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
155,741 - 155,760 of 200,597 Comments Last updated 4 hrs ago

“Get it right”

Since: Nov 10

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#178614
Feb 6, 2013
 

Judged:

6

6

6

Frankie Rizzo wrote:
<quoted text>
Chicken butt!
So what? chicken butt!...

You're a poet? and you know it!

“Get it right”

Since: Nov 10

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#178615
Feb 6, 2013
 

Judged:

6

6

6

Frankie Rizzo wrote:
<quoted text>
I bet you missed a lot more than that before you dropped out!
YUK!YUK!YUK!
You gambler types will bet on anything. Stop before the money is gone... there is hope.

http://www.gamblersanonymous.org/ga/
Frankie Rizzo

Union City, CA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#178616
Feb 6, 2013
 

Judged:

8

8

8

chance47 wrote:
<quoted text>
You gambler types will bet on anything. Stop before the money is gone... there is hope.
http://www.gamblersanonymous.org/ga/
There's hope for you drunks too!

http://www.aa.org/...

“KiMare'a the Monster Mutation”

Since: Nov 10

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#178617
Feb 6, 2013
 

Judged:

8

7

7

chance47 wrote:
<quoted text>
Well, it does change the meaning of your claim. One assumes an active attempt to limit gay relationships via marriage laws and the other implies an unintended restriction. Both points can be discussed and the ethical and moral implications of each are very different. You seem to drop that statement as if it is some sort guiding principle beyond the reach or reason of yourself or anyone else.
<quoted text>
Say what exactly?
<quoted text>
Okay, nice try - sorta. I just spent 15 minutes reviewing this link - I even used its own search feature and nowhere did it state The Fundamental Goal of Evolution. I am now even more sure there is no goal at all... but if you can find someone (no hack jobs, now) that has discovered what The Fundamental Goal of Evolution is please do share the link or referrence.
<quoted text>
"Bewary of those who think they know the mind of God". You are sounding borderline insane if you expect us to believe you know what is and what is not meant to be. I would argue if it wasn't meant to be then it doesn't exist! But, since there are gays in love then the only conclusion is that such was meant to be afterall.
<quoted text>
Thank you, smiles back to you.
1. The cross cultural constraint predates gay couples claiming marriage by quite some time making your point pointless.

The statement is a simple fact that you cannot directly refute, hence these games.

2. I said the basic essence of marriage is a cross cultural constraint on evolutionary mating behavior. You had no logical counter, so you made up a statement (lied) I never made. Again, where did I say marriage wasn't about love?

3. Maybe you've heard the term 'survival of the fittest', which is the summation of the four points in the link. Or put simply, no mutation occurs if there is not procreation. There is no procreation by gay couples.

4. Point 3; hence gay couples are an evolutionary blunder.

This is simple logic. Perhaps you might try a direct response to the fact; Marriage is a cross cultural constraint on evolutionary mating behavior.

By the way, here is some of the other elements of marriage distinguished from gay couples;

If you
believe denying marriage to a relationship
will prevent love

If you
demand any committed relationship
has to be called marriage

If you
claim rights and benefits can only be acquired
by a imposition on marriage

If you
equate the diversity of two genders
with the redundancy of same genders

If you
desecrate the sacred tradition of all major religions
and violate the historic practice of every single culture in history

If you
believe a fundamental change to the building block of society
will have absolutely no affect

If you
think a law can change
the reality of crucial distinctions in relationships

If you
pretend duplicating sexuality
is the same as blending masculinity and femininity

If you
condemn some children to parents of only one gender
and deliberately deny some children one natural parent

If you
ignore the design of sexual union
to manipulate a harmful act

If you
violate evolution's law of reproduction
to equate a genetic dead end

If you
risk the healthiest human relationship
to include one of the unhealthiest

If you
parallel the sole birthplace of every other relationship
with one that can reproduce none

If you
dilute all these things
down to just 'a committed relationship of two people'

Then, and only then, can you equate same-sex unions with marriage.

Smile.

Since: Apr 11

North Hollywood, CA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#178618
Feb 6, 2013
 

Judged:

6

6

6

Brian_G wrote:
<quoted text>There's plenty of evidence of same sex marriage affecting our prisons:
In the rest of North America, even prison systems are beginning to recognize and accommodate gay marriages. Canada allows same-sex prisoners to wed while still incarcerated. Last October, two male inmates of a federal penitentiary in Quebec province married in the prison chapel. It was the third gay marriage to be performed in a federal prison in Canada since gay marriage was recognized on the national level in July 2005.15 Canada permits “private family visits” for a broad range of relatives including same-sex couples, but the visitor cannot be another prisoner.16 In Mexico, the National Human Rights Commission ruled in February 2007 that conjugal visits must be allowed to same-sex couples on the same terms and conditions as are extended to straight couples, and Mexico City’s jail had its first same-sex partner conjugal visit the following July.17
https://www.prisonlegalnews.org/displayArticl...
If you believe penitentiaries should be places for penitence instead of honeymoon romps and forced same sex marriage.
But stupid, your claim was that there would be FORCED gay marriages in prisons.
There is nothing wrong with gay prisoners being able to marry and visit their significant others just like straight people can.

Since: Apr 11

North Hollywood, CA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#178619
Feb 6, 2013
 

Judged:

6

6

6

KiMare wrote:
<quoted text>
This is why those closest to you ignore you;
On what basis is that the litmus test?
To equate gay couples to marriage, the first test is, "are they the same"?
Sorry stupid, that's a non issue. Marriage is a legal contract, and no two marriages are the same. But people should have equal rights when it comes to marriage.

KiMare wrote:
<
Marriage is a cross cultural constraint on evolutionary mating behavior. Gay couples are a defective blunder of evolution.(snip)
A mutant monster like you should be calling anybody else a defective blunder of evolution. Should you have been aborted? You call yourself the mutant monster.

Since: Apr 11

North Hollywood, CA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#178620
Feb 6, 2013
 

Judged:

6

6

6

Brian_G wrote:
<quoted text>While I don't believe there's anything wrong with homosexuals or homosexuality, I agree with the view of same sex marriage. It's not constitutional, it was imposed on the US by a court so it's also undemocratic. Many gay and lesbian activists are on our side and prefer referendum and legislation to the left's imperialistic secularism.
Morality makes a great personal value, but we need to discuss these issues in public. I oppose shutting down civil discourse.
You are so dumb, you think legalizing gay marriage will lead to members of professional sports teams being forced to marry each other! Will they have to be members of the same team? Just curious.

Since: Apr 11

North Hollywood, CA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#178621
Feb 6, 2013
 

Judged:

6

6

6

Brian_G wrote:
<quoted text>The statement above is untrue; I've always written there is nothing wrong with homosexuals or homosexuality. I've never discussed sin or written homosexuality is sick, those are Jazybird58'S words, not mine.
Many homosexuals believe in protecting male/female marriage too. Conservatism doesn't have a sexual orientation.
The fact you feel gay marriage harms straight marriage shows you have ill feelings towards gay people.
So, when are members of pro sports teams going to be forced to marry each other?

“Get it right”

Since: Nov 10

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#178622
Feb 6, 2013
 

Judged:

7

7

7

KiMare wrote:
<quoted text>
1. The cross cultural constraint predates gay couples claiming marriage by quite some time making your point pointless.
The statement is a simple fact that you cannot directly refute, hence these games....
By calling my questioning 'games' I take it you are simply dismissive on this. Noted.
KiMare wrote:
<quoted text>
....
2. I said the basic essence of marriage is a cross cultural constraint on evolutionary mating behavior. You had no logical counter, so you made up a statement (lied) I never made. Again, where did I say marriage wasn't about love?
...
Careful now... asking why you think marriage isn't about love is NOT claiming that you made the statement. Telling me I lied is , well, ironically a lie of yours.
KiMare wrote:
<quoted text>
...3. Maybe you've heard the term 'survival of the fittest', which is the summation of the four points in the link. Or put simply, no mutation occurs if there is not procreation. There is no procreation by gay couples.
....
Another lie... lots of gays have procreated... and lots of straight people do not....
KiMare wrote:
<quoted text>
...4. Point 3; hence gay couples are an evolutionary blunder.
This is simple logic.....
I daresay that is not simple logic (maybe simpleton logic!).'blunders' are what define and drive evolutionary forces. I would contend that humans have a certain frequency of how many will be gay - just like a certain frequency will have curly hair or blue eyes. There is no 'blunder' in what we are... just variation.
KiMare wrote:
<quoted text>
...If you
believe denying marriage to a relationship
will prevent love
If you
demand any committed relationship
has to be called marriage
If you
claim rights and benefits can only be acquired
by a imposition on marriage
If you
equate the diversity of two genders
with the redundancy of same genders
If you
desecrate the sacred tradition of all major religions
and violate the historic practice of every single culture in history
If you
believe a fundamental change to the building block of society
will have absolutely no affect
If you
think a law can change
the reality of crucial distinctions in relationships
If you
pretend duplicating sexuality
is the same as blending masculinity and femininity
If you
condemn some children to parents of only one gender
and deliberately deny some children one natural parent
If you
ignore the design of sexual union
to manipulate a harmful act
If you
violate evolution's law of reproduction
to equate a genetic dead end
If you
risk the healthiest human relationship
to include one of the unhealthiest
If you
parallel the sole birthplace of every other relationship
with one that can reproduce none
If you
dilute all these things
down to just 'a committed relationship of two people'
Then, and only then, can you equate same-sex unions with marriage.
Smile.
Thanks for the stream of consciousness, I suppose. Here are my responses in order if you are interested:
Love exists even in the void of marriage (for straight people and gay)
Lots of committed relationships have nothing to do with mar
riage (or sex)
Human rights are innate, not granted
Equate… diversity … redundancy.. what???
Surely, sacred religions aren’t afraid of the doing of you or I…
Violate history? Oh yeah, bring back slavery and the dark ages! Yipee!
Things don’t get better without change
Laws do change this – for instance the marriage tax credit
WTF is duplicating sexuality
So children of single parents are also condemned? Really?
WTF is design of sexual union
Evolution has no laws. Not one... none at all…
Pray tell, what is the unhealthiest relationship of all?(hint: it’s not SSM)
Reproduction doesn’t require marriage; and marriage does not imply kids
Dilute.. the..what, huh?

Since: Mar 09

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#178623
Feb 6, 2013
 

Judged:

6

6

6

Largelanguage wrote:
<quoted text>
Who cares whether its the polices job idiot? And moron, grasp this, the police system will make regulations with FORCED marriages, with a verifiable reason in order to prevent prison rape, like they are supposed to, dimwit!
Are you drunk, high, or just plain stupid? The "police system" will make regulations with forced marriages?..with a varifiable reason in order to prevent prison rape?

Can you point out where they've done this in Canada?

The more you post the more I am astounded by the magnitude of your idiocy.
Largelanguage wrote:
<quoted text>
Because if gay marriage does not exist officially, then cell mates won't be married to each other for prison regulations. Most prison rapes are done to men, by men, stupid. If gay marriage does exist, they will be able to put in that regulation, moron.
Can you explain to the rest of the forum why your posts read like they were composed by a ten year old?

“Busting Kimare's”

Since: Feb 13

Clitty

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#178624
Feb 6, 2013
 

Judged:

6

6

6

Kimare, you have yet to back up a previous statement, so I'll ask again:

In which culture/s was SSM legally recognized previously? Still waiting for your answer.

Just pull down your drawers and talk to the mangina. Don't keep you internal lesbian waiting.

Crickets. Chirp. Chirp.

Since: Mar 09

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#178625
Feb 6, 2013
 

Judged:

7

7

7

Brian_G wrote:
<quoted text>That's true, can't keep up with the real argument.
Well now, since you've not provided a real argument...
Frankie Rizzo

Union City, CA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#178626
Feb 6, 2013
 

Judged:

8

8

8

chance47 wrote:
<quoted text>
By calling my questioning 'games' I take it you are simply dismissive on this. Noted.
<quoted text>
Careful now... asking why you think marriage isn't about love is NOT claiming that you made the statement. Telling me I lied is , well, ironically a lie of yours.
<quoted text>
Another lie... lots of gays have procreated... and lots of straight people do not....
<quoted text>
I daresay that is not simple logic (maybe simpleton logic!).'blunders' are what define and drive evolutionary forces. I would contend that humans have a certain frequency of how many will be gay - just like a certain frequency will have curly hair or blue eyes. There is no 'blunder' in what we are... just variation.
<quoted text>
Thanks for the stream of consciousness, I suppose. Here are my responses in order if you are interested:
Love exists even in the void of marriage (for straight people and gay)
Lots of committed relationships have nothing to do with mar
riage (or sex)
Human rights are innate, not granted
Equate… diversity … redundancy.. what???
Surely, sacred religions aren’t afraid of the doing of you or I…
Violate history? Oh yeah, bring back slavery and the dark ages! Yipee!
Things don’t get better without change
Laws do change this – for instance the marriage tax credit
WTF is duplicating sexuality
So children of single parents are also condemned? Really?
WTF is design of sexual union
Evolution has no laws. Not one... none at all…
Pray tell, what is the unhealthiest relationship of all?(hint: it’s not SSM)
Reproduction doesn’t require marriage; and marriage does not imply kids
Dilute.. the..what, huh?
Too wordy.
Randy -Rock- Hudson

Wooster, OH

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#178627
Feb 6, 2013
 

Judged:

8

8

8

Big D wrote:
<quoted text>
Protecting? I don’t understand, homosexual marriage does not attack heterosexual marriage in any way at all. There are over 18,0000 legal homosexual marriages in California now, It certainly did not hurt my marriage, how did it hurt yours?
They diminished the sanctity of your status.
Randy -Rock- Hudson

Wooster, OH

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#178628
Feb 6, 2013
 

Judged:

7

7

7

Largelanguage wrote:
<quoted text>
She's mentally ill, and has a lack of love in her life, and is now trying to fufill it sexually.
I've been pointing out that very fact, but Chongo refuses to acknowledge this. It is sad.
Randy -Rock- Hudson

Wooster, OH

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#178629
Feb 6, 2013
 

Judged:

8

8

8

Largelanguage wrote:
<quoted text>
No moron, hard to believe you are 69, more like 20. The majority of the voters were against same sex marriage, 80%!
I've also pointed out how easily election results can be rigged, to support any agenda that is being forced upon us. Imagine, I've been told that elections are all honest and straightforward. No rigging ever occurs, according to one poster (Big D). We live in a perfect world...LOL
Randy -Rock- Hudson

Wooster, OH

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#178630
Feb 6, 2013
 

Judged:

8

8

8

Largelanguage wrote:
<quoted text>
Only 9 states do, moron.
Which means that 41 do not. Hopefully, the fad will end soon, and we can return to normality...
Randy -Rock- Hudson

Wooster, OH

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#178631
Feb 6, 2013
 

Judged:

8

8

8

Frankie Rizzo wrote:
<quoted text>
Did I say poly was your obsession dummy? Learn to read.
So what if you don't give a flip about poly? Most people don't give a flip about SSM. What do I care what you give a flip about? So what if it might not be decades? Are these your real reasons to deny equal rights?
By what logic do you insist on the traditional, arbitrary, religious and discriminatory number of two?
Many do not give a flip about SSM, but are forced to watch as it becomes valid. But for those that give a flip about poly and incest, it must be a slap in the face to watch "equality' being doled out, but only for some....Like "Animal Farm". We are all created equal, but some are more equal than others...
Pressed shirts

Monrovia, CA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#178632
Feb 6, 2013
 

Judged:

7

7

6

If you want to get away with a crime of stealing money since 2001 then join a police department and you'll get your free "white collar" crime pass card.

Four defendants remain in the case against a group of sheriff's deputies caught in a decade-long pay scandal.
Randy -Rock- Hudson

Wooster, OH

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#178633
Feb 6, 2013
 

Judged:

8

8

8

Jazybird58 wrote:
<quoted text>
http://www.topix.com/forum/topstories/TBQ0DHC...
So I will not find any post by you on this thread, correct?
I just clicked on your link, and guess what ? Brian_G's name didn't appear, JizzyLips...You moron. Go invest in some more Reynolds Wrap, your protective layer has worn away. Dumb-ass.....

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

Add to my Tracker Send me an email

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 Jobs

•••
Enter and win $5000
•••

Oakdale People Search

Addresses and phone numbers for FREE

•••

Oakdale News, Events & Info

Click for news, events and info in Oakdale
•••

Personal Finance

Mortgages [ See current mortgage rates ]
•••