Judge overturns California's ban on same-sex marriage

[Largelanguage]

sheesh void of hate wrote:

<quoted text>
WTF are you blathering on about here?

You wouldn't know would you?

[Largelanguage]

Rose_NoHo wrote:

<quoted text>
Reported.

Grown ups are talking here, what do you mean reported? DEAL WITH IT! Its only life isn't it?

[Largelanguage]

Jane Dodo wrote:

<quoted text>
Yet another meaningless post from our resident drama queen....yawn...

Hello Jane Dough! Reckognize ol' orangelion?

[Big D]

Largelanguage wrote:

<quoted text>
You claim this, when yet you pro homosexuals are the most unimformed of them all when it comes to homosexuality!
<quoted text>
You idiot! They feared Jesus would turn people away from Caesar! The Roman catholics weren't there as a threat at the time! It was the saxons who wiped them out you moron!

No it wasn’t Saxons, and there were no "Roman Catholics" at the time, Rome did not become a Christian society until Constantine, and then fell not long after establishing Christianity as the state religion.

I don’t think you have made a single reference correct here

[Largelanguage]

heartandmind wrote:

<quoted text>
and you're not playing games yourself? you're dilluting a relationship two consenting adult want to solemnize with vows and obtain those rights the GAO listed a few yrs back (totaling to just over 1300) that are extended to only legally married couples. you're the one trying to tell us that anything other than a male/female married relationship isn't worthy of those vows to one another. you're the one that's smirking at you own (lack) of with, chum, not us.
the issues at hand are regarding the legal contract between 2 consenting adults that wish to marry. stick to the topic. when you can rationally discuss with insulting people, then chime in. without the smartasz smirks and ridiculous comparisons. until then, let the grownups talk at the grown up table.

At the grown ups table? Are you joking? You aren't even at the grown ups table, little doggie, you shouldn't even sit there! And gays don't feel this solemnness, they don't even love themselves, how can they love others?

[Largelanguage]

Big D wrote:

<quoted text>
Because he doesn’t actually care at all about the subject, he is only trying to get attention, specifically a reaction from people.
look how many time he asks if someone is mad
that is the goal, talking about one small sad human here

Nice little tale isn't it? Still same idiot who has picked up the idea in his own little world that polictics is simply dishonesty? We are discussing it because it is an interesting subject and would like to debate off the evilness of homosexuality!

[heartandmind]

Big D wrote:

<quoted text>
No it wasn’t Saxons, and there were no "Roman Catholics" at the time, Rome did not become a Christian society until Constantine, and then fell not long after establishing Christianity as the state religion.
I don’t think you have made a single reference correct here

i'm beginning to think that the dear fellow should just be ignored, no matter what he posts. just a complete moratorium in answering or replying to his posts.

if no one plays with him, maybe he'll take his toys elsewhere.

LOL.

[Largelanguage]

Mikey DiRucci wrote:

<quoted text>
I am interested in discussing marriage. This is a discussion forum. It won't work if you treat it like a kindergarten playground and refuse to discuss the topic to hide your bigotry. Tell me why you are against polyamory, don't just whine.
So, before I was so juvenilely interrupted, I was asking you why are you a hypocrite?

So now you are attacking people on both sides after your betrayal and folly has been exposed and you have become aware of it?

[Largelanguage]

Mikey DiRucci wrote:

<quoted text>
Marriage.

Just look at you! You know are excusing polygamy and not being faithful fully to God now! What a loose little calf you are! Even a wicked pagan sees your unrightious behavior!

[Largelanguage]

Mikey DiRucci wrote:

<quoted text>
It's arrogant to discuss alternate forms of marriage in a discussion of an alternate form of marriage?

It is hard to blame even the wicked for pointing out the unholy behavior of someone who rejected God outright!

[Largelanguage]

heartandmind wrote:

<quoted text>
no surprise you've fallen off your rocker and out the window.
more garbldy-gook from someone who doesn't understand the different between a sphere and a circle.
another 0 for the day for you kid. i think i might need to contact your parents about your odd behaivior in class as well. no other kids want to play with you due to your antisocial behaivior and sheer unadulterated stupidity.

Have you finally fallen off the big boys coaster?

[Largelanguage]

Big D wrote:

<quoted text>
No it wasn’t Saxons, and there were no "Roman Catholics" at the time, Rome did not become a Christian society until Constantine, and then fell not long after establishing Christianity as the state religion.
I don’t think you have made a single reference correct here

We know Rose don't we? I think in her ignorance she actually thought the Roman catholics were there at the time, and probably assumed in her ignorance they did wipe the romans out! And yes, the saxons were the ones who defeated the romans!

[Big D]

Largelanguage wrote:

<quoted text>
Nice little tale isn't it? Still same idiot who has picked up the idea in his own little world that polictics is simply dishonesty? We are discussing it because it is an interesting subject and would like to debate off the evilness of homosexuality!

Don’t worry you keep screwing up history and I will keep correcting you. It is established facts, not conjecture, and not just a tale.

[Redux]

It's the heartland and a bunch of idiot out ot towners posting.

[Largelanguage]

Big D wrote:

<quoted text>
Don’t worry you keep screwing up history and I will keep correcting you. It is established facts, not conjecture, and not just a tale.

What ideas are you making up this time?

[Brian_G]

Impeachment Cobblers wrote:

More hilarity from the short bus.

What do you find hilarious about gender segregation of marriage?

Until the 21st Century, all cultures had gender diversity marriage. Now we have gender apartheid marriage; that's not funny in the least.

[Big D]

Largelanguage wrote:

<quoted text>
What ideas are you making up this time?

I am not, it was not the Saxons that sacked Rome

Rome fell not long after becoming a Christian nation after the emperor Constantine converted ( I did not say it was the cause )

There was no "Roman Catholic Church" until long LONG after these events

Don’t worry, as you screw up history I will be here to correct it for you.

[Largelanguage]

Big D wrote:

<quoted text>
I am not, it was not the Saxons that sacked Rome
Rome fell not long after becoming a Christian nation after the emperor Constantine converted ( I did not say it was the cause )
There was no "Roman Catholic Church" until long LONG after these events
Don’t worry, as you screw up history I will be here to correct it for you.

Rome existed, but caesar and the other white robed emperors wrelm no longer existed. Rome itself lost its empire due to the saxons and was changed and then later converted to christianity. Why else do you think our nation is renouned for being Christian? Because the Roman catholics originated from Britain and also inhabited Christianity in their own nation! Still very stupid! Making up even more ideas then eh?

[Big D]

Largelanguage wrote:

<quoted text>
Rome existed, but caesar and the other white robed emperors wrelm no longer existed. Rome itself lost its empire due to the saxons and was changed and then later converted to christianity. Why else do you think our nation is renouned for being Christian? Because the Roman catholics originated from Britain and also inhabited Christianity in their own nation! Still very stupid! Making up even more ideas then eh?

No Rome lost its empire to the Goths who sacked Rome, and Rome had been Christian empire for over 100 years when that happened. Rome had converted to Christianity after the conversation of Constantine.

Read just a little history, even children’s books before you post, what they are telling you from the pulpit is made up crap.

Roman Catholics did exist until many hundreds of years later

[heartandmind]

so now it's the fall of the roman empire?

here's a history lesson :

http://www.fordham.edu/halsall/source/gibbon-...

or :

http://www.suu.edu/faculty/bostick/Sample%20E...