Judge overturns California's ban on s...

Judge overturns California's ban on same-sex marriage

There are 201803 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.

“KiMare'a the Monster Mutation”

Since: Nov 10

Location hidden

#193689 May 29, 2013
Tony C wrote:
<quoted text>
Smart people aren't threatened by such nonsense.
My husband and I are both called "husband." Neither of us are confused by that.
When kids have two Dads, they often differentiate (for the sake of being practical) much the same way they differentiate between what they call their Grandfathers, i.e. calling one "Dad" and the other "Pop," for example. Nobody is confused by that, either.
Raise your standards.
Duplicate husbands? An oxymoron.

Kids don't have two dads. Never. One may be the dad, but the other is always a default.

You aren't asking me to raise my standards, you are asking me to be stupid.
Big D

Modesto, CA

#193690 May 29, 2013
Bruno wrote:
If SSM is so important, then why don't gays go to the states that have fallen under presure and get married. Just get is done and quit crying about it.
Because this is the land of the free, and we will see equality and justice from one end of it to the other.

200 major businesses have petitioned the supreme court calling the overturn of Prop 8 a business imperative, they are having difficulty moving the best employees from state to state deepening on the laws in that state with respect to their employees marriages and benefits.

This will happen, you can sit back and enjoy the ride.

It will take some time, but it will happen.

“Vita e' Bella.”

Since: May 12

Location hidden

#193691 May 29, 2013
Big D wrote:
<quoted text>
They have nothing left to attack same sex marriage with, so you will see them making leaps in every direction out of pure desperation.
Even over tall buildings in a single bound like you Big D.

“Vita e' Bella.”

Since: May 12

Location hidden

#193692 May 29, 2013
veryvermilion wrote:
<quoted text>
Here... Let me post what U.S. Solicitor General, Ted Olsen, said to Justice Sotomayor.
"[P]olygamy raises questions about exploitation, abuse, patriarchy, issues with respect to taxes, inheritance, child custody ó it is an entirely different thing."
"If a state prohibits polygamy," he said, "itís prohibiting conduct. If it prohibits gay and lesbian citizens from getting married, it is prohibiting their exercise of a right based upon their status."
I think he sums it up nicely...
Did it? Mr. Olsen stated that polygamy "raises questions....". He also ignored the fact that polygamy is also prohibited based on status, religion. Gay and lesbians aren't prohibited from getting married, they are prohibited from marrying someone of the same sex. As to the question:

"If you say that marriage is a fundamental right, what state restrictions could ever exist?" Sotomayor asked before referencing polygamy and incest among adults.

What is the answer? If they all consenting adults, and marriage is a fundamental right, what state restrictions could ever exist?

“Vita e' Bella.”

Since: May 12

Location hidden

#193693 May 29, 2013
Big D wrote:
<quoted text>
Because this is the land of the free, and we will see equality and justice from one end of it to the other.
200 major businesses have petitioned the supreme court calling the overturn of Prop 8 a business imperative, they are having difficulty moving the best employees from state to state deepening on the laws in that state with respect to their employees marriages and benefits.
This will happen, you can sit back and enjoy the ride.
It will take some time, but it will happen.
Oh by gosh by golly, freedom for all, including polygamists. That too will happen sit back and enjoy the ride.
Big D

Modesto, CA

#193694 May 29, 2013
Pietro Armando wrote:
<quoted text>
Oh by gosh by golly, freedom for all, including polygamists. That too will happen sit back and enjoy the ride.
I will vote in favor of it when it comes up, think of it as a jobs program, can you imagine a divorce of one person out of the marriage?

Full employment for our Lawyers!

Seriously though, I donít see a reason not to vote in favor of it.

“Building Better Worlds”

Since: May 13

Europa

#193695 May 29, 2013
We'll know what SCOTUS decides, (if they decide to decide), in less than 30 days.
Strats

San Dimas, CA

#193696 May 29, 2013
Wednesday May 29, 2013 Leave it to New York to mess things up, again.

Part-time workers at the city's Parks Department stripped and pole-danced at agency holiday parties in exchange for permanent jobs.

Several female staffers allege routine sexual harassment by their supervisors, according to complaints and texts under review by city investigators.

Like that's going to make a difference, the investigators were probably in on it from the beginning.
Big D

Modesto, CA

#193697 May 29, 2013
Europa Report wrote:
We'll know what SCOTUS decides,(if they decide to decide), in less than 30 days.
The SCOUTS decision while interesting, I doubt will be earth shattering. And in the long run, will not affect to momentum.

Section 3 of DOMA is dead meat, I donít think anyone with any intellectual capacity at all will refute that. Even the conservative justices where asking some pretty negative questions about the validity of section 3

As for the rest

DOMA section 2 will likely stand, meaning states will not be forced to recognize marriages preformed in other states. But section 3 going down will mean federal recognition of same sex marriages, that in itself is a huge victory.

More likely however is for the SCOTS to just toss Prop 8 back to the state, Dismissed as improvidently granted is the term I think. Ruling that the supporters of Prop 8 have no standing as they are NOT the government and can show no harm whatsoever from the overturn of Prop 8 ( always a critical flaw in their case )

If it gets tossed back to the state, the state judicial system has already overturned Prop 8 in court and appellate court, the stay will be lifted and same sex marriages will once again occur in California.

Even the worst case scenario, they uphold Prop 8, it will fall in the next election cycle anyway.

The SCOTUS ruling is interesting, and may be a faster track, but no matter which way they rule, the momentum will continue to recognize same sex marriages.

“equality for ALL means ALL”

Since: Jan 07

Fort Lauderdale FL

#193698 May 29, 2013
Big D wrote:
<quoted text>
Oh yeah, they say they hate big government, but support a government that steps into your private life, trying to tell my daughters that the government gets to control their bodies, their own reproductive systems. Or one that tells you who you can marry and who you cant.
They call themselves conservatives, but I have never figured out exactly what it is they conserve, it isnít the environment, certainly not our nations finances, certainly not our nations values of freedom, justice and equality.
They conserve (or preserve) the status quo.

The are afraid...of just about everything - new, different, etc.

The label of "conservative" is a misnomer.

I believe it has a lot to do with personality type. Some people are just followers, and are afraid unless they have a majority or mob to back them up. Those are "conservatives." Other people live life, aren't afraid to be the only one in the room who is doing/saying/thinking/wearing something, and aren't afraid of change. Those are "normal." LOL

“equality for ALL means ALL”

Since: Jan 07

Fort Lauderdale FL

#193699 May 29, 2013
KiMare wrote:
<quoted text>
I think you have a fairly accurate view of society. What you are missing is the importance of each point. Children are the future of our culture. We are severely undermining their potential by these acts. There is no better place most often to raise children than in an intact family.
No, we undermine childrens' potential by teaching them bigotry.

While it may (or may not) be the "ideal" for a child to be raised in an intact (mom/dad) family, we do not prohibit other families from existing, and many, MANY children from single parent households and gay parent households will outperform and be better adjusted than many children from more traditional households, and especially more than the effed up step-family situations.
Adam Mosh

Sunnyvale, CA

#193700 May 29, 2013
Tony C wrote:
<quoted text>
You're a twit.
It's not about "the news" and there is no economic scenario that will affect my life more than simple legal recognition of my already existing marriage.
OK. People are just more dumb than I imagined.

I mean, really, you think whether the government recognizes gay marriage or not effects your life more directly than say, the fact that the government takes in a tax revenue of 16 dollars for every $100 it owes and borrows 40 dollars for every 100 it spends.

It doesn't seem like there's any point in reasoning with you. That ability to seems to be broken.

I've seen 2 nations go bankrupt in my lifetime through direct experience. The USSR and Argentina. I guess we'll just have to suffer through it too.
Big D

Modesto, CA

#193701 May 29, 2013
Tony C wrote:
<quoted text>
They conserve (or preserve) the status quo.
The are afraid...of just about everything - new, different, etc.
The label of "conservative" is a misnomer.
I believe it has a lot to do with personality type. Some people are just followers, and are afraid unless they have a majority or mob to back them up. Those are "conservatives." Other people live life, aren't afraid to be the only one in the room who is doing/saying/thinking/wearing something, and aren't afraid of change. Those are "normal." LOL
I love to remind them of our nationís founding, by extreme, even radical liberals of their day

“equality for ALL means ALL”

Since: Jan 07

Fort Lauderdale FL

#193702 May 29, 2013
KiMare wrote:
<quoted text>
Duplicate husbands? An oxymoron.
Kids don't have two dads. Never. One may be the dad, but the other is always a default.
You aren't asking me to raise my standards, you are asking me to be stupid.
No, you already are stupid, and you clearly don't understand the proper use of the word 'oxymoron.'

Kids don't have two biological dads. But some kids are raised by two dads, and many kids have a dad and a stepdad (and call them both "dad" or again, two different names meaning dad.)

This isn't hard for the kids to understand, yet you seem to have a big hangup about it.

Whether you choose to acknowledge the reality in front of your face or to continue to delude yourself, the fact is gay couples do and will always raise children, and they have just as good a shot at raising great ones.

So, once again, my husband and I are each husbands. Deal with it.
Frankie Rizzo

Hayward, CA

#193703 May 29, 2013
Big D wrote:
<quoted text>
I will vote in favor of it when it comes up, think of it as a jobs program, can you imagine a divorce of one person out of the marriage?
Full employment for our Lawyers!
Seriously though, I donít see a reason not to vote in favor of it.
Of course you should (but won't) thank Frankie for your new tolerance and acceptance. It wasn't long ago you referred to polygamists as "welfare cheats and child rapists using polygamy to commit their crimes." You've come a long way baby!
laughing man

Tempe, AZ

#193704 May 29, 2013
Big D wrote:
<quoted text>
I love to remind them of our nationís founding, by extreme, even radical liberals of their day
Tell us, Caligula, what they might think of your bread and circus "pride" parade or Folsom Street or bug chasers.
Frankie Rizzo

Hayward, CA

#193705 May 29, 2013
Adam Mosh wrote:
<quoted text>
OK. People are just more dumb than I imagined.
I mean, really, you think whether the government recognizes gay marriage or not effects your life more directly than say, the fact that the government takes in a tax revenue of 16 dollars for every $100 it owes and borrows 40 dollars for every 100 it spends.
It doesn't seem like there's any point in reasoning with you. That ability to seems to be broken.
I've seen 2 nations go bankrupt in my lifetime through direct experience. The USSR and Argentina. I guess we'll just have to suffer through it too.
Yes. Gay marriage kinda loses its importance when you're starving or dead.
Big D

Modesto, CA

#193706 May 29, 2013
Tony C wrote:
<quoted text>
No, we undermine childrens' potential by teaching them bigotry..
That is why we no longer allow any religion in the classroom.
Children are resilient, and even children of ignorant parents ( all prejudice is ignorance by definition ) will come to a time where they realize their parents are wrong.
But we will not teach bigotry from a position of governmental authority like a teacher.
Frankie Rizzo

Hayward, CA

#193707 May 29, 2013
Tony C wrote:
<quoted text>
No, you already are stupid, and you clearly don't understand the proper use of the word 'oxymoron.'
Kids don't have two biological dads. But some kids are raised by two dads, and many kids have a dad and a stepdad (and call them both "dad" or again, two different names meaning dad.)
This isn't hard for the kids to understand, yet you seem to have a big hangup about it.
Whether you choose to acknowledge the reality in front of your face or to continue to delude yourself, the fact is gay couples do and will always raise children, and they have just as good a shot at raising great ones.
So, once again, my husband and I are each husbands. Deal with it.
You should take your own advice for it is good advice- Deal with it.

Since: Dec 09

Knoxville, TN

#193708 May 29, 2013
KiMare wrote:
<quoted text>
I think you have a fairly accurate view of society. What you are missing is the importance of each point. Children are the future of our culture. We are severely undermining their potential by these acts. There is no better place most often to raise children than in an intact family.
When gay marriage is legal in the U.S., there will still be intact families to raise children.

And, since 1993, gay people have been able to adopt children in the U.S. That was before gay marriage was legal anywhere in the country. So regardless of what happens to gay marriage, gay people will continue to be able to adopt children in this country.

Put a period at the end of this chapter and move on...

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
News A a safea space to shoot up: Worth a try in Cal... (Jun '17) Feb 4 Solarman 8
Homeless people in oroville (Dec '15) Feb 3 Tabbylife 2
a family friend Tilley Jan 23 Madonna 1
News Alleged Oroville intruder critical after being ... Jan 19 JanW 1
News Arrest made in Chico homicide (Jan '10) Jan 18 jyhungin 38
News Six teens arrested for homicide, robbery in hom... (Feb '10) Jan '18 jason 79
News San Jose mother's rage focused on PG&E (Jun '10) Jan '18 lisa b 4

Oroville Jobs

More from around the web

Personal Finance

Oroville Mortgages