Judge overturns California's ban on s...

Judge overturns California's ban on same-sex marriage

There are 201887 comments on the www.cnn.com story from Aug 4, 2010, titled Judge overturns California's ban on same-sex marriage. In it, www.cnn.com reports that:

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.

Join the discussion below, or Read more at www.cnn.com.

Since: Mar 07

Location hidden

#180939 Feb 23, 2013
Brian_G wrote:
If you love diversity and hate segregation; keep marriage one man and one woman.
This is the type of line of thinking that happens when someone finally gives up. They KNOW there is no rational argument against same sex marriage, and admit it, but they just can't stop posting.

It's sad, really. But kind of funny, too. They are proposing that the government interfere with marriage choices to an unprecedented and unsustainable level.

They are demanding "diversity" inside of each marriage, so they must also require different religions and races to be present inside each marriage. It's not just gender that receives government protection against segregation and discrimination.

Can you imagine the tax dollars and levels of governmental interference in personal lives required to implement their ideas?

“Busting Kimare's”

Since: Feb 13

Clitty

#180940 Feb 23, 2013
Frankie Rizzo wrote:
<quoted text>

This is a perfectly good marriage equality thread. If you are truly interested in MARRIAGE EQUALITY. And not more of the same. Equality for approved groups only.
Your attempts at censorship suck.
Silly me, I thought the thread was entitled "Judge overturns California's ban on same-sex marriage". Mea culpa.

Your attempts at diversionary tactics suck.
Frankie Rizzo

Hayward, CA

#180941 Feb 23, 2013
Dusty Mangina wrote:
<quoted text>
Silly me, I thought the thread was entitled "Judge overturns California's ban on same-sex marriage". Mea culpa.
Your attempts at diversionary tactics suck.
That's what they all say, poly isn't marriage equality because the judge didn't mention it.

But striking down prop 8, which mandates that marriage is between one man and a one woman, also strikes down that pesky "one" thing along with that pesky "man woman" thing. Glad it makes you mad, hypocrite! But you can't have one without the other and have equality.

Marriage equality is for everyone, not just people you approve of.
Rainbow

Covina, CA

#180942 Feb 23, 2013
And why doesn't the little pea brained GOP, Republican and tea party idiots go fly kites.

“Busting Kimare's”

Since: Feb 13

Clitty

#180943 Feb 23, 2013
KiMare wrote:
<quoted text>
Eat sh/t and die if it is so healthy, otherwise sit on it!
Ho, Ho, Ho.
Careful, your sock puppet is showing.

“KiMare'a the Monster Mutation”

Since: Nov 10

Location hidden

#180944 Feb 23, 2013
Quest wrote:
<quoted text>
This is the type of line of thinking that happens when someone finally gives up. They KNOW there is no rational argument against same sex marriage, and admit it, but they just can't stop posting.
It's sad, really. But kind of funny, too. They are proposing that the government interfere with marriage choices to an unprecedented and unsustainable level.
They are demanding "diversity" inside of each marriage, so they must also require different religions and races to be present inside each marriage. It's not just gender that receives government protection against segregation and discrimination.
Can you imagine the tax dollars and levels of governmental interference in personal lives required to implement their ideas?
Hardly, it is in fact carrying the context of gender, rather than illogically embracing every other aspect of marriage.

The fact is, marriage has always been the reunion of genders into a genderless being. In fact, it harkens back to the very roots of life; simple, genderless life forms.

Gay couples, on the other hand, are simply duplicate unions. Always only half of what a heterosexual couple equates to.

Smile.
aLeppoo

Covina, CA

#180945 Feb 23, 2013
What took you clown "out of towners" post-toasties so long to make a come back?
Xavier Breath

West New York, NJ

#180946 Feb 23, 2013
Frankie Rizzo wrote:
The subject is marriage equality, why does that upset you so much if it includes ALL MARRIAGES? Are you a hypocrite and you're mad at me for it? It's on you Miss Thing. Deal with it.
http://poly-nyc.com/
The subject is Prop 8, not marriage equality. You fail at reading comprehension....AGAIN.
Xavier Breath

West New York, NJ

#180947 Feb 23, 2013
Frankie Rizzo wrote:
<quoted text>
That's what they all say, poly isn't marriage equality because the judge didn't mention it.
But striking down prop 8, which mandates that marriage is between one man and a one woman, also strikes down that pesky "one" thing along with that pesky "man woman" thing. Glad it makes you mad, hypocrite! But you can't have one without the other and have equality.
Marriage equality is for everyone, not just people you approve of.
Polygamy was illegal BEFORE Prop 8. It will reamin illegal after Prop 8. Striking down Prop 8 will NOT strike down bigamy laws. Prop 8 had NOTHING to do with polygamy. This thread is not about polygamy. The article in question is not about polygamy, nor does it mention polygamy. None of the judges made any ruling concerning polygamy.... they did NOT strike down that "pesky one thing."
Xavier Breath

West New York, NJ

#180948 Feb 23, 2013
KiMare wrote:
<quoted text>
Hardly, it is in fact carrying the context of gender, rather than illogically embracing every other aspect of marriage.
The fact is, marriage has always been the reunion of genders into a genderless being. In fact, it harkens back to the very roots of life; simple, genderless life forms.
Gay couples, on the other hand, are simply duplicate unions. Always only half of what a heterosexual couple equates to.
Smile.
So now two is half of two, eh? I figured out you are "unstable" but now I know you're off-the-deep-end nuts.
Frankie Rizzo

Hayward, CA

#180949 Feb 23, 2013
Xavier Breath wrote:
<quoted text>
The subject is Prop 8, not marriage equality. You fail at reading comprehension....AGAIN.
Yes. Prop 8 says marriage is a man and a woman. That's not fair. Not fair to homosexuals and EQUALLY unfair to polyamorists.

Striking down prop 8 strikes down the "a" part of "a" man and "a" woman as well as the "man" "woman" part.

So you see, it is very on topic. The only reason you try to spin that it's not is because you are a hypocrite. And it righfully makes you uncomfortable. That's on you Miss Thing, not me.
Frankie Rizzo

Hayward, CA

#180950 Feb 23, 2013
Xavier Breath wrote:
<quoted text>
Polygamy was illegal BEFORE Prop 8. It will reamin illegal after Prop 8. Striking down Prop 8 will NOT strike down bigamy laws. Prop 8 had NOTHING to do with polygamy. This thread is not about polygamy. The article in question is not about polygamy, nor does it mention polygamy. None of the judges made any ruling concerning polygamy.... they did NOT strike down that "pesky one thing."
Yes. Polygamy will still be illegal, but it will have one more restriction removed, prop 8.

Prop 8 says marriage is a man and a woman. That's not fair. Not fair to homosexuals and EQUALLY unfair to polyamorists.

Striking down prop 8 strikes down the "a" part of "a" man and "a" woman as well as the "man" "woman" part.

So you see, it is very on topic. The only reason you try to spin that it's not is because you are a hypocrite. And it righfully makes you uncomfortable. That's on you Miss Thing, not me.
Frankie Rizzo

Hayward, CA

#180951 Feb 23, 2013

“KiMare'a the Monster Mutation”

Since: Nov 10

Location hidden

#180952 Feb 23, 2013
KiMare wrote:
<quoted text>
Hardly, it is in fact carrying the context of gender, rather than illogically embracing every other aspect of marriage.
The fact is, marriage has always been the reunion of genders into a genderless being. In fact, it harkens back to the very roots of life; simple, genderless life forms.
Gay couples, on the other hand, are simply duplicate unions. Always only half of what a heterosexual couple equates to.
Smile.
Xavier Breath wrote:
<quoted text>
So now two is half of two, eh? I figured out you are "unstable" but now I know you're off-the-deep-end nuts.
I accurately correct an attempt to divert from gender equality, and you turn around and do the same thing right off the bat (pun intended).

Here, let me school you;

We were not talking about numbers, we were talking about genders (See the very first sentence I posted for context). A gay couple represents half the available genders. A heterosexual couple is as diverse as gender possible. Both have two people, but one has only half the genders.

If I am unstable, what does that make you?

I have a letter certifying my sanity, this is a clear indication you need to pursue one. I can help you some more if you'd like.

Smile.
Frankie Rizzo

Hayward, CA

#180953 Feb 23, 2013
If anyone sees "Xavier Breath" stick a fork in him. I think he's done.

“Busting Kimare's”

Since: Feb 13

Clitty

#180954 Feb 23, 2013
KiMare wrote:
KiMare wrote:
<quoted text>

I have a letter certifying my sanity, this is a clear indication you need to pursue one. I can help you some more if you'd like.
Smile.
You claim to have 3, and you also claimed to lie to friends in order to obtain them.

Why are you so boastful about this?

Inner lesbian remembers things.
Frankie Rizzo

Hayward, CA

#180955 Feb 23, 2013
Marriage. There is no one right way.
PooMobila

Covina, CA

#180956 Feb 23, 2013
Look another paving job over the "out of towners" stupid postings.

It's reported that the pope commissioned a two-volume, 300-page document that ended up exposing a network of gay bishops within the Vatican.

“Busting Kimare's”

Since: Feb 13

Clitty

#180957 Feb 23, 2013
Frankie Rizzo

Hayward, CA

#180958 Feb 23, 2013
PooMobila wrote:
Look another paving job over the "out of towners" stupid postings.
It's reported that the pope commissioned a two-volume, 300-page document that ended up exposing a network of gay bishops within the Vatican.
Some Big Cardinal muckety muck who will be among those choosing a new pope said it's time the church came in to the 21st century (Having skipped the twentieth!) and letting priests marry. He thinks it will make them less randy, but it won't. Ask any married man!

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
Sheila Garcia Del Rio's scam artist Nov 29 Well Well 2
Two children among four found dead after mobile... Nov 23 openmind693 1
unsolved. murders Nov 21 unsolved 1
News Homeless Modesto Men Headed for Trial (Apr '08) Nov 17 Your Service Prov... 28
Did you know?... Nov 10 Your Service Prov... 1
Neighbors make your home HELL!! (May '08) Nov 6 Ready to detinate 31
Are Modesto Police doing there job? (Nov '07) Nov '16 Your Service Prov... 74

Oakdale Jobs

More from around the web

Personal Finance

Oakdale Mortgages