Judge overturns California's ban on same-sex marriage

Aug 4, 2010 Full story: www.cnn.com 200,974

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
Pees People

Covina, CA

#193298 May 25, 2013
When are the stupid elected officials going to take their?

Workers who lose their jobs would have to clear a drug screening to qualify for unemployment compensation under a proposal approved by the Texas Legislature
Frankie Rizzo

Union City, CA

#193299 May 25, 2013
veryvermilion wrote:
<quoted text>
I don't fear polygamy. I just don't endorse it.
It's been my personal and professional experience that relationships of that kind are rarely successful and happy for all members. There are alliances built, sometimes without the knowledge of all of the players. Resentments can build. People can feel lost in the crowd. It's difficult enough to manage a relationship between two people, let alone several.
I've never been in any kind of relationship that was not monogamous. I think I would be jealous. I think I would feel lonely and easily hurt.
It's not something that I could find myself getting behind. But I don't "fear" it.
If polygamy happens, then it happens. It's not likely to impact me in any way. If people want to try to live their lives in plural relationships, that's up to them. More power to them.
I think most people know enough to choose their battles. Polygamy is not my battle.
Listen to yourself bigot. Just replace polygamy with same sex marriage in your rant. You'd scream and probably vomit if someone talked that trash against SSM.

Who are you to decide if someone's marriage is worthy or viable? Polygamy deserves the same respect and consideration as SSM. They're both marriage, you know, equal.

Marriage. There is no one right way.
Frankie Rizzo

Union City, CA

#193300 May 25, 2013
veryvermilion wrote:
<quoted text>
I don't fear polygamy. I just don't endorse it.
It's been my personal and professional experience that relationships of that kind are rarely successful and happy for all members. There are alliances built, sometimes without the knowledge of all of the players. Resentments can build. People can feel lost in the crowd. It's difficult enough to manage a relationship between two people, let alone several.
I've never been in any kind of relationship that was not monogamous. I think I would be jealous. I think I would feel lonely and easily hurt.
It's not something that I could find myself getting behind. But I don't "fear" it.
If polygamy happens, then it happens. It's not likely to impact me in any way. If people want to try to live their lives in plural relationships, that's up to them. More power to them.
I think most people know enough to choose their battles. Polygamy is not my battle.
You claimed people are afraid of polygamy. I call bullsh!t. No one fears it.
Frankie Rizzo

Union City, CA

#193301 May 25, 2013
veryvermilion wrote:
<quoted text>
I don't fear polygamy. I just don't endorse it.
It's been my personal and professional experience that relationships of that kind are rarely successful and happy for all members. There are alliances built, sometimes without the knowledge of all of the players. Resentments can build. People can feel lost in the crowd. It's difficult enough to manage a relationship between two people, let alone several.
I've never been in any kind of relationship that was not monogamous. I think I would be jealous. I think I would feel lonely and easily hurt.
It's not something that I could find myself getting behind. But I don't "fear" it.
If polygamy happens, then it happens. It's not likely to impact me in any way. If people want to try to live their lives in plural relationships, that's up to them. More power to them.
I think most people know enough to choose their battles. Polygamy is not my battle.
Most polygamists consider SSM their battle too. I notice it's not reciprocal. It should be. What harm would a loving marriage of three men cause you?

Are you for marriage equality or are you for more of the same, marriage only for approved groups?

Bottom line is you are a hypocrite.

Marriage. There is no one right way.
Illya Kuryakin

Covina, CA

#193302 May 25, 2013
Illya Kuryakin

Bong the Gong and get this mess over with.

A South Lake Tahoe police officer pleaded guilty May 22, 2013 Wednesday to multiple counts of witness tampering and obstruction of an official proceeding.

A three-year, multi-agency investigation involving the FBI led to 44-year-old John Gerald Polands arrest in January 2013 on five counts of witness tampering.
Orem

Durham, NC

#193304 May 26, 2013
Frankie Rizzo wrote:
<quoted text>
Listen to yourself bigot. Just replace polygamy with same sex marriage in your rant. You'd scream and probably vomit if someone talked that trash against SSM.
Who are you to decide if someone's marriage is worthy or viable? Polygamy deserves the same respect and consideration as SSM. They're both marriage, you know, equal.
Marriage. There is no one right way.
Whoop Whoop.
Vermoothed

Covina, CA

#193306 May 26, 2013
News 2013;

The Pentagon has been confronting an increase in reports of sexual misconduct, harassment and crime and is under pressure from Congress to overhaul the way it deals with such cases.

Some lawmakers have introduced legislation that would take the power to prosecute sexual crimes and abuse outside the military chain of command.

Now this is where there are serious problems to be handled, no where else!
laughing man

Tempe, AZ

#193307 May 26, 2013
veryvermilion wrote:
<quoted text>
Cowardice has rarely ever resulted in success.
Caligula thinks her adolescent "anything goes" attitude is "bravery".

One would almost think those people are mentally ill.
laughing man

Tempe, AZ

#193308 May 26, 2013
Speaking of mental illness, one of the large intestine propagandists says that the caving in by the Boy Scouts will "save lives".

http://blog.al.com/breaking/2013/05/allowing_...

Since: Dec 09

Knoxville, TN

#193309 May 26, 2013
Frankie Rizzo wrote:
<quoted text>
Listen to yourself bigot. Just replace polygamy with same sex marriage in your rant. You'd scream and probably vomit if someone talked that trash against SSM.
Who are you to decide if someone's marriage is worthy or viable? Polygamy deserves the same respect and consideration as SSM. They're both marriage, you know, equal.
Marriage. There is no one right way.
Look, as much as you continue to try to involve me in an effort that has no impact on my life; one that I do not personally endorse, I am not going to take the bait.

Same-sex marriage is important to me because I am a gay man. I see the damage caused by the efforts to block same-sex marriage.

That's why I fight for it. That's why I'm here on this particular TOPIX forum and not on a "polygamy forum".

I don't seek out issues that I do not endorse or support.

I've been crystal clear about my personal and professional feelings re: polygamy.

You believe that same-sex marriage and polygamy are one and the same. I don't agree.

Same-sex marriage intends to unite two people together. Polygamy does not.

If you want to believe that I'm being hypocritical, that's fine with me.

I personally don't believe that you're in favor of polygamy. Rather, you're trying to stir the pot by linking same-sex marriage to polygamy.

Good luck with that.

None of the arguments before the Supreme Court or other courts involving same-sex marriage have EVER included arguments for polygamy.

We have a very specific goal.

If you, personally, wish to have more than one wife with an extended group of children who have different mothers, then that's YOUR battle--not mine.

Since: Dec 09

Knoxville, TN

#193310 May 26, 2013
Frankie Rizzo wrote:
<quoted text>
Most polygamists consider SSM their battle too. I notice it's not reciprocal. It should be. What harm would a loving marriage of three men cause you?
Are you for marriage equality or are you for more of the same, marriage only for approved groups?
Bottom line is you are a hypocrite.
Marriage. There is no one right way.
"Most polygamists"? Really? Where's your proof?

I did a brief bit of research to see if your claim holds water, and the only thing I could find where polygamists support same-sex marriage was an interview of the people portrayed on "Sister Wives".

They support same-sex marriage.

Are they representative of "most polygamists"?

Prove your comments. Show us where you get your "facts".
Frankie Rizzo

Union City, CA

#193311 May 26, 2013
veryvermilion wrote:
<quoted text>
Look, as much as you continue to try to involve me in an effort that has no impact on my life; one that I do not personally endorse, I am not going to take the bait.
Same-sex marriage is important to me because I am a gay man. I see the damage caused by the efforts to block same-sex marriage.
That's why I fight for it. That's why I'm here on this particular TOPIX forum and not on a "polygamy forum".
I don't seek out issues that I do not endorse or support.
I've been crystal clear about my personal and professional feelings re: polygamy.
You believe that same-sex marriage and polygamy are one and the same. I don't agree.
Same-sex marriage intends to unite two people together. Polygamy does not.
If you want to believe that I'm being hypocritical, that's fine with me.
I personally don't believe that you're in favor of polygamy. Rather, you're trying to stir the pot by linking same-sex marriage to polygamy.
Good luck with that.
None of the arguments before the Supreme Court or other courts involving same-sex marriage have EVER included arguments for polygamy.
We have a very specific goal.
If you, personally, wish to have more than one wife with an extended group of children who have different mothers, then that's YOUR battle--not mine.
You are a bigot and a hypocrite.

Poly MARRIAGE deserves the same respect and consideration as same sex MARRIAGE.

Suppose I said to you If you want to marry a man, then that's your battle, not ours. You'd get so upset you'd vomit and file hate crime charges.
Frankie Rizzo

Union City, CA

#193312 May 26, 2013
veryvermilion wrote:
<quoted text>
"Most polygamists"? Really? Where's your proof?
I did a brief bit of research to see if your claim holds water, and the only thing I could find where polygamists support same-sex marriage was an interview of the people portrayed on "Sister Wives".
They support same-sex marriage.
Are they representative of "most polygamists"?
Prove your comments. Show us where you get your "facts".
Prove they are not. You want to be a bigot, the burden is on you to justify your bigotry.

Marriage. There is no one right way.

How does it feel to argue against marriage equality? You're not doing a very good job of it.
Frankie Rizzo

Union City, CA

#193313 May 26, 2013
veryvermilion wrote:
<quoted text>
Look, as much as you continue to try to involve me in an effort that has no impact on my life; one that I do not personally endorse, I am not going to take the bait.
Same-sex marriage is important to me because I am a gay man. I see the damage caused by the efforts to block same-sex marriage.
That's why I fight for it. That's why I'm here on this particular TOPIX forum and not on a "polygamy forum".
I don't seek out issues that I do not endorse or support.
I've been crystal clear about my personal and professional feelings re: polygamy.
You believe that same-sex marriage and polygamy are one and the same. I don't agree.
Same-sex marriage intends to unite two people together. Polygamy does not.
If you want to believe that I'm being hypocritical, that's fine with me.
I personally don't believe that you're in favor of polygamy. Rather, you're trying to stir the pot by linking same-sex marriage to polygamy.
Good luck with that.
None of the arguments before the Supreme Court or other courts involving same-sex marriage have EVER included arguments for polygamy.
We have a very specific goal.
If you, personally, wish to have more than one wife with an extended group of children who have different mothers, then that's YOUR battle--not mine.

One of the assumptions that gay marriage calls into question is: why pairs? If not man-woman, then why not man-woman-woman, and so forth? The response of gay marriage proponents is generally ridicule. I don't think this is a ridiculous question. "Why can't you marry your dog, then?" is a ridiculous question.

Marriage, in our society, is between consenting adult persons. But "why only two?" isn't a ridiculous question. It's easy enough to show that gay marriage does not empirically lead to pressure to legalise polygamy; that hasn't happened anywhere that gay marriage is legal. But this is different from explaining why opening up the boundaries of the 20th-century understanding of marriage shouldn't raise the possibility of legalising polygamy. Why shouldn't it be legal for more than two consenting adults to marry each other?

There are, obviously, a whole lot of societies in the world where polygamy is legal and normal. In fact the anthropological record suggests that the overwhelming majority of human societies have allowed men to have more than one wife simultaneously.

“Vita e' Bella.”

Since: May 12

Location hidden

#193314 May 26, 2013
http://m.sltrib.com/sltrib/mobile3/56063485-2...
veryvermilion wrote:
<quoted text>
Look, as much as you continue to try to involve me in an effort that has no impact on my life; one that I do not personally endorse, I am not going to take the bait.
Same-sex marriage is important to me because I am a gay man. I see the damage caused by the efforts to block same-sex marriage.
That's why I fight for it. That's why I'm here on this particular TOPIX forum and not on a "polygamy forum".
I don't seek out issues that I do not endorse or support.
I've been crystal clear about my personal and professional feelings re: polygamy.
You believe that same-sex marriage and polygamy are one and the same. I don't agree.
Same-sex marriage intends to unite two people together. Polygamy does not.
If you want to believe that I'm being hypocritical, that's fine with me.
I personally don't believe that you're in favor of polygamy. Rather, you're trying to stir the pot by linking same-sex marriage to polygamy.
Good luck with that.
None of the arguments before the Supreme Court or other courts involving same-sex marriage have EVER included arguments for polygamy.
We have a very specific goal.
If you, personally, wish to have more than one wife with an extended group of children who have different mothers, then that's YOUR battle--not mine.
Justice brings up polygamy in Prop 8 gay marriage case

By Matt Canham | The Salt Lake Tribune
First Published Mar 26 2013 12:46 pm
Last Updated Mar 26 2013 07:22 pm

“Vita e' Bella.”

Since: May 12

Location hidden

#193315 May 26, 2013
Frankie Rizzo wrote:
<quoted text>
One of the assumptions that gay marriage calls into question is: why pairs? If not man-woman, then why not man-woman-woman, and so forth? The response of gay marriage proponents is generally ridicule. I don't think this is a ridiculous question. "Why can't you marry your dog, then?" is a ridiculous question.
Marriage, in our society, is between consenting adult persons. But "why only two?" isn't a ridiculous question. It's easy enough to show that gay marriage does not empirically lead to pressure to legalise polygamy; that hasn't happened anywhere that gay marriage is legal. But this is different from explaining why opening up the boundaries of the 20th-century understanding of marriage shouldn't raise the possibility of legalising polygamy. Why shouldn't it be legal for more than two consenting adults to marry each other?
There are, obviously, a whole lot of societies in the world where polygamy is legal and normal. In fact the anthropological record suggests that the overwhelming majority of human societies have allowed men to have more than one wife simultaneously.
Well put Frankie. If monogamous conjugal, husband and wife, marriage is no longer the foundation of a stable society in this country, why would it matter if SSM is legal AND plural marriage. Eventually will it matter who marries who legally as long as they're consenting adults. VeeVee, thoughts?

Since: Dec 09

Knoxville, TN

#193316 May 26, 2013
Pietro Armando wrote:
http://m.sltrib.com/sltrib/mob ile3/56063485-219/polygamy-mar riage-gay-court.html.csp
<quoted text>
Justice brings up polygamy in Prop 8 gay marriage case
By Matt Canham | The Salt Lake Tribune
First Published Mar 26 2013 12:46 pm
Last Updated Mar 26 2013 07:22 pm
The JUSTICE brought it up. Proponents of same-sex marriage have NEVER argued in favor of polygamy in any court cases involving same-sex marriage.

These are two, very distinct issues.
Orem

Durham, NC

#193317 May 26, 2013
Frankie Rizzo wrote:
<quoted text>
One of the assumptions that gay marriage calls into question is: why pairs? If not man-woman, then why not man-woman-woman, and so forth? The response of gay marriage proponents is generally ridicule. I don't think this is a ridiculous question. "Why can't you marry your dog, then?" is a ridiculous question.
Marriage, in our society, is between consenting adult persons. But "why only two?" isn't a ridiculous question. It's easy enough to show that gay marriage does not empirically lead to pressure to legalise polygamy; that hasn't happened anywhere that gay marriage is legal. But this is different from explaining why opening up the boundaries of the 20th-century understanding of marriage shouldn't raise the possibility of legalising polygamy. Why shouldn't it be legal for more than two consenting adults to marry each other?
There are, obviously, a whole lot of societies in the world where polygamy is legal and normal. In fact the anthropological record suggests that the overwhelming majority of human societies have allowed men to have more than one wife simultaneously.
Whoop Whoop

Since: Dec 09

Knoxville, TN

#193318 May 26, 2013
Frankie Rizzo wrote:
<quoted text>
One of the assumptions that gay marriage calls into question is: why pairs? If not man-woman, then why not man-woman-woman, and so forth? The response of gay marriage proponents is generally ridicule. I don't think this is a ridiculous question. "Why can't you marry your dog, then?" is a ridiculous question.
Marriage, in our society, is between consenting adult persons. But "why only two?" isn't a ridiculous question. It's easy enough to show that gay marriage does not empirically lead to pressure to legalise polygamy; that hasn't happened anywhere that gay marriage is legal. But this is different from explaining why opening up the boundaries of the 20th-century understanding of marriage shouldn't raise the possibility of legalising polygamy. Why shouldn't it be legal for more than two consenting adults to marry each other?
There are, obviously, a whole lot of societies in the world where polygamy is legal and normal. In fact the anthropological record suggests that the overwhelming majority of human societies have allowed men to have more than one wife simultaneously.
The arguments placed before the courts by proponents of same-sex marriage have never included plural marriage.

Many people who fear same-sex marriage have used that tired, old refrain--"If we allow same-sex couples to marry, where will it end?"

THEY are the ones bringing up polygamy.

The arguments in favor of same-sex marriage ARE NOT an natural leap to arguments in favor of polygamy. They have NOTHING to do with one another, other than they both discuss marriage.

Polygamists would be more likely to use heterosexual marriage rights to defend their arguments in court. This is especially true with the Defense of Marriage Act, which clearly prohibits same-sex marriage as not being recognized by the federal government.

Opposite-sex couples already have the rights and protections of marriage. Polygamists would naturally use those rights and protections that are already in existence to argue their case.
Frankie Rizzo

Union City, CA

#193319 May 26, 2013
Orem wrote:
<quoted text>
Whoop Whoop
WOO~HOOOO! Whoop Whoop!

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
CA Jury reaches verdict in Oakland BART shooting t... (Jul '10) 6 hr scoop 2,273
CA California seeks to ban free, single-use carryo... (Jun '10) 20 hr zhuzhamm 5,079
CA California Proposition 19: the Marijuana Legali... (Oct '10) Thu Pizza 16,000
CA CA Proposition 23 - Global Warming (Oct '10) Sep 17 Blazing saddles 7,954
OAKDALE (NWO) FEMA CONCENTRATION CAMP being bui... (Nov '08) Sep 16 🙈🙈 99
michael walker? Sep 15 meh 1
I am a multi millionaire (Aug '13) Sep 9 KeS 16
•••
•••
•••

Oakdale Jobs

•••
•••
•••

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 ]
•••