Judge overturns California's ban on same-sex marriage

Aug 4, 2010 Full story: www.cnn.com 201,197

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
Frankie Rizzo

Union City, CA

#180251 Feb 19, 2013
Jazybird58 wrote:
<quoted text>Fluck are you stuck on stoopid? I have told you NO on many occasions. The Judges ruling has no bearing on polygamy at all. The flucking thread is about voters trying to remove an existing right, based on a persons sexuality. That's discrimination you flipping moron.
No effect? You can be sure every means used to get equal protection for same sex marriage will and should be used to get equal protection for poly. That's what EQUAL protection means "you flipping moron".

Every victory for same sex marriage bodes well for polygamy. That's the way it works, son.

“Reality bites”

Since: Dec 11

Location hidden

#180252 Feb 19, 2013
Frankie Rizzo wrote:
<quoted text>
Yes of course. So does the author and any intelligent person who read her essay.
She is not advocating polygamy for Mormons only dummy. She is advocating equal protection of the law.
Then she needs to take it before scotus. Frankiie I started a blog just for you. Some one posted to it already
Frankie Rizzo

Union City, CA

#180253 Feb 19, 2013
Big D wrote:
<quoted text>
I donít have any problem with those pairings, or SSM parings raising children either ( I know of several )
I do wonder if we should look into our allowing religious fundamentalists to raise children, that is a rather hateful environment.
The government agrees with you and ripped 436 children from their biological parents with no crime or abuse alleged or committed beyond polygamy. These were happy normal kids in loving families.

Unfortunately for them SCOTUS just doesn't like polygamy. Nice!

I support equal protection even for everyone. Even unpopular people. You don't it seems.

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

Union City, CA

#180254 Feb 19, 2013
Jazybird58 wrote:
<quoted text>Then she needs to take it before scotus. Frankiie I started a blog just for you. Some one posted to it already
It's a dead link. Learn how to post a link you dopey obsessed cyberstalking creep!

You can write an essay without taking it to SCOTUS jackass. You can post about equal protection without being off topic dummy. And censorship sucks. And you're just an angry fool.

Hope that helps!

“Vita e' Bella.”

Since: May 12

Location hidden

#180255 Feb 19, 2013
Big D wrote:
<quoted text>
I donít have any problem with those pairings, or SSM parings raising children either ( I know of several )
I do wonder if we should look into our allowing religious fundamentalists to raise children, that is a rather hateful environment.
The poses the question of how is "religious fundamentalism" defined. Any abuse regardless of the source has to be dealt with.
Frankie Rizzo

Union City, CA

#180256 Feb 19, 2013
Big D wrote:
<quoted text>
That is what I keep telling him, get the signatures and put it on the ballot.( but he really doesnít want to do that )
It isnít going to be a serious discussion worth anything at all until he does that. Nothing before the courts right now will have any effect on it whatsoever
Just a diversionary tactic ( that continues to fail miserably )
You can write an essay about equal protection without gathering signatures. You can post about it without gathering signatures.

And you can use diversionary tactics like calling my posts diversionary tactics too!

But you cannot avoid revealing your hypocrisy.

“Reality bites”

Since: Dec 11

Location hidden

#180257 Feb 19, 2013
Frankie Rizzo wrote:
<quoted text>
It's a dead link. Learn how to post a link you dopey obsessed cyberstalking creep!
You can write an essay without taking it to SCOTUS jackass. You can post about equal protection without being off topic dummy. And censorship sucks. And you're just an angry fool.
Hope that helps!
One more time, I do not have a problem with poly. Got it? Hey your thread does exist
Big D

Modesto, CA

#180258 Feb 19, 2013
Frankie Rizzo wrote:
<quoted text>
You can write an essay about equal protection without gathering signatures. You can post about it without gathering signatures.
And you can use diversionary tactics like calling my posts diversionary tactics too!
But you cannot avoid revealing your hypocrisy.
You can ( and do )post all day long, but it wonít do your pet obsession any good at all, you certainly are not changing anyoneís opinion.

The only thing that will do it any good is for you to get the signatures needed for a proposition and put it on a ballot, that will elicit a response from the general public.

And then you can work from there, right not you are not at step one yet, you are just using it as a way to attack those that are for same sex marriage ( which so far has been your only point )
Big D

Modesto, CA

#180259 Feb 19, 2013
Jazybird58 wrote:
<quoted text>One more time, I do not have a problem with poly. Got it? Hey your thread does exist
Neither do I, but he will pretend you do as that is the only way to attack you with it, which is his only point.
Big D

Modesto, CA

#180260 Feb 19, 2013
Pietro Armando wrote:
<quoted text>
The poses the question of how is "religious fundamentalism" defined. Any abuse regardless of the source has to be dealt with.
I agree
Frankie Rizzo

Union City, CA

#180261 Feb 19, 2013
Big D wrote:
<quoted text>
You can ( and do )post all day long, but it wonít do your pet obsession any good at all, you certainly are not changing anyoneís opinion.
The only thing that will do it any good is for you to get the signatures needed for a proposition and put it on a ballot, that will elicit a response from the general public.
And then you can work from there, right not you are not at step one yet, you are just using it as a way to attack those that are for same sex marriage ( which so far has been your only point )
Why do you refuse to discuss equal protection of the law?

Do I tell you you cannot support equal protection for same sex without gathering signatures?

Please educate yourself. Do you agree the government was right in denying these parents equal protection of the law? Why?

Why is it OK to deny them the same equal protection that same sex marriage gets?
Frankie Rizzo

Union City, CA

#180262 Feb 19, 2013
Big D wrote:
<quoted text>
I agree
That's right. There are laws against all the crimes you ignorantly accuse polygamists of, no need to make their marriage a crime. Prosecute criminals to the full extent of the law NO MATTER what type of marriage they are in.
Frankie Rizzo

Union City, CA

#180263 Feb 19, 2013
Big D wrote:
<quoted text>
Neither do I, but he will pretend you do as that is the only way to attack you with it, which is his only point.
I must have missed all his support for equal protection, perhaps you could give me a post number?
Frankie Rizzo

Union City, CA

#180264 Feb 19, 2013
Jazybird58 wrote:
<quoted text>One more time, I do not have a problem with poly. Got it? Hey your thread does exist
Where in that post did I say you did?
Frankie Rizzo

Union City, CA

#180266 Feb 19, 2013
Big D wrote:
<quoted text>
Neither do I, but he will pretend you do as that is the only way to attack you with it, which is his only point.
You "don't have a problem with it", but you say everyone else does because polygamists are child rapists, welfare cheats and all around bad actors!

Priceless!
SeaQuesters

Covina, CA

#180269 Feb 19, 2013
Just who are the SeaQuesters?

They are a small group of ultra-nutty GOP, Republican
Big D

Modesto, CA

#180270 Feb 19, 2013
Frankie Rizzo wrote:
<quoted text>
You "don't have a problem with it", but you say everyone else does because polygamists are child rapists, welfare cheats and all around bad actors!
Priceless!
You arenít bright enough to comprehend the truth of that, but others here are.

Right now the public face of polygamy is indeed child molesters and welfare cheats.

You need to change that

I would vote in favor of polygamy if it came up because I donít see a valid reason to specifically disallow it. But that vote is not pending, and will not be coming up until you change the face of the most public supporters of it.
Frankie Rizzo

Union City, CA

#180272 Feb 19, 2013
Big D wrote:
<quoted text>
You arenít bright enough to comprehend the truth of that, but others here are.
Right now the public face of polygamy is indeed child molesters and welfare cheats.
You need to change that
I would vote in favor of polygamy if it came up because I donít see a valid reason to specifically disallow it. But that vote is not pending, and will not be coming up until you change the face of the most public supporters of it.
Right. Same as it was for same sex marriage. I'm old enough to remember when people said the same ignorant and nasty things you said about poly about homosexuals.

They are known child molesters they used to say. Thankfully that has changed for them and hopefully it will change for poly too once people are educated.

When you keep saying people have a bad perception it is true. We need education to change that which I'm trying to do. But you shout me down. You say equal protection for poly is not to be discussed, only equal protection for same sex is allowed to be discussed.
Big D

Modesto, CA

#180273 Feb 19, 2013
Frankie Rizzo wrote:
<quoted text>
Right. Same as it was for same sex marriage. I'm old enough to remember when people said the same ignorant and nasty things you said about poly about homosexuals.
They are known child molesters they used to say. Thankfully that has changed for them and hopefully it will change for poly too once people are educated.
When you keep saying people have a bad perception it is true. We need education to change that which I'm trying to do. But you shout me down. You say equal protection for poly is not to be discussed, only equal protection for same sex is allowed to be discussed.
The difference is, those criminals are NOT the face of Same Sex marriage. And they didnít just talk on a topix forum, they went and got the signatures and put them on ballots, and brought court cases to bear in other states and they are gaining ground more swiftly than anyone ( including themselves ) expected.
Frankie Rizzo

Union City, CA

#180274 Feb 19, 2013
Big D wrote:
<quoted text>
The difference is, those criminals are NOT the face of Same Sex marriage. And they didnít just talk on a topix forum, they went and got the signatures and put them on ballots, and brought court cases to bear in other states and they are gaining ground more swiftly than anyone ( including themselves ) expected.
There is no difference. Bad people were the face of homosexuality not very long ago, son. They showed us movies in school about staying away from evil homosexuals. Look on YouTube. They showed us their evil tactics to kidnap and molest us. And how to spot a dreaded queer. And to stay away at all costs.
In P.E. they told us to kick him in the balls and run screaming to an adult.

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
Crook in Arnold Oct 23 Commander Bunny 3
OAKDALE (NWO) FEMA CONCENTRATION CAMP being bui... (Nov '08) Oct 20 Riverbank resident 105
Yucaipa City Council candidates answer questions Oct 8 Qeolersan 1
h*rny sky pe Oct 3 fallen10 1
Stanislaus county Embezzles hundred of thousand... (Nov '08) Oct 1 KeS 9
Fraud claims coming to court (Jun '07) Oct 1 KeS 3
Review: 5 Star Auto Sales Inc (Aug '10) Sep '14 motownx 6
Oakdale Dating
Find my Match

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 ]