Judge overturns California's ban on same-sex marriage

Aug 4, 2010 Full story: www.cnn.com 201,161

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

#186663 Apr 5, 2013
Big D wrote:
<quoted text>
Go read your own news
I am not opposed to Poly.
Donít mind me, got get your signatures for your ballot measure and you will find out what your image problem is, you donít need to and are not about to learn about it from me.
For the umpteenth time, I'm not interested in gathering signatures from my wheelchair, I just want to fully explore marriage equality. I cannot with you, your paranoia gets in the way. Trying to hide something?
Frankie Rizzo

Union City, CA

#186664 Apr 5, 2013
Big D wrote:
<quoted text>
Wrong I would vote in favor of it if it came up
I have tried to point out in the past an issue that will need to be dealt with if this will ever go forward but you are not bright enough to distinguish between support and awareness of a problem.
In the future I wonít refer to it anymore as I donít want to confuse the village idiot any further
Too funny!

An obvious but sort of graceful bow out. Hope you learned something Big Shot.
Big D

Modesto, CA

#186665 Apr 5, 2013
Frankie Rizzo wrote:
<quoted text>
For the umpteenth time, I'm not interested in gathering signatures from my wheelchair, I just want to fully explore marriage equality. I cannot with you, your paranoia gets in the way. Trying to hide something?
For the umpteenth time I would vote in favor of Poly marriage if the issue comes up.

Your paranoia that recognition of an issue in the public eye is related to lack of agreement gets in the way
Big D

Modesto, CA

#186666 Apr 5, 2013
Frankie Rizzo wrote:
<quoted text>
Too funny!
An obvious but sort of graceful bow out. Hope you learned something Big Shot.
Nope just acknowledging that you are not bright enough to discuss an aspect of an issue without jumping to a wrong conclusion.

“Vita e' Bella.”

Since: May 12

Location hidden

#186667 Apr 5, 2013
just the facts wrote:
<quoted text>And there you have it. Marriage to you is a sanctioned fluckfest, a god ordained ticket to procreation. Well good for you. My marriage is about sharing my life with my wife. Any one can have sex you moron, and you damn sure don't need to be married to do so. What a sad life you have.
Oh Madone! Why not try explaining how calling an intimate personal sexual relationship between two men/women "strengthens marriage", as you claimed. Apparently you have difficulty distinguishing between marriage as public policy, cultural norm, shared understanding, and/or an historic, legal, and/or religious concept of husband and wife, and individual marriages.

That word, "religious" just got your dander up, didn't it. You were so busy focusing in on that, you didn't see anything else. Try sticking to the facts, "just the facts".
Frankie Rizzo

Union City, CA

#186668 Apr 5, 2013
Big D wrote:
<quoted text>
For the umpteenth time I would vote in favor of Poly marriage if the issue comes up.
Your paranoia that recognition of an issue in the public eye is related to lack of agreement gets in the way
Yeah, you'd vote for it and all, it's just that they are child molesters and welfare cheats and all like that.

Too Funny!

Since: Mar 12

Milwaukee

#186669 Apr 5, 2013
RiccardoFire wrote:
<quoted text>It won't bother me.
So what you are truly saying then is all you are opposed to is the use of a word?? Doesent that seem silly??
Frankie Rizzo

Union City, CA

#186670 Apr 5, 2013
Big D wrote:
<quoted text>
Nope just acknowledging that you are not bright enough to discuss an aspect of an issue without jumping to a wrong conclusion.
YUK!YUK!YUK! Getting sloppy. Slipping into ad hominem. Fail.

“Vita e' Bella.”

Since: May 12

Location hidden

#186671 Apr 5, 2013
Big D wrote:
<quoted text>
I only bring that up when people bring up history and tradition as if following what was done in the past is always a good thing.
The key word misused here is "always". Simply because it was done in the past, doesn't automatically mean it shouldn't be done now, or should be. If SSM is such a hot idea, why having societies, across time and place, incorporated it into their societal structures? Why didn't it naturally develop alongside of both monogamous, and polygamous, opposite sex marriage?
Big D

Modesto, CA

#186672 Apr 5, 2013
Jaredb8 wrote:
<quoted text>
So what you are truly saying then is all you are opposed to is the use of a word?? Doesent that seem silly??
That is the entire issue

a word

A word they donít own, as it relates to dozens of religions and no religion at all. They want to define that word not only for themselves but to force that word upon others not of their religion.

The word scares them to the core of their being.

The rights donít concern them... it is the word itself that shakes them to their core.

These people are frightened to death over how someone might use that word.

It is really pathetic when you think about it.
Big D

Modesto, CA

#186673 Apr 5, 2013
Frankie Rizzo wrote:
<quoted text>
Yeah, you'd vote for it and all, it's just that they are child molesters and welfare cheats and all like that.
Too Funny!
You are wrong thinking that all those in poly marriages are criminals, they are not.
Big D

Modesto, CA

#186674 Apr 5, 2013
Pietro Armando wrote:
<quoted text>
Oh Madone! Why not try explaining how calling an intimate personal sexual relationship between two men/women "strengthens marriage", as you claimed. Apparently you have difficulty distinguishing between marriage as public policy, cultural norm, shared understanding, and/or an historic, legal, and/or religious concept of husband and wife, and individual marriages.
That word, "religious" just got your dander up, didn't it. You were so busy focusing in on that, you didn't see anything else. Try sticking to the facts, "just the facts".
Not everything about a marriage is about sex

It may be for you, but for most of us our marriage is more than just about sex

Since: Nov 12

Elk Grove, CA

#186675 Apr 5, 2013
Jaredb8 wrote:
<quoted text>
So what you are truly saying then is all you are opposed to is the use of a word?? Doesent that seem silly??
Doesn't it seem silly to your side? Marriage is between a man and a woman.
Frankie Rizzo

Union City, CA

#186676 Apr 5, 2013
Big D wrote:
<quoted text>
You are wrong thinking that all those in poly marriages are criminals, they are not.
Slick try! But a Fail. That's your schtick dummy.

Since: Mar 12

Milwaukee

#186677 Apr 5, 2013
Big D wrote:
<quoted text>Not everything about a marriage is about sex

It may be for you, but for most of us our marriage is more than just about sex
Everyone against gay marriage says things about how it ruins the sanctity or how it will make theirs less meaningful. I'm pretty sure there are plenty of traditional marriages that would be considered a failure.

Since: Mar 12

Milwaukee

#186678 Apr 5, 2013
Big D wrote:
<quoted text>That is the entire issue

a word

A word they don’t own, as it relates to dozens of religions and no religion at all. They want to define that word not only for themselves but to force that word upon others not of their religion.

The word scares them to the core of their being.

The rights don’t concern them... it is the word itself that shakes them to their core.

These people are frightened to death over how someone might use that word.

It is really pathetic when you think about it.
It's pathetic that they are defending a word.
Big D

Modesto, CA

#186679 Apr 5, 2013
RiccardoFire wrote:
<quoted text>Doesn't it seem silly to your side? Marriage is between a man and a woman.
Not true in 11 states one district, and 17 nations ( I think, they are converting so fast it is hard to keep track )

12 states if you consider that California has 18,000 legally married same sex couples

More to follow
Big D

Modesto, CA

#186680 Apr 5, 2013
Jaredb8 wrote:
<quoted text>
Everyone against gay marriage says things about how it ruins the sanctity or how it will make theirs less meaningful. I'm pretty sure there are plenty of traditional marriages that would be considered a failure.
I know, they are desperately trying to preserve the sanctity of Britney Spears "just for fun" 3 day marriage.

My marriage is not a failure, come same sex marriage or not, I donít see any reason not to deny you the same rights, privileges, recognition and yes... the word... that my wife and I have.

18,000 same sex marriages in California didnít hurt my marriage at all, not sure why their marriages are so fragile that it would hurt theirs. Maybe they should be focused on why their own marriages are so fragile rather than worry about what others are doing.

Since: Mar 12

Milwaukee

#186681 Apr 5, 2013
RiccardoFire wrote:
<quoted text>Doesn't it seem silly to your side? Marriage is between a man and a woman.
Not at all. We want equality. Just as blacks had their own bathrooms, drinking fountains etc. yes they had their own bathrooms and water to drink but they also just wanted equality. Just as you want to say we can have civil unions we want marriage. It's the same principal. 40 years from now you will look just as stupid as those that were for their civil rights.

“Vita e' Bella.”

Since: May 12

Location hidden

#186682 Apr 5, 2013
Big D wrote:
<quoted text>
That is the entire issue
a word
A word they donít own, as it relates to dozens of religions and no religion at all. They want to define that word not only for themselves but to force that word upon others not of their religion.
The word scares them to the core of their being.
The rights donít concern them... it is the word itself that shakes them to their core.
These people are frightened to death over how someone might use that word.
It is really pathetic when you think about it.
Similar to the word "gay" which was understood, in common usage, to mean happy, carefree. Now its been highjacked to refer to homosexuality/homosexuals. The irony is that at one time a gay man was a womanizer. A gay woman a prostitute.

We've come a long way.

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.

Oroville Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
Laser treatment that tackles toenail fungus ava... (Jan '09) Dec 12 Gary Puntman 165
Police Shooting on April 28 / victim Victor Col... (May '14) Dec 6 Retired Law 2
School Closings: Port Huron, Marysville (Feb '08) Nov 25 hpallett 11
Men injured in Oroville shooting Nov 24 deborahughes 1
Oroville super Walmart project appeals consider... (Dec '10) Nov '14 mikmax 73
Historic Bridge Part of the Virginia Turnpike T... (Apr '14) Nov '14 American Gentlema... 2
Butte vows to defy unfunded mandates: Superviso... (Feb '09) Nov '14 backyard223 22
Oroville Dating
Find my Match
More from around the web

Oroville People Search

Addresses and phone numbers for FREE

Oroville News, Events & Info

Click for news, events and info in Oroville

Personal Finance

Mortgages [ See current mortgage rates ]

NFL Latest News

Updated 7:48 pm PST