Judge overturns California's ban on same-sex marriage

Aug 4, 2010 Full story: www.cnn.com 201,387

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

#184330 Mar 24, 2013
just announced wrote:
hopefully this thread will be retired after the Supreme Court rules - the end of homophobes once and for all.
hate the haters.
Yaaaaaaaaay.....no more homophobes......no more fear of homogenized milk....hopefully we can also get rid of the polyphobes too.
endocannabanoid system

Anderson, CA

#184331 Mar 24, 2013
PayToPlay wrote:
Incantations are the new rage.
this coming so soon after rage was made the new incantation?

how could it be a coincidence??
endocannabanoid system

Anderson, CA

#184332 Mar 24, 2013
Pietro Armando wrote:
<quoted text>
Yaaaaaaaaay.....no more homophobes......no more fear of homogenized milk....hopefully we can also get rid of the polyphobes too.
there will always be a vocal minority of "Phobes" here in america.

they are called social conservatives.

and they represent an ever shrinking slice of pure lunacy

(well you know the kind of outlandish stuff they post)

luckily they represent an older demographic and dont have much of a future.(and dont have much to say either)

the elections last fall were a good indication.!!

they lost bad, and still havnt figured out why

while the rest of Us keep telling them OVER AND over again why.

they basically have a war going on against every single group of people in this country, except the wealthy, whom they represent.

“Vita e' Bella.”

Since: May 12

Location hidden

#184335 Mar 24, 2013
endocannabanoid system wrote:
<quoted text>
there is no "RIGHT" to deny others their rights.....
that is why we dont vote on minorty rights...
why dont you look it up??
No right was denied. The vote was for definitional constitutional clarification only. it seems some folks forgot marriage was a union of husband and wife. Everyone retained the same right prior to the vote.

“Vita e' Bella.”

Since: May 12

Location hidden

#184336 Mar 24, 2013
Xavier Breath wrote:
<quoted text>
I didn't say that, you did, and it is incorrect. Married people live longer, have better health, stability, and finances. It is a fact, it's not up for debate
Studies conducted on married people, of the husband AND wife variety, demonstrate this. That is correct. However that doesn't necessarily mean it would be applicable to married SSCs, male or female.
. Fortunately, the State already knows this, so do try to catch up. Marriage isn't ONLY about procreation.
Perhaps the state should recognize plural marriage relationships, if it already know this. Marriage isn't ONLY about two people.
endocannabanoid system

Anderson, CA

#184340 Mar 24, 2013
Pietro Armando wrote:
<quoted text>
No right was denied. The vote was for definitional constitutional clarification only. it seems some folks forgot marriage was a union of husband and wife. Everyone retained the same right prior to the vote.
do you live here??

the people were given their rights, after they were granted by a judge, like they should have been, long ago.

then the bigots voted on it, and that vote tried to TAKE peoples rights away.

BTW; your definiaton of maraige is narrow minded
..........and another tidbit for you...

we dont let the MAJORITy vote on the RIGHTS of the minority.

at least not in this country. this last point is likely to kill "prop hate" next week in court. good ridance.
endocannabanoid system

Anderson, CA

#184341 Mar 24, 2013
Pietro Armando wrote:
<quoted text>
Studies conducted on married people, of the husband AND wife variety, demonstrate this. That is correct. However that doesn't necessarily mean it would be applicable to married SSCs, male or female.
<quoted text>
Perhaps the state should recognize plural marriage relationships, if it already know this. Marriage isn't ONLY about two people.
move to utah

Since: Nov 12

Elk Grove, CA

#184342 Mar 24, 2013
endocannabanoid system wrote:
<quoted text>
nope....it does happen.
such is the nature of love.
Im saying that actual relationships tend to appeal to pairs..
THERE ARE some REAL three way relationships.....
I wont comment on how strong they may be??
it could be very strong...
but their numbers tell a story....
that cohabitating pairs are much more common.
and "threesomes' are genrally are about recreation.
It's too bad you can't give us more information, we are all just waiting for your information. Please enlighten us. LOL

Since: Nov 12

Elk Grove, CA

#184343 Mar 24, 2013
endocannabanoid system wrote:
<quoted text>
mislead by who??
Clinton for one:“Saddam’s goal … is to achieve the lifting of U.N. sanctions while retaining and enhancing Iraq’s weapons of mass destruction programs. We cannot, we must not and we will not let him succeed.”— Madeline Albright, 1998

“(Saddam) will rebuild his arsenal of weapons of mass destruction and some day, some way, I am certain he will use that arsenal again, as he has 10 times since 1983&#8243; — National Security Adviser Sandy Berger, Feb 18, 1998

“Iraq made commitments after the Gulf War to completely dismantle all weapons of mass destruction, and unfortunately, Iraq has not lived up to its agreement.”— Barbara Boxer, November 8, 2002

“We have known for many years that Saddam Hussein is seeking and developing weapons of mass destruction.”— Ted Kennedy, September 27, 2002

“There is no doubt that Saddam Hussein’s regime is a serious danger, that he is a tyrant, and that his pursuit of lethal weapons of mass destruction cannot be tolerated. He must be disarmed.”— Ted Kennedy, Sept 27, 2002

“I will be voting to give the president of the United States the authority to use force – if necessary – to disarm Saddam Hussein because I believe that a deadly arsenal of weapons of mass destruction in his hands is a real and grave threat to our security.”— John F. Kerry, Oct 2002

“I am absolutely convinced that there are weapons…I saw evidence back in 1998 when we would see the inspectors being barred from gaining entry into a warehouse for three hours with trucks rolling up and then moving those trucks out.”— Clinton’s Secretary of Defense William Cohen in April of 2003
machete of rialto

Los Angeles, CA

#184344 Mar 24, 2013
just announced wrote:
hopefully this thread will be retired after the Supreme Court rules - the end of homophobes once and for all.
hate the haters.
as long as there are phaggs like you, there will be plenty of haters ready to deliver. word!

“I Luv Carbon Dioxide”

Since: Dec 08

Location hidden

#184345 Mar 24, 2013
endocannabanoid system wrote:
you claimed the state requires marriages to produce children. you did it in the first sentence...
this is false....as the state requires NOTHING from a union between two adults. wake up.
No, the first sentence says: "The state requires posterity and married couples produce children with better outcomes than children born out of wedlock." I've acknowledged children are born out of wedlock. The thing is, children raised by married mother and father have better outcomes, spend less time in prison and more time in school, for instance, than children raised by only one of their parents.

I've never written the state requires married couples produce children; that's a strawman you find written by same sex marriage supporters. Children are a benefit from marriage, both for the state and the parents.
RedLine

La Puente, CA

#184346 Mar 24, 2013
Warning the Red Line has been crossed.
endocannabanoid system

Anderson, CA

#184347 Mar 24, 2013
RiccardoFire wrote:
<quoted text>Clinton for one:“Saddam’s goal … is to achieve the lifting of U.N. sanctions while retaining and enhancing Iraq’s weapons of mass destruction programs. We cannot, we must not and we will not let him succeed.”— Madeline Albright, 1998
“(Saddam) will rebuild his arsenal of weapons of mass destruction and some day, some way, I am certain he will use that arsenal again, as he has 10 times since 1983&#8243; — National Security Adviser Sandy Berger, Feb 18, 1998
“Iraq made commitments after the Gulf War to completely dismantle all weapons of mass destruction, and unfortunately, Iraq has not lived up to its agreement.”— Barbara Boxer, November 8, 2002
“We have known for many years that Saddam Hussein is seeking and developing weapons of mass destruction.”— Ted Kennedy, September 27, 2002
“There is no doubt that Saddam Hussein’s regime is a serious danger, that he is a tyrant, and that his pursuit of lethal weapons of mass destruction cannot be tolerated. He must be disarmed.”— Ted Kennedy, Sept 27, 2002
“I will be voting to give the president of the United States the authority to use force – if necessary – to disarm Saddam Hussein because I believe that a deadly arsenal of weapons of mass destruction in his hands is a real and grave threat to our security.”— John F. Kerry, Oct 2002
“I am absolutely convinced that there are weapons…I saw evidence back in 1998 when we would see the inspectors being barred from gaining entry into a warehouse for three hours with trucks rolling up and then moving those trucks out.”— Clinton’s Secretary of Defense William Cohen in April of 2003
ive admitted in the past these people were wrong...

how could they nOT be?? IT WAS WRONG!! many of us new it, like myself.

77 senators voted for it, and many of them were democrats.

THEY were wrong.

many of them have recanted. Bush, cheney, rumsy and wolfy have not.

im glad you have.
endocannabanoid system

Anderson, CA

#184348 Mar 24, 2013
Brian_G wrote:
<quoted text>No, the first sentence says: "The state requires posterity and married couples produce children with better outcomes than children born out of wedlock." I've acknowledged children are born out of wedlock. The thing is, children raised by married mother and father have better outcomes, spend less time in prison and more time in school, for instance, than children raised by only one of their parents.
I've never written the state requires married couples produce children; that's a strawman you find written by same sex marriage supporters. Children are a benefit from marriage, both for the state and the parents.
again brain.....the state requires NOTHING of married couples.

Since: Dec 09

Knoxville, TN

#184349 Mar 24, 2013
Randy -Rock- Hudson wrote:
<quoted text>
We are not "attacking" their rights. They are asking for the granting of rights that they do not rate. There is no "Compelling Reason" to grant them the same status as heterosexual couples. Maybe compelling to them, but not to the majority of us. We are merely responding.
Here is the compelling reason...

1.) Scientists and the Supreme Court have determined that homosexuality is a normal, legal, expression of human sexuality. It is no worse than heterosexual behavior and no better than heterosexual behavior. It is equal. Like it or not, those are the facts based on scientific findings and legal findings in this country.

2.) Heterosexual relationships are granted the right, protection, and privileges of marriage. Homosexual relationships are not granted these things.

3.) The Fourteenth Amendment to the Constitution states, "no state shall ... deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws."

4.) So, if homosexual and heterosexual relationships are both supposed to be equal under the law; and heterosexual relationships are given more rights and protections via marriage than homosexual relationships; and the Fourteenth Amendment states clearly that no state shall deny any person the equal protection of law; then THERE IS A COMPELLING reason to give homosexual relationships THE SAME RIGHTS as heterosexual relationships.
RedLine

La Puente, CA

#184350 Mar 24, 2013
Warning the Red Line has been crossed.

Large guns will be firing next, jets, tanks and missles are being ready and sent away now.

Since: Dec 09

Knoxville, TN

#184351 Mar 24, 2013
Brian_G wrote:
<quoted text>No, the first sentence says: "The state requires posterity and married couples produce children with better outcomes than children born out of wedlock." I've acknowledged children are born out of wedlock. The thing is, children raised by married mother and father have better outcomes, spend less time in prison and more time in school, for instance, than children raised by only one of their parents.
I've never written the state requires married couples produce children; that's a strawman you find written by same sex marriage supporters. Children are a benefit from marriage, both for the state and the parents.
Do you really believe that all children raised by their biological parents fair better than all children raised by someone else?

I've worked for many years in the field of social work. And I've got to tell you, that simply isn't the case.

Two parents who are physically/emotionally abusive to their children and who have serious drug/alcohol problems DO NOT do better than children raised in a loving, stable, supportive household headed by non-biological parents--regardless of the parent's orientation.

The key to raising successful children has less to do with the biological connection to the parents and more to do with the skills of the parents.

It's not "who" raises the kids, but "how" the kids are raised.

That is the case 100% of the time.

It hardly takes an advanced degree to know this is true.

“Vita e' Bella.”

Since: May 12

Location hidden

#184352 Mar 24, 2013
Xavier Breath wrote:
<quoted text>um.... prior to "the vote," gay people HAD the right to marry. The vote took that right away, and that is why SCOTUS will overturn it. You should have learned this stuff in high school civics class.
XBox

Gay people ALWAYS had the right to marry, along with every other American, and actually exercised that right, even fathered, or gave birth to, children, with their respective (opposite sex) husband or wife.

The people of California voted to constitutionally define marriage, as it had been defined, for all of American history, as a union of husband/man AND wife. What was taken away was the right to participate, by the voter, in the constitutional process.

“Vita e' Bella.”

Since: May 12

Location hidden

#184353 Mar 24, 2013
veryvermilion wrote:
<quoted text>
Do you really believe that all children raised by their biological parents fair better than all children raised by someone else?
Of course not. There will always be situations where the bio parents cannot, or choose not, to care for their children. So what's your point?
I've worked for many years in the field of social work. And I've got to tell you, that simply isn't the case.
Two parents who are physically/emotionally abusive to their children and who have serious drug/alcohol problems DO NOT do better than children raised in a loving, stable, supportive household headed by non-biological parents--regardless of the parent's orientation.
True, but children will do better in any other stable home environment .
The key to raising successful children has less to do with the biological connection to the parents and more to do with the skills of the parents.
It's not "who" raises the kids, but "how" the kids are raised.
The biological connection should not be severed unless there is legitimate reason for doing so. Even gay people have a mom and dad.
That is the case 100% of the time.
It hardly takes an advanced degree to know this is true.
True

“Vita e' Bella.”

Since: May 12

Location hidden

#184354 Mar 24, 2013
endocannabanoid system wrote:
<quoted text>
move to utah
My oh my....how quickly the mood changes as soon as the "P" word is mentioned. So much for "equality". Apparently, some are more equal than others.

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
Review: Andrews Appliance Repair (Oct '13) 18 hr Sean 2
$1.8 million mosque rising at Islamic Center in... (Feb '14) Sun Muslim from Modes... 25
OAKDALE (NWO) FEMA CONCENTRATION CAMP being bui... (Nov '08) Sun Riverbank resident 113
Review: Law Offices Of Ernie Spokes (Dec '13) Feb 19 99 percent 2
Fraud claims coming to court (Jun '07) Jan '15 KeS 4
Legalize COCKFIGHTING in AGRI ZONINGS to fund p... (Feb '13) Jan '15 Un agenda 21 and ... 10
Gay People (May '14) Jan '15 Ace045 3
Oakdale Dating
Find my Match
More from around the web

Oakdale People Search

Addresses and phone numbers for FREE

Personal Finance

Mortgages [ See current mortgage rates ]

NFL Latest News

Updated 12:51 am PST