Judge overturns California's ban on same-sex marriage

Aug 4, 2010 Full story: www.cnn.com 201,187

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

“Vita e' Bella.”

Since: May 12

Location hidden

#181420 Feb 26, 2013
Rose_NoHo wrote:
Frankie Rizzo is just a troll who is against gay marriage pretending to be in favor of it. He keeps flooding the forum with posts about red herrings, like polygamy, because he doesn't have a real argument against gay marriage. And he is so dumb, he thinks the term "red herring" means a fish.
That would be pesce Rosa.....delicious over pasta.
Frankie Rizzo

Union City, CA

#181421 Feb 26, 2013
A detailed look into polygamy from an Islamic point of view. It is also a good description of various forms of poly marriage and their good and bad points.

(Not an evil Fundie Mormon point of view! Relax put down that weapon!)

http://www.al-islam.org/WomanRights/11.htm

“KiMare'a the Monster Mutation”

Since: Nov 10

Location hidden

#181422 Feb 26, 2013
Quest wrote:
<quoted text>
Actually, you left out the first logical step.
In reality, it's the current ability of heterosexuals to marry that is the leading cause for other groups to demand the right to legally marry. Same sex couples are only asking for the SAME right to marry just one person.
However, same sex couples wanting the SAME right to marry one that already exists for ever heterosexual in the country is not similar to straight people demanding the right to marry, not only ONE, but many at one time.
Separate issues. Separate effects on society.
Actually, YOU left out the first logical step.

In reality, marriage always has included the likelihood of procreation. So much so that the instances where it did not occur were ignored.

Moreover, you then simply argue tradition, without a valid reason to discriminate.

The only reason marriage was restricted to one man and one woman, was the very issue of procreation. By removing that element, you leave the setting of a natural family undefined, horn in on the protection and support designed for that foundational societal relationship, and open the door to simply any committed relationships. ANY restrictions of number and type must show harm, and children cannot be considered.

Smirk.
Big D

Modesto, CA

#181423 Feb 26, 2013
Frankie Rizzo wrote:
<quoted text>
There is an arcahic 100+ year old federal law against poly. That's based on hatred and prejudice and should be gone.
Then it will be just like SSM. Up to the states. Good thing PROP 8 is being struck down because it won't stand in the way of poly in CA.
And there's your topic.
No the topic is Prop 8 and its being overturned in the California courts.

here let me post the topic header for you

"Judge overturns California's ban on same-sex marriage"

You should start a Poly topic
Big D

Modesto, CA

#181424 Feb 26, 2013
Frankie Rizzo wrote:
<quoted text>
OK I'll go along with your stupid straw man argument for a moment and humor you.
Let's say only 3 people in the whole world want a poly marriage. Is that a reason to deny poly marriage?
HOW MANY PEOPLE WANT IT IS IRRELEVANT.
Are they working on getting petitions? Are they making a case in court? Or are they just using it in random internet forums to attack people in favor of other topics like Same Sex marriage?
Big D

Modesto, CA

#181425 Feb 26, 2013
Pietro Armando wrote:
<quoted text>
Ohhhhh.....so the "D" stands for denial? What frighten? Why would it matter to you if plural marriage in some form was given legal recognition? Would it crash your Big Fat Gay Wedding?
Oh it doesn’t frighten me, neither does SSM, but there are people it would frighten, and they are easily led which is why this argument is used.

“KiMare'a the Monster Mutation”

Since: Nov 10

Location hidden

#181426 Feb 26, 2013
Jazybird58 wrote:
<quoted text>
Please indicate how property disbursement will be allocated in a poly marriage where a man has say 4 wives.
wife # 1 , married 15 years, 5 children
wife #2, married 10 years, 4 children
wife #3 Married, 5 years,3 children
wife # 4 married 1 year, 1 child
The husband wishes to divorce wife #1. Will she get the house, and a bulk of his assets? How will that be fair to the 3 remaining wives.
He wants to divorce all 4, how will the property be split, will it be based on duration of each marriage.
The husband dies, at that point all 4 are widows, tell me Frank who will receive his social security, for the children, will each of them receive the same?
As you can see same sex marriages will not affect any standing laws.
According to gays, children cannot be considered as a basis for marriage. Why are you considering a scenario where they are?

Smile.

Since: Apr 11

North Hollywood, CA

#181427 Feb 26, 2013
Pietro Armando wrote:
<quoted text>
Isn't she great ladies and gentlemen. She'll be here all week, so please be kind to your waitress, waiter, or androgynous waitperson.
If anybody is androgynous, it's KiMare. LOL!

Since: Apr 11

North Hollywood, CA

#181428 Feb 26, 2013
KiMare wrote:
<quoted text>
According to gays, children cannot be considered as a basis for marriage. Why are you considering a scenario where they are?
Smile.
You liar. Nobody has said that.
People just say you don't have to be able to have children in order to marry.
And that's the truth.

Since: Apr 11

North Hollywood, CA

#181429 Feb 26, 2013
KiMare wrote:
<quoted text>
Actually, YOU left out the first logical step.
In reality, marriage always has included the likelihood of procreation. So much so that the instances where it did not occur were ignored.
Moreover, you then simply argue tradition, without a valid reason to discriminate.
The only reason marriage was restricted to one man and one woman, was the very issue of procreation.
No matter how you twist things, you don't have to be able to procreate in order to marry.
Can you?
KiMare wrote:
<
By removing that element, you leave the setting of a natural family undefined, horn in on the protection and support designed for that foundational societal relationship, and open the door to simply any committed relationships. ANY restrictions of number and type must show harm, and children cannot be considered.
Smirk.
LOL.
The whole logic thing, beyond you, huh?
Frankie Rizzo

Union City, CA

#181430 Feb 26, 2013
Pietro Armando wrote:
<quoted text>
That would be pesce Rosa.....delicious over pasta.
Aringa rosa! Eccellente!

And dopey rose_noho says that's polygamy!
Frankie Rizzo

Union City, CA

#181431 Feb 26, 2013
Rose_NoHo wrote:
<quoted text>
No matter how you twist things, you don't have to be able to procreate in order to marry.
Then why can't I marry my sister?
Frankie Rizzo

Union City, CA

#181432 Feb 26, 2013
Rose_NoHo wrote:
<quoted text>
The whole logic thing, beyond you, huh?
Didn't happen to everybody, just you.

“KiMare'a the Monster Mutation”

Since: Nov 10

Location hidden

#181433 Feb 26, 2013
Quest wrote:
<quoted text>
It's important (or not so) to the couples involved. A great many people do indeed believe that it is relevant to marriage, and don't base their own actions on the actions of others who do not see it that way.
I personally believe that it is vital to maintaining a health marriage, although it is not natural to everyone. If it is not natural to you, and you cannot find someone to marry be believes just as you do, then marriage is not the right choice.
I have seen very few happy marriages where monogamy is optional. But it is not my place to decide that for anyone other than myself.
The fact is, when no-fault divorce was extended across the country, divorce skyrocketed. Quickly the rate of couples living together outside of marriage also shot up. Moreover, single parenthood also has become nearly as common as heterosexual parenthood.

In other words, when we diluted marriage by ignoring the consideration of children, marriage has become a cheap, disposable option. In every aspect of social measurement, the result has been devastating for everyone.

Now gays are demanding we totally remove the consideration of children. Rizzo is right. Monogamy and marriage will only accelerate in their demise.

Sad and stupid.

“KiMare'a the Monster Mutation”

Since: Nov 10

Location hidden

#181434 Feb 26, 2013
KiMare wrote:
Moreover, homosexuality is a far more promiscuous orientation than heterosexuality.
Smile.
Xavier Breath wrote:
<quoted text>
Here we go with the NARTH bullshit propaganda spew....
Not even aware of it.

I simply note the sociological fact that the presence of children encourages monogamy. The absence leaves mating behavior unrestrained. Homosexuals have never had that restraint.

Smile.

“KiMare'a the Monster Mutation”

Since: Nov 10

Location hidden

#181435 Feb 26, 2013
Big D wrote:
<quoted text>
LOL are you suggesting that polygamy was legal before prop 8?
Wrong!... try again
Same sex marriage was in fact legal before prop 8, and some 18,000 legal same sex marriages were preformed legally before this unconstitutional measure was voted on.
Polygamy has been far more active than calling gay couples married.

In any culture. Anywhere. At any time.

Smile.
Frankie Rizzo

Union City, CA

#181436 Feb 26, 2013
Pietro Armando wrote:
<quoted text>
Ohhhhh.....so the "D" stands for denial? What frighten? Why would it matter to you if plural marriage in some form was given legal recognition? Would it crash your Big Fat Gay Wedding?
Big D is quite the ignorant bigot.

He says most people (not him of course!) see polygamists as child abusers and welfare cheats. That's the "face of polygamy" he says. And polygamists use polygamy to commit their crimes. Then he says not enough people want it for it to be worthy anyway.

Nice!

“Reality bites”

Since: Dec 11

Location hidden

#181437 Feb 26, 2013
Frankie Rizzo wrote:
<quoted text>
Then why can't I marry my sister?
Umm she hates your lying no good two timing dead beat azz???

“Reality bites”

Since: Dec 11

Location hidden

#181438 Feb 26, 2013
Frankie Rizzo wrote:
<quoted text>
Big D is quite the ignorant bigot.
He says most people (not him of course!) see polygamists as child abusers and welfare cheats. That's the "face of polygamy" he says. And polygamists use polygamy to commit their crimes. Then he says not enough people want it for it to be worthy anyway.
Nice!
Stuck on stupid.

“Vita e' Bella.”

Since: May 12

Location hidden

#181439 Feb 26, 2013
KiMare wrote:
<quoted text>
The fact is, when no-fault divorce was extended across the country, divorce skyrocketed. Quickly the rate of couples living together outside of marriage also shot up. Moreover, single parenthood also has become nearly as common as heterosexual parenthood.
In other words, when we diluted marriage by ignoring the consideration of children, marriage has become a cheap, disposable option. In every aspect of social measurement, the result has been devastating for everyone.
Now gays are demanding we totally remove the consideration of children. Rizzo is right. Monogamy and marriage will only accelerate in their demise.
Sad and stupid.
EXACTLY! Finally a ray of reason. Bravo

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
Available for dating Bachelorette (Dec '13) Dec 20 KeS 2
New OAKDALE Fema Concentration camps being buil... (Nov '08) Dec 18 classified1234 12
Review: A & A Temporary Fencing (Jun '14) Dec 18 Matt Dalek 2
Obamaa s Action on Immigration Praised in Modesto Dec 3 stell88 1
1980's Restaurant; Rax or Arbies? (Jul '06) Nov '14 xsturgeonx 3
Turlock candidate has long history in Stanislau... (Oct '06) Nov '14 Joe 6
Walmart in Oakdale? (Aug '07) Nov '14 Riverbank resident 13
Oakdale Dating
Find my Match
More from around the web

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 ]

NFL Latest News

Updated 3:12 pm PST