Judge overturns California's ban on same-sex marriage

Aug 4, 2010 Full story: www.cnn.com 201,368

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.

Full Story

“Formerly Frankie Rizzo”

Since: Sep 12

Canarsie, NY

#171718 Dec 20, 2012
Big D wrote:
<quoted text>
Do you really want me to start re-posing that same post again over and over in this thread too?
Give it a break Mike
I want you to stop falsely accusing me of lying. I have not lied. You have.

Since: Apr 11

Santa Monica, CA

#171719 Dec 20, 2012
oneperson-onevoice wrote:
Well now the lesbians will be walking around putting chapstick on their chapped carpet burned looking noses. And the pole smokers will be walking around craming things in their neck to desensitize their gag reflex.
Most "pole smokers" are straight women, but I wouldn't expect you'd have any experience in that area.
oneperson-onevoice wrote:
This is where I want my kids raised.
Rose's Law: Morons with no real argument scream, "But what about the children!?"
oneperson-onevoice wrote:
It blows me away that a teacher now can teach such behavior is acceptable. I mean if you want to eat clam tacos or bologna ponies thats cool. If you like those things in your neck or face, cool. But thats not enough. You think all of society should have it in their neck and face also. Marriage never was about where to put what in or on each other. It was made ugly by sects of people who couldnt come up with a name for the unity of their little sickies.
WE.ARE FASTLY BECOMING A GENDER MUTE NATION. IT TROUBLES ME WHEN BOYS ARE GIRLS AND GIRLS ARE BOYS AND SOCIETY AS A WHOLE IS GOOD WITH IT.
Sexually insecure?

Since: Apr 11

Santa Monica, CA

#171720 Dec 20, 2012
Brian_G wrote:
<quoted text>Your reasons for keeping marriage male/female are valid even if they aren't verbose.
You didn't keep your marriage male/female. You got a divorce.
Brian_G wrote:
You don't have to engage every argument, especially if those arguments are made by rude or obnoxious people.
You're a rude and obnoxious person.
Brian_G wrote:
There is no gender equality right in the Constitution; marriage has always been male/female.
14th Amendment, equal protection clause, stupid.
"All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside. No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws."

That would include women and men.

And you are appealing to tradition, a logical fallacy.

Since: Apr 11

Santa Monica, CA

#171721 Dec 20, 2012
Brian_G wrote:
<quoted text>Homosexuals have the same rights as heterosexuals; they marry under the same laws as everyone else. There is no orientation test for a marriage license.
If you are offended by political opponents who argue to protect male/female marriage; maybe you're just over sensitive. Get over yourself; everyone has a right to their opinion.
Men and women don't marry under the same laws. There is a gender test.
Gay marriage doesn't harm male/female marriage, divorce does. You got divorced. You are the one who harmed male/female marriage. So, you should STFU, you stupid, hypocritical b!tch. That's my opinion. And you even said, I have the right to it.
Chrisnris

Hesperia, CA

#171722 Dec 20, 2012
I believe that there are great marriages and their are horrible ones too, but being gay or straight doesn't have anything to do with it. Everybody should have the same rights regardless, if we were talking about employment rights and if somebody who is gay was being discriminated against for being that way than there would be a lawsuit against their employer. We are only asking for the same rights as everybody else we don't want to be discriminated against, we only want the right straight people have had for years. Are we not deserving of that?

“Formerly Frankie Rizzo”

Since: Sep 12

Canarsie, NY

#171723 Dec 20, 2012
Rose_NoHo wrote:
<quoted text>
Most "pole smokers" are straight women, but I wouldn't expect you'd have any experience in that area.
<quoted text>
Rose's Law: Morons with no real argument scream, "But what about the children!?"
<quoted text>
Sexually insecure?
Mike's Law: Morons who dream up "Laws" and name them after themselves are silly.
Impeachment Cobblers

Capitol Heights, MD

#171724 Dec 20, 2012
Brian_G wrote:
<quoted text>Your reasons for keeping marriage male/female are valid even if they aren't verbose. You don't have to engage every argument, especially if those arguments are made by rude or obnoxious people.
There is no gender equality right in the Constitution; marriage has always been male/female.
You don't give reasons, Brian, you just give slogans. There is no cause and effect shown, no supporting evidence, just some unfounded commentary. Little more than opinion. If I say the sky is green I really ought to provide some evidence. I can even give you reasons for it appearing blue (or gray, or red, depending upon time of day and weather conditions). OTOH, you simply make some claims and fail to back them up with substance. That is why you get insulted. You make idiotic comments, and get called an idiot.

You make the comment that people are obnoxious. Well Brian, you're bumper sticker slogans are quite tedious. Which is obnoxious to some.

Carry on by all means, it seems to be the limit of your capability.
Impeachment Cobblers

Capitol Heights, MD

#171725 Dec 20, 2012
Rose_NoHo wrote:
<quoted text>

Gay marriage doesn't harm male/female marriage...
Brian, this is exactly what I'm talking about. It is repeatedly claimed that permitting same sex marriage will harm marriage. But when asked to give supporting evidence, all we get is the chirping of crickets. Nada, zip, zilch. You cannot show any harm, claiming there will be is not evidence.

“Formerly Frankie Rizzo”

Since: Sep 12

Canarsie, NY

#171726 Dec 20, 2012
Rose_NoHo wrote:
<quoted text>
Rose's Law: Morons with no real argument scream, "But what about the children!?"
<quoted text>
That's because you never answer them jackass!

Want them to stop? TRY ANSWERING THEM!

What a dope!

“Formerly Frankie Rizzo”

Since: Sep 12

Canarsie, NY

#171728 Dec 20, 2012
Impeachment Cobblers wrote:
<quoted text>
Brian, this is exactly what I'm talking about. It is repeatedly claimed that permitting same sex marriage will harm marriage. But when asked to give supporting evidence, all we get is the chirping of crickets. Nada, zip, zilch. You cannot show any harm, claiming there will be is not evidence.
The slippery slope. It has validity. If we grant same sex marriage what will we say when other groups demand their reform of marriage be given equal consideration? Polygamy, incest marriage etc. If marriage means everything, it means nothing.

In practice I don't see it as an obstacle to SSM because the numbers are insignificant. But to dismiss it as invalid is dishonest.

http://www2.law.ucla.edu/volokh/marriage.pdf
SSOOTP

West Covina, CA

#171730 Dec 20, 2012
Same Stupid Out Of Town Poster.

“Reality bites”

Since: Dec 11

Location hidden

#171731 Dec 20, 2012
Mike DiRucci wrote:
<quoted text>
Mike's Law: Morons who dream up "Laws" and name them after themselves are silly.
You bet sugar nipples. One day soon you might not be stuck on stupid.

“Reality bites”

Since: Dec 11

Location hidden

#171733 Dec 20, 2012
R Hudson wrote:
<quoted text>
So, basically, what you are saying, is that you don't want to read a rational argument against SSM, um OK, don't read it. But it makes perfect sense, and you know it. So, snore away, while the adults deal with it.
Oh snap, we all have been waiting for a rational argument against SSM, when will you be posting one?
SSOOTP

West Covina, CA

#171734 Dec 20, 2012
Does it still come in a can?
The Flag is

West Covina, CA

#171737 Dec 20, 2012
Once again the idiot Tea Party is about to crash the system, it's is all to apparent that the Tea Party needs to be outlawed and declared a danger to all american citizen's.

It;s another big defeat for John Boehner, Republicans party because they have nixed his fiscal "Plan B," because they didn't have the votes to pass it.

“Formerly Frankie Rizzo”

Since: Sep 12

Canarsie, NY

#171738 Dec 20, 2012
Jazybird58 wrote:
<quoted text>You bet sugar nipples. One day soon you might not be stuck on stupid.
What a dumb post!

You're funny Fruitloops. What's with the tin foil hat?
Floride

West Covina, CA

#171743 Dec 20, 2012
It's another big defeat for John Boehner, Republicans party. The Macco Nuts in the Tea Party are as dum as they look. Right Judy Nelson of the glendora city council.

Your all a bunch of terrible gamblers, just look at the fool calling himself Tim Donnelly.

Since: Dec 12

Location hidden

#171746 Dec 20, 2012
Rose_NoHo wrote:
<quoted text>
Most "pole smokers" are straight women, but I wouldn't expect you'd have any experience in that area.
<quoted text>
Rose's Law: Morons with no real argument scream, "But what about the children!?"
<quoted text>
Sexually insecure?
Most are strait women but the male pole smokers wants the scales tipped. Youve made no point. I hope you dont infect thosr around you with your obviously high level of intelligence.

What about the children? Exactly, that is increasingly.societies attitude.

Thanks for the concern, but im quite secure in my sexuality.

If my comment offended you personally, perhaps you should psycho-analyze yourself, not me.
Bll Grimeson

Oxnard, CA

#171747 Dec 20, 2012
American DC-7C by "Y" of Japan with original box. Same aircraft featured in the Twilight Zone episode "Nightmare at 20,000 Feet" starring actor William Shatner.
Chrisnris

Hesperia, CA

#171748 Dec 20, 2012
R Hudson wrote:
<quoted text>
You might...
So let me get this straight are you saying that the true definition of marriage is a union that can procreate through sexual intercourse of the person that they are married to? So according to that bs than I guess all those infertile hetrosexual couples are not considered to married either. Now that doesn't seem right. Or what about the couples that get married but choose not to have kids? Is that not considered marriage either? Correct me if I'm wrong but I was under the asumption that marriage was a union joined together by love. But I guess I'm just a nieve legally married in this state of california lesbian and a mother of five highly intelligent, well rounded children.

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.

Oakdale Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
OAKDALE (NWO) FEMA CONCENTRATION CAMP being bui... (Nov '08) Fri paws4mercy 112
Review: Law Offices Of Ernie Spokes (Dec '13) Feb 19 99 percent 2
Fraud claims coming to court (Jun '07) Jan '15 KeS 4
Legalize COCKFIGHTING in AGRI ZONINGS to fund p... (Feb '13) Jan '15 Un agenda 21 and ... 10
Gay People (May '14) Jan '15 Ace045 3
Motorcycle accident near Jack in the box in oak... Jan '15 Watch 1
Review: Better Bakery LLC Jan '15 Stanislaus Co Env... 1
Oakdale Dating
Find my Match
More from around the web

Oakdale People Search

Addresses and phone numbers for FREE

Personal Finance

Mortgages [ See current mortgage rates ]

NFL Latest News

Updated 11:38 pm PST