Judge overturns California's ban on s...

Judge overturns California's ban on same-sex marriage

There are 201862 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.

Big D

Modesto, CA

#205606 Jul 29, 2013
KiMare wrote:
<quoted text>
Even if your assessment were true, you lie.
If you really believed that, you would be the first in line to acquiesce.
You are pretending brave and playing dumb.
You know, you really have to question the motives of an "all powerful being" who creates people, and then demands they worship him or he will torture them

Think about it

That is one insecure little childish god

Of course we know the truth, he is a threat, used to control the behavior of people, that is what your whole religion is about

Monrovia, CA

#205607 Jul 29, 2013
Where did I leave that necklace of garlic?

“KiMare'a the Monster Mutation”

Since: Nov 10

Location hidden

#205608 Jul 29, 2013
Big D wrote:
<quoted text>
No I am not kidding, if you proved beyond all doubt that the evil thing you worship actually was a god, I would not worship that evil thing
Big dummy, how long do you think you'd last if a MAN even started to torture you?

If you even had an inkling that a supreme monster would torture you for all eternity, you don't think your 'courage' camouflages supreme stupidity?

However, simple logic and justice says that if a scientist can create life in a lab and dispose as he chooses, certainly a Supreme Being has the right.

But the curve ball is that you have a choice to be present or not.

Moreover, you judge Him as horrible because you have experienced the goodness of His minor creation and think He falls short regarding His major creation.

You've thought this through as poorly as you have equating ss couples with marriage...
Rocky Hudsony

Wooster, OH

#205609 Jul 29, 2013
Randy Hudson wrote:
<quoted text>
Can you name another instance in US history where a popular vote was used to deny rights to others? What if the good people of Ohio decided to deny internet access to people with the surname Hudson?
Rights are rights and you don't get to vote to deny them.
Rights are defined in the Constitution. SSM rights were not mentioned..

Faribault, MN

#205610 Jul 29, 2013
Rocky Hudsony wrote:
<quoted text>
Rights are defined in the Constitution. SSM rights were not mentioned..
So?? But freedom and equality are.
Rocky Hudsony

Wooster, OH

#205611 Jul 29, 2013
veryvermilion wrote:
Can you imagine if heterosexual marriages were called before the courts and scrutinized the way same-sex marriages have been?
Can you imagine a group of couples who have had abortions, extramarital affairs, multiple divorces, dead-beat dads, etc. having to try to argue why it is that heterosexuals should have the right to marry?
The state could show statistics about how unstable heterosexual marriages have become over the past few decades. They could ask courts to either eliminate states supported heterosexual marriages or they could argue for severe restrictions on heterosexual marriages; making potential couples go through a series of medical and psychiatric tests, just to make sure that couples are truly worthy of marriage.
That's what gays have had to do. We have been scrutinized and had our personal lives investigated at every step of the way in the fight to obtain the right to marry.
And while many straight couples would qualify for marriage after being thoroughly tested; many would not qualify. They would be banned from marriage.
I'm just trying to point out the ridiculousness of the arguments that Kim keeps making, especially the argument that only couples who have the ability or potential to procreate should be allowed to marry.
If he and others are going to so narrowly define marriage for gays, then they need to narrowly define it for themselves. They need to put structures in place that would reduce domestic violence, abortion, child abuse/neglect, parental abandonment, divorce, adultery, etc. BEFORE a heterosexual couple could marry.
What's good for the chimera goose is good for the devastatingly gorgeous gander.
There's nothing wrong with KiMares arguments. The right to marry belongs with the normal people. Not with the SSSB crowd. You couldn't possibly have realized how weak this post is, else, you'd not have posted it.
And, I'm still laughing about the "prolapsed rectu....." I mean, really.. That was rich.
It's not called a "prolapsed rectum", it's called a "blow-out". It is clear, incontrovertible, fundamental, undeniable proof that what you hohos engage in is unnatural, and not meant to be performed. Even oral sex is more natural. When was the last time that you gave someone a "prolapsed esophagus"?
I mean, come on now, are you pulling my le...Are you giving me a "prolapsed leg"? Seriously...? "Prolapse" the other leg, it's the one with the bell on it... Did you "prolapse" that one out of your a$$?
Rocky Hudsony

Wooster, OH

#205612 Jul 29, 2013
veryvermilion wrote:
<quoted text>
No, dear, you missed my point...
If heterosexual marriages were scrutinized to the same degree that homosexual marriages have been, then many heterosexual marriages simply would not meet the "standard" that so many of the people in here say must be met in order to qualify for marriage.
Do you se what I'm saying?
Yeah. You're saying that "prolapsing" your buddy is to be allowed, because of some failures on our side.
Rocky Hudsony

Wooster, OH

#205613 Jul 29, 2013
veryvermilion wrote:
Major announcement from the Vatican...
"Pope Francis reached out to gays, saying he won't judge priests for their sexual orientation in a remarkably open and wide-ranging news conference Monday as he returned from his first foreign trip.
'If someone is gay and he searches for the Lord and has good will, who am I to judge?' Francis asked.'We shouldn't marginalize people for this. They must be integrated into society'."
Is he corrupting religion further, in order to sanction the gay ones, the pedophiliac ones, or is he even making a distinction?
I'll bet that he's trying to "prolapse" people into the church...
Rocky Hudsony

Wooster, OH

#205614 Jul 29, 2013
veryvermilion wrote:
Cute joke I read today...
12 priests were about to be ordained. The final test was for them to line up in a straight row, totally nude in a garden while a sexy and beautiful, big-breasted, nude model danced before them.
Each priest had a small bell attached to his penis and they were told that anyone whose bell rang when she danced in front of them would not be ordained because he had not reached a state of spiritual purity.
The beautiful model danced before the first candidate, with no reaction.
She proceeded down the line with the same response from all the priests until she got to the final priest, Carlos.
As she danced, his bell began to ring so loudly that it flew off and fell clattering to the ground. Embarrassed, Carlos took a few steps forward, and bent over to pick it up.
Then, all the other bells started to ring, and all hell broke loose....
That's a good joke. I like that one!
Rocky Hudsony

Wooster, OH

#205615 Jul 29, 2013
veryvermilion wrote:
<quoted text>
Oh, maybe the mockery will continue. You know, I say to Kim and Rock that we'll make better marriages simply to annoy them.
They take such great delight in telling us that our marriages don't count.
It annoys me that they do this, so I feel that turn-about is fair play.
Nevertheless, I will stand by my comment that heterosexual marriages could not stand the level of study and scrutiny that has been heaped on same-sex marriages for the past several years.
If people looked at heterosexual marriage the way they've judged and picked apart gay relationships, there's not a doubt in my mind that they couldn't pass muster.
Seriously... If they're going to look at every single aspect of same-sex marriage and demand that we aren't fit, then their marriages should be just as closely inspected.
So, if they're going to continue to insist that only certain people should be allowed to marry, then I'm going to suggest that probing investigations be done on couples who wish to marry. They should be evaluated for potential adultery problems, divorce likelihood, anger management issues (to stem any abuse problems), etc.
And only after they've passed these rigorous tests should they be issued a license to marry.
That way, people like Kimare Kardashian, could be certain that only the cream of the crop are allowed to marry.
We'd probably be a LOT better off....
Rocky Hudsony

Wooster, OH

#205616 Jul 29, 2013
laughing man wrote:
What's all this hoho talk of "filthy people"?
At least there's no foreign fecal matter mixed with Crisco on MY pee-pee.
...What a picture....
Rocky Hudsony

Wooster, OH

#205617 Jul 29, 2013
Tellit wrote:
Pope Francis has said gay people should not be marginalized but integrated into society, in some of the most conciliatory remarks by a pontiff on the issue of homosexuality and he's the Boss.
Actually, he's a servant. Many forget this.
Rocky Hudsony

Wooster, OH

#205618 Jul 29, 2013
Huh wrote:
They cannot....Pethky little Conthtitutional detailth...
Rocky Hudsony

Wooster, OH

#205619 Jul 29, 2013
veryvermilion wrote:
<quoted text>
Frankie rolled to a bar, but wasn't able to enter because there were no ramps.
He hired an attorney to sue the bar's owner. They were able to reach an agreement where Frankie received a lump sum of $150,000.
Frankie spent part of his money on a "Coca-Cola red" top of the line "Jazzy" scooter with a reclining, gel cushioned seat.
His friends and family are hopeful that Frankie's new "Jazzy" will inspire him to get out of the house and away from his fookin computer; you know the one, where he makes 15 comments every half hour.
I'm so glad this story has a happy ending.
Yeah, at least he wasn't gonna get told to "get the hell out"...
Rocky Hudsony

Wooster, OH

#205620 Jul 29, 2013
veryvermilion wrote:
<quoted text>
If it doesn't annoy you, then why do you come here and argue?
You know what's really an oxymoron? A judgmental Christian pastor...
I smell a mood swing coming on...
Gone from telling jokes to this...
I'll bet that the local pawn shop has your next monitor ready...

Faribault, MN

#205621 Jul 29, 2013
Rocky Hudsony wrote:
<quoted text>
They cannot....Pethky little Conthtitutional detailth...
Yes they can. BECAUSE OF THE CONSTITUTION.....Civil rights cant be stomped on by bigoted states...
Rocky Hudsony

Wooster, OH

#205622 Jul 29, 2013
Frankie Rizzo wrote:
<quoted text>
Dopey ad hominem.
The dopiest....
Rocky Hudsony

Wooster, OH

#205623 Jul 29, 2013
Big D wrote:
<quoted text>
You have yet to even once accepted reality
Same sex couple are married, legally, and recognized on both the state and federal level.
Not in all states. Only in a minority. And let's all hope it stays that way...
Rocky Hudsony

Wooster, OH

#205624 Jul 29, 2013
Pietro Armando wrote:
<quoted text>
The qualifications are simple. The parties must be of age, able to consent, not closely related by blood, not currently married, and of the opposite sex. You're operating from the position that personal same sex intimate sexual relationships are marriage, and are considered as such by a broad consensus. Thirty state bans say other wise.
Excellent post, sir.
Rocky Hudsony

Wooster, OH

#205625 Jul 29, 2013
Big D wrote:
<quoted text>
But coming, more every year... National recognition was a very big step.
More and more large companies are piling on, they no longer want offices in states where their employees marriages are not recognized.
The pressure is on in every direction
Politically now that a majority of voters favor same sex marriage, the speed will escalate
Not everyone wants to work for Chick a Fill
Big D lie #....Well, I've lost track. NOT "National recognition" at all. Recognized in a few. Your company playbook has you going off the deep end.
"More and more large companies are piling on" in spite of the fact that they have NO business engaing in politics and tiiping the scales through the manipulation of jobs and money. they are not in existence to control national policy.
"The pressure is on in every direction" from corporate entities that have no place doing so.
"a majority of voters favor same sex marriage" is a LIE! I have told you, you liar, that I can disporve what your little black book tells you to say. Why won't you answer my challenge? You know that you are lying and depending upon propagandist trollsites to further your lies. It is why you ignore my offer. Never once have you even addressed my offer. Even acknowledged it. We both know that you lie.

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 'Sleeves Bandit' is caught in Northern California (Apr '09) Fri Griswold 7
News Randy Barrett becomes Oroville's new postmaster (Jan '09) Aug 26 Paycheck 9
News County behavioral health budget cuts mean loss ... (Jun '08) Aug 13 deltawave 7
News Spread of fire in Palermo stopped; barn, severa... Aug 12 Mary 1
News Leslie Bond sentenced to life in prison (Jul '10) Aug 8 ImThe1UAllLove2Ha... 15
here fron bakersfield looking to meet single girls Aug 5 Alonzo Ledbetter 2
News News of our Past: Lake Brown was possible name ... Jul '15 RiccardoFire 8
More from around the web

Personal Finance

Oroville Mortgages