Judge overturns California's ban on same-sex marriage

Aug 4, 2010 | Posted by: Topix | Full story: www.cnn.com

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.

Comments
177,241 - 177,260 of 200,590 Comments Last updated 4 hrs ago

“KiMare'a the Monster Mutation”

Since: Nov 10

Location hidden

#204561 Jul 25, 2013
Dusty Mangina wrote:
<quoted text>
Are you f'ing serious? At the very core of what you do here is judgment. You are the queen of Topix trolls, albeit a bad troll like R1. There's a special place in Hell for you and R1, GDK, and I can only hope that you'll enjoy your karma payback.
Troll on, Hunty.
Ah, another censored post...

At the core of my posts is simple statements of reality.

That is why you can only mount ad homoan troll attacks on me personally.

Here is a simple statement of reality. Your duplicate gendered relationship is fundamentally different from marriage.
Big D

Modesto, CA

#204562 Jul 25, 2013
KiMare wrote:
KiMare wrote:
<quoted text>Or here is my question to you. Does it matter how we define a relationship? Say when you tell the police you are the victim of an abusive relationship vs a friendship?
What matters is that you will not be defining others relationships.

Fact: same sex couples are married, as married as any other couple.

deal with it :)
Big D

Modesto, CA

#204563 Jul 25, 2013
KiMare wrote:
<quoted text>
Ah, another censored post...
At the core of my posts is simple statements of reality.
That is why you can only mount ad homoan troll attacks on me personally.
Here is a simple statement of reality. Your duplicate gendered relationship is fundamentally different from marriage.
have you yet stated the reality that same sex couples are married, or do you still have your eyes shut on that one
Big D

Modesto, CA

#204564 Jul 25, 2013
KiMare wrote:
KiMare wrote:
I find it hilarious that homosexuals keep talking about no 'requirement' for procreation.
Especially when marriage needs protection NOT to procreate, and gays need protection to HAVE sex!
LOL
<quoted text>
Read it again big dummy. Where did I say it ever was?
Why would you want to require something you need to protect from?
Dumb, dumb, dumb...
Good so you understand that procreation has no place whatsoever in a discussion about the ability to marry, and of course the courts have already agreed with me, it has no place.

I know a LOT of heterosexuals that use protection to keep from getting diseases, there is no such thing as a "gay disease" any sexually transmitted disease can affect any community

“KiMare'a the Monster Mutation”

Since: Nov 10

Location hidden

#204565 Jul 25, 2013
Big D wrote:
<quoted text>
Good so you understand that procreation has no place whatsoever in a discussion about the ability to marry, and of course the courts have already agreed with me, it has no place.
I know a LOT of heterosexuals that use protection to keep from getting diseases, there is no such thing as a "gay disease" any sexually transmitted disease can affect any community
You really are thick skulled

Why would you require procreation when you need to protect against it???

Nor was I talking about a gay disease. That is the result of not using protection to have gay sex. As one dr. said, "an anal condom and too much lub is almost enough."
Pietro Armando

Schenectady, NY

#204566 Jul 25, 2013
Big D wrote:
<quoted text>
Good so you understand that procreation has no place whatsoever in a discussion about the ability to marry, and of course the courts have already agreed with me, it has no place.
The institution of marriage as a union of man and woman, uniquely involving the procreation and rearing of children within a family, is as old as the book of Genesis.”– Baker v. Nelson (Minn. 971) 191 N.W.2d 185, 186, appeal dismissed for want of a substantial federal question, 409 U.S. 810 (1972)
Big D

Modesto, CA

#204567 Jul 25, 2013
Pietro Armando wrote:
<quoted text>
The institution of marriage as a union of man and woman, uniquely involving the procreation and rearing of children within a family, is as old as the book of Genesis.”– Baker v. Nelson (Minn. 971) 191 N.W.2d 185, 186, appeal dismissed for want of a substantial federal question, 409 U.S. 810 (1972)
Wrong

Many marriages do not involve procreation and they are just as married as those that do, no difference under US law.

And your little religious book is not US law

Same Sex Marriage is recognized legally on the state and federal level in California and in a growing number of states

You lost
missy wang

Sonoma, CA

#204568 Jul 25, 2013
the congressman has proposed doing away with the communist ideal of the minimum wage. he states that this stalinist nonsense is causing businesses to fail, new businesses wont start, people are in the streets, no items are being sold and their is unrest in the families and abortions everywhere. Now, if he is right, then we must accept this and do away with the minimum wage and then all things will be all right again just like they were in 1954. He says that he will compromise and allow a base line wage suggestion of $2.25 an hour anbd that is enough to live on. Businesses will thrive if we implement this and do away with the stalinist unions, medicare and socialist security and insane ideas that folks should be given free money when they quit working for whatever made up reason of age or fake sickness or laziness. he said his granpa lived to 94 and worked all his life...so there. Join us in the TEAPARTY to make this happen and stop all this hollering about queers and licenses. Golllleeee!

“KiMare'a the Monster Mutation”

Since: Nov 10

Location hidden

#204569 Jul 25, 2013
Big D wrote:
<quoted text>
Wrong
Many marriages do not involve procreation and they are just as married as those that do, no difference under US law.
And your little religious book is not US law
Same Sex Marriage is recognized legally on the state and federal level in California and in a growing number of states
You lost
SS marriage is an oxymoron.
Big D

Modesto, CA

#204570 Jul 25, 2013
You said 1. "I'm not trying to understand a ss relationship."

We all clearly see that you have no desire to understand anything

You said 2. "I'm not trying to change anyone's personal description of their relationship."

And it would not matter if you tried to anyway you aren’t that important.

You said 3. "I'm not judging anyone's personal relationships."

That is all you have done, and you are in no position to judge anything, people who are in a position to judge have supported same sex couples to marry on the state and federal level.

You said: "I simply and accurately noted the reality of a core distinction between ss couples and marriage."

The core description is a legal one, under state and federal law, same sex couples are indeed married. Your personal fantasy that you try to call reality has no bearing whatsoever
Big D

Modesto, CA

#204571 Jul 25, 2013
KiMare wrote:
<quoted text>
SS marriage is an oxymoron.
No it is law, recognized on both the state and federal level. That is a fact.

Your opinion carries no weight.
Amy

Fullerton, CA

#204572 Jul 25, 2013
KiMare wrote:
<quoted text>
SS marriage is an oxymoron.
Your logic is a oxymoron...

“KiMare'a the Monster Mutation”

Since: Nov 10

Location hidden

#204573 Jul 25, 2013
Big D wrote:
You said 1. "I'm not trying to understand a ss relationship."
We all clearly see that you have no desire to understand anything
You said 2. "I'm not trying to change anyone's personal description of their relationship."
And it would not matter if you tried to anyway you aren’t that important.
You said 3. "I'm not judging anyone's personal relationships."
That is all you have done, and you are in no position to judge anything, people who are in a position to judge have supported same sex couples to marry on the state and federal level.
You said: "I simply and accurately noted the reality of a core distinction between ss couples and marriage."
The core description is a legal one, under state and federal law, same sex couples are indeed married. Your personal fantasy that you try to call reality has no bearing whatsoever
Of reality has no bearing on s bad ruling, why does it bother homosexuals so much when I point reality out?

“"ENOUGH"”

Since: Jul 13

Location hidden

#204574 Jul 25, 2013
Pietro Armando wrote:
<quoted text>
The institution of marriage as a union of man and woman, uniquely involving the procreation and rearing of children within a family, is as old as the book of Genesis.”– Baker v. Nelson (Minn. 971) 191 N.W.2d 185, 186, appeal dismissed for want of a substantial federal question, 409 U.S. 810 (1972)
Sorry but I'd have to say when Minnesota passed their marriage equality law that kind of shot this decision in the foot and made it moot. Care to try again?

“KiMare'a the Monster Mutation”

Since: Nov 10

Location hidden

#204575 Jul 25, 2013
Big D wrote:
<quoted text>
No it is law, recognized on both the state and federal level. That is a fact.
Your opinion carries no weight.
The fact that SS relationships are a mating behavior defect is no opinion.

SS relationships are literally 'unmarriage'.

Judged:

10

10

10

Reply »
Report Abuse Judge it!
Big D

Modesto, CA

#204576 Jul 25, 2013
KiMare wrote:
<quoted text>
The fact that SS relationships are a mating behavior defect is no opinion.
SS relationships are literally 'unmarriage'.
There is no "mating behavior" stipulated on a marriage license

Your opinions don’t matter.

There is a fact however, that same sex couples are legally married and recognized on the state and federal level, recognized exactly the same as any other marriage.
Big D

Modesto, CA

#204577 Jul 25, 2013
KiMare wrote:
<quoted text>
Of reality has no bearing on s bad ruling, why does it bother homosexuals so much when I point reality out?
You don’t understand reality.

There is a fact however that you cannot avoid. Same sex marriages are the same under California and federal law as marriage, not treated or viewed any differently than any other marriage.

“Vita e' Bella.”

Since: May 12

Location hidden

#204578 Jul 25, 2013
BASTA wrote:
<quoted text>
Sorry but I'd have to say when Minnesota passed their marriage equality law that kind of shot this decision in the foot and made it moot. Care to try again?
The point is there are numerous court cases proving the link between marriage and procreation, of marriage as the expected societal setting for procreation. Minnesota passed a law ending marriage conjugality, not "marriage equality".
Gustavo

San Pedro, CA

#204579 Jul 25, 2013
No more SSM, stop this insanity

“Vita e' Bella.”

Since: May 12

Location hidden

#204580 Jul 25, 2013
Big D wrote:
<quoted text>
Wrong
Not according to that court.
Many marriages do not involve procreation and they are just as married as those that do, no difference under US law.
Marriage itself, not individual marriages, but u know this.
And your little religious book is not US law
Same Sex Marriage is recognized legally on the state and federal level in California and in a growing number of states
Yet that "....little religious book...."was cited by a judge in a legal decision. Thirty plus states say conjugal marriage only.
You lost
The battle is still being fought.

Tell me when this thread is updated: (Registration is not required)

Add to my Tracker Send me an email

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
CA California seeks to ban free, single-use carryo... (Jun '10) 40 min anonatall 5,005
CA California Proposition 19: the Marijuana Legali... (Oct '10) 7 hr lazy posts 15,963
CA CA Proposition 23 - Global Warming (Oct '10) Thu Tank ever 7,926
Anyone see Marvin Markle lose his sh*t yesterday? (Feb '12) Aug 24 jram1970 88
Recent reports of bodies found/murders in Orovi... Aug 19 Justsaying 1
Review: VALLEY HOME CENTERS Aug 16 Scott Alexander 1
Review: Oroville Tacos Aug 9 Steve M 1
•••
•••
•••

Oroville Jobs

•••
Enter and win $5000
•••
•••

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 ]
•••