FO3o2gWM9ICwD w&zoom=1&ved=1t:3588,i :171&iact=rc&dur=1051 &sig=106557996882417990628 &page=1&tbnh=185&t bnw=172&start=0&ndsp=1 0&tx=61&ty=114

just sayin
Frankie Rizzo

Union City, CA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#180460
Feb 20, 2013
 

Judged:

7

6

6

Of course, Iím not suggesting that any parent have a religious right to harm their children by denying them medical care, subjecting them to sexual molestation, or otherwise abusing them. Iím simply pointing out that the state should not abuse the power to prosecute people or forcibly remove their children because authorities donít approve of their ďlifestyle.Ē Gay men were once routinely suspected of being pedophiles, a suspicion that persists today but with considerably less prevalence and respectability. Indeed, opposition to gay marriage still relies on specious arguments about the harm it poses to children. Some fools still compare homosexuality to bestiality, just as the Supreme Court once compared polygamy to human sacrifice. We progress when we base the extension of rights on reason, not bias or judicial hyperbole.

Excerpts from:

http://www.secularhumanism.org/index.php...

“Vita e' Bella.”

Since: May 12

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#180461
Feb 20, 2013
 

Judged:

7

7

6

Same-sex marriages give polygamy a legal boost

By Valerie Richardson-The Washington Times Sunday, March 20, 2011

The outlook for polygamy hasn't been this good since Abraham took Keturah as his third wife.

Plural marriage remains illegal, but it's undergoing an image upgrade as a result of television shows like HBO's "Big Love" and TLC's "Sister Wives." More significantly, it's getting a legal boost from a strange bedfellow: the success of same-sex marriage.

Gay-rights advocates cringe whenever the connection is made between same-sex and plural marriage, but more than a few legal analysts say the recent gains posted by gay marriage in the courts and state legislatures cannot help but bolster the case for legalized polygamy.

The federal government and most states define marriage as an institution between one man and one woman. If marriage is redefined to include two people of the same sex, the argument goes, then it can be redefined to include more than two people.

Critics reject the polygamy comparison, arguing that marriage's definition as a union of two people remains inviolable. They also dismiss the specter of legalized polygamy as a scare tactic used by the traditional-marriage camp to chill public support for same-sex marriage.

Claiming much deeper roots in human society than gay marriage, plural marriage has been practiced for centuries in nations and cultures across the globe and has ties to both Christianity and Islam. Same-sex marriage is a recent phenomenon confined to the secular West.

"Unlike same-sex marriage, which has no historical roots and is a new frontier ó you can't say the same thing about polygamy," said Austin Nimocks, attorney for the conservative Alliance Defense Fund, which opposes same-sex marriage. "There's a cultural underpinning and support for plural marriage, so one could say the case is actually stronger for plural marriage."

Wayne McCormack, dean of the University of Utah law school, predicted a pro-polygamy legal challenge based on recent court decisions in favor of same-sex marriage is all but inevitable. Five states and the District of Columbia now recognize gay marriage.

"I don't have any doubt we'll see it," said Mr. McCormack. "It's going to play out after same-sex marriage is resolved, but we're going to get new cases."

He pointed to a case now before a Canadian judge testing the national ban on polygamy. British Columbia Chief Justice Robert Bauman is expected to rule later this year on whether anti-polygamy laws violate Canada's constitution. Canada legalized same-sex marriage in 2005.

"What the Canadian court is looking at is whether restrictions against polygamy are a denial of personal liberty," said Mr. McCormack. "They're using the same arguments that we see used here to support gay marriage."

If U.S. courts do eventually legalize plural marriage, there's an excellent chance that the attorney for the plaintiffs will be Brian Barnard,, he has been challenging anti-polygamy laws for decades.

"We haven't been successful, but we think the times are a-coming," said Mr. Barnard, who serves as legal director for the Utah Civil Rights and Liberties Foundation.
At the same time, he said, it won't just happen automatically if and when gay marriage becomes the law of the land. Unlike Canadian courts, which can take up constitutional questions without being presented with a case, the pro-polygamy side will need a case, and so far that's been the problem.

Eight years ago, Mr. Barnard brought a case on behalf of a man and woman who were denied a marriage license because he was already married. The 10th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals rejected their claim

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2011/mar/...
Big D

Modesto, CA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#180462
Feb 20, 2013
 

Judged:

5

5

5

Frankie Rizzo wrote:
<quoted text>
"I don't need to prove it." Yes you do, when you accuse people of crimes, the burden of proof is on you.
The government dropped the case due to lack of evidence and returned the traumatized children to their loving biological parents. Oprah went there and declared it cool. Oprah approved! What the hell more do you want bigot?
The government could have gone in a seized the real criminals, instead they arrested everybody and put their children in the notorious Texas child care system. Nice! But you don't care.
I have net accused anyone of any crimes at all, they were accused ( and convicted ) by the courts. I am just making you aware of it as you seem totally ignorant of the event.

I am not the law ( or Judge Dred )

I donít know why they did it in the order that they did, but I can assume their first concern was to remove the children from a real an imminent threat. Go talk to themÖ that is who you have an issue with. Whining and crying on a forum here will get you nowhere, you have an issue with itÖ go do something about it.

I think we are getting to the base of your desire for polygamy, here you are defending the convicted criminals now.
Frankie Rizzo

Union City, CA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#180463
Feb 20, 2013
 

Judged:

6

6

6

Pietro Armando wrote:
<quoted text>
Well Franke....you know what they say....if sex is a pain the the arse...you're doing it the wrong way!
And if it's real messy, you're doing it the right way!
Big D

Modesto, CA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#180464
Feb 20, 2013
 

Judged:

5

5

5

Pietro Armando wrote:
Same-sex marriages give polygamy a legal boost
By Valerie Richardson-The Washington Times Sunday, March 20, 2011
The outlook for polygamy hasn't been this good since Abraham took Keturah as his third wife.
Plural marriage remains illegal, but it's undergoing an image upgrade as a result of television shows like HBO's "Big Love" and TLC's "Sister Wives." More significantly, it's getting a legal boost from a strange bedfellow: the success of same-sex marriage.
Gay-rights advocates cringe whenever the connection is made between same-sex and plural marriage, but more than a few legal analysts say the recent gains posted by gay marriage in the courts and state legislatures cannot help but bolster the case for legalized polygamy.
The federal government and most states define marriage as an institution between one man and one woman. If marriage is redefined to include two people of the same sex, the argument goes, then it can be redefined to include more than two people.
Critics reject the polygamy comparison, arguing that marriage's definition as a union of two people remains inviolable. They also dismiss the specter of legalized polygamy as a scare tactic used by the traditional-marriage camp to chill public support for same-sex marriage.
Claiming much deeper roots in human society than gay marriage, plural marriage has been practiced for centuries in nations and cultures across the globe and has ties to both Christianity and Islam. Same-sex marriage is a recent phenomenon confined to the secular West.
"Unlike same-sex marriage, which has no historical roots and is a new frontier ó you can't say the same thing about polygamy," said Austin Nimocks, attorney for the conservative Alliance Defense Fund, which opposes same-sex marriage. "There's a cultural underpinning and support for plural marriage, so one could say the case is actually stronger for plural marriage."
Wayne McCormack, dean of the University of Utah law school, predicted a pro-polygamy legal challenge based on recent court decisions in favor of same-sex marriage is all but inevitable. Five states and the District of Columbia now recognize gay marriage.
"I don't have any doubt we'll see it," said Mr. McCormack. "It's going to play out after same-sex marriage is resolved, but we're going to get new cases."
He pointed to a case now before a Canadian judge testing the national ban on polygamy. British Columbia Chief Justice Robert Bauman is expected to rule later this year on whether anti-polygamy laws violate Canada's constitution. Canada legalized same-sex marriage in 2005.
"What the Canadian court is looking at is whether restrictions against polygamy are a denial of personal liberty," said Mr. McCormack. "They're using the same arguments that we see used here to support gay marriage."
If U.S. courts do eventually legalize plural marriage, there's an excellent chance that the attorney for the plaintiffs will be Brian Barnard,, he has been challenging anti-polygamy laws for decades.
"We haven't been successful, but we think the times are a-coming," said Mr. Barnard, who serves as legal director for the Utah Civil Rights and Liberties Foundation.
At the same time, he said, it won't just happen automatically if and when gay marriage becomes the law of the land. Unlike Canadian courts, which can take up constitutional questions without being presented with a case, the pro-polygamy side will need a case, and so far that's been the problem.
Eight years ago, Mr. Barnard brought a case on behalf of a man and woman who were denied a marriage license because he was already married. The 10th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals rejected their claim
http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2011/mar/...
It might if anyone would take any action with it.... but no one seems to be.
Frankie Rizzo

Union City, CA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#180465
Feb 20, 2013
 

Judged:

6

6

6

Big D wrote:
<quoted text>
I have net accused anyone of any crimes at all, they were accused ( and convicted ) by the courts. I am just making you aware of it as you seem totally ignorant of the event.
I am not the law ( or Judge Dred )
I donít know why they did it in the order that they did, but I can assume their first concern was to remove the children from a real an imminent threat. Go talk to themÖ that is who you have an issue with. Whining and crying on a forum here will get you nowhere, you have an issue with itÖ go do something about it.
I think we are getting to the base of your desire for polygamy, here you are defending the convicted criminals now.
How many of the 460 children's parents were convicted jackass? Come on, you're the expert and I know nothing. Tell us. How many?

What we are getting to is the base of your ignorance.
Frankie Rizzo

Union City, CA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#180466
Feb 20, 2013
 

Judged:

6

6

6

Big D wrote:
<quoted text>
It might if anyone would take any action with it.... but no one seems to be.
So what? Does that mean as Rose_NoHo says "it's not an equal rights issue, it just isn't"?
Frankie Rizzo

Union City, CA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#180467
Feb 20, 2013
 

Judged:

6

6

6

Big D wrote:
<quoted text>
...you have an issue with itÖ go do something about it...
There you go again!

Come on, is that your best argument?
Big D

Modesto, CA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#180468
Feb 20, 2013
 

Judged:

5

5

5

Frankie Rizzo wrote:
<quoted text>
There you go again!
Come on, is that your best argument?
I donít have an argument, I donít give a crap about it one way or the other.

I am trying to give you something to do other than to whine about it. Whining here will get nothing whatsoever done about it.
Big D

Modesto, CA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#180469
Feb 20, 2013
 

Judged:

5

5

5

Frankie Rizzo wrote:
<quoted text>
How many of the 460 children's parents were convicted jackass? Come on, you're the expert and I know nothing. Tell us. How many?
What we are getting to is the base of your ignorance.
The leader that they collectively had sworn obedience to, to the point that they would give their underage children to older men for sex was convicted of quite a few.
Frankie Rizzo

Union City, CA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#180470
Feb 20, 2013
 

Judged:

6

6

6

When the children under 5 realized their mothers would be taken away, the children started crying and screaming, requiring CPS workers to pry many from their mothers.

Nice!
Frankie Rizzo

Union City, CA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#180471
Feb 20, 2013
 

Judged:

6

6

6

Big D wrote:
<quoted text>
I have net accused anyone of any crimes at all, they were accused ( and convicted ) by the courts. I am just making you aware of it as you seem totally ignorant of the event....
On May 22, 2008 an appeals court ruled there was not enough evidence at the original hearing that the children were in immediate danger to justify keeping them in state custody. The court added that Judge Walther had abused her discretion by keeping the children in state care. The court ruled, "The department did not present any evidence of danger to the physical health and safety of any male children or any female children who had not reached puberty."[52] The children were to be returned to their families in 10 days. CPS announced they would seek to overturn the decision.[53] On May 29, the Texas Supreme Court declined to issue a mandamus to the Appeals Court, with a result that CPS must return all of the children. The court stated,ďOn the record before us, removal of the children was not warranted.Ē[54] The court also noted that although the children must be returned, "it need not do so without granting other appropriate relief to protect the children."[55]
Frankie Rizzo

Union City, CA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#180472
Feb 20, 2013
 

Judged:

7

7

7

Big D wrote:
<quoted text>
The leader that they collectively had sworn obedience to, to the point that they would give their underage children to older men for sex was convicted of quite a few.
Four men were rightfully convicted of despicable crimes.

Jeffry Dahmer was rightfully convicted of despicable crimes. Should we outlaw gay marriage?
Frankie Rizzo

Union City, CA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#180473
Feb 20, 2013
 

Judged:

8

8

7

Mental health workers who worked at the shelter testified similarly to state officials, also citing lack of privacy, only military cots for sleeping and poor-quality food, with no communications and threatened arrest if mothers waved to friends. "The CPS workers were openly rude to the mothers and children, yelled at them for trying to wave to friends... threatened them with arrest if they did not stop waving"[85] Workers took notes on everything the "guests" said. In many of the testimonies it was compared it to a prison or concentration camp.

Nice!
Big D

Modesto, CA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#180474
Feb 20, 2013
 

Judged:

6

6

6

Frankie Rizzo wrote:
<quoted text>
Four men were rightfully convicted of despicable crimes.
Jeffry Dahmer was rightfully convicted of despicable crimes. Should we outlaw gay marriage?
and here is why you talk about polygamy, how you can relate that to not allowing gay marriage.

Jeffery Dhamer was not involved in a same sex marriage, he didnít use same sex marriage as the "excuse" for his crimes, he is not the face of same sex marriage, never was. In the minds of voters he is just a criminal and has nothing to do whatsoever with same sex marriage.

Not true for your personal hero Warren Jeffs, he IS the public face of polygamy, I donít think he should be, but he is in the minds of a large number of voters. If you would just go out and get your signatures you might realize that.
Frankie Rizzo

Union City, CA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#180475
Feb 20, 2013
 

Judged:

8

8

8

Big D wrote:
<quoted text>
and here is why you talk about polygamy, how you can relate that to not allowing gay marriage.
Jeffery Dhamer was not involved in a same sex marriage, he didnít use same sex marriage as the "excuse" for his crimes, he is not the face of same sex marriage, never was. In the minds of voters he is just a criminal and has nothing to do whatsoever with same sex marriage.
Not true for your personal hero Warren Jeffs, he IS the public face of polygamy, I donít think he should be, but he is in the minds of a large number of voters. If you would just go out and get your signatures you might realize that.
No one used polygamy as an excuse for crimes. No matter how you spin it, there is no reason for same sex or poly marriage to be unlawful.

We have perfectly good laws against all the crimes your ignorance can conjure up. Some people in marriages abuse their spouses. Do we ban marriage?

One of the links I submitted and you ignored because you already know everything and I am stupid was of a happy family of 3 men and their 6 children. Are they child molesters too? Should CPS seize their children too?
Frankie Rizzo

Union City, CA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#180476
Feb 20, 2013
 

Judged:

7

7

7

Big D wrote:
<quoted text>
and here is why you talk about polygamy, how you can relate that to not allowing gay marriage.
Jeffery Dhamer was not involved in a same sex marriage, he didnít use same sex marriage as the "excuse" for his crimes, he is not the face of same sex marriage, never was. In the minds of voters he is just a criminal and has nothing to do whatsoever with same sex marriage.
Not true for your personal hero Warren Jeffs, he IS the public face of polygamy, I donít think he should be, but he is in the minds of a large number of voters. If you would just go out and get your signatures you might realize that.
There are many Islamic polygamists around the world. Many more than Christian.

Does that give polygamy a bad image in your world too? I guess so.

So far your argument seems to be polygamists are bad. And I should go out and gather signatures because no one cares except they hate it because of the ugly "face of polygamy" or something.
Frankie Rizzo

Union City, CA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#180477
Feb 20, 2013
 

Judged:

7

7

7

Big D wrote:
<quoted text>.
Not true for your personal hero Warren Jeffs,
Come on, are you going to start that crap again?

Come back when you have an argument, I've heard all your ad hominem. It's stupid.

Tell me when this thread is updated: (Registration is not required)

Add to my Tracker Send me an email

Type in your comments below
Name
(appears on your post)
Comments
Characters left: 4000
Type the numbers you see in the image on the right:

Please note by clicking on "Post Comment" 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.

Other Recent Nevada City Discussions

Search the Nevada City Forum:
Title Updated Last By Comments
CA CA Proposition 23 - Global Warming (Oct '10) 2 hr Brian_G 7,851
CA California Proposition 19: the Marijuana Legali... (Oct '10) 2 hr rain or snow to slow 15,928
CA California seeks to ban free, single-use carryo... (Jun '10) 2 hr tail pipe 4,898
RN Salary in Nevada County Mon Curious 1
CA Jury reaches verdict in Oakland BART shooting t... (Jul '10) Jul 28 snodder 2,252
Steer that was set on fire gets new, safe home Jul 22 Kimber shaw 1
Artistry in the sand Jun '14 DBS 2
•••
•••
•••
Nevada City Dating

more search filters

less search filters

•••

Nevada City Jobs

•••
Enter and win $5000
•••
•••

Nevada City People Search

Addresses and phone numbers for FREE

•••

Nevada City News, Events & Info

Click for news, events and info in Nevada City
•••

Personal Finance

Mortgages [ See current mortgage rates ]
•••