Judge overturns California's ban on same-sex marriage

Aug 4, 2010 Full story: www.cnn.com 201,038

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

“Vita e' Bella.”

Since: May 12

Location hidden

#205590 Jul 29, 2013
Big D wrote:
<quoted text>
So have I, around the world more than once and very well read
I am also devoted to live and marriage and family, unlike you I do not belittle other families and marriages that are different than my own.
Except for plural marriages.
I am willing to wager I have studied religions more extensively than you have, many different religions, not just the particular sect you belong to
Then you would recognize plural marriage/polygamy is recognized by many religions around the world.
I am not a man of faith, that has become a dirty word and nothing but an excuse for the kind of hatred and spite that you display here every day.
So you use secularism as your excuse for the kind of hatred and spite you display here.
You obviously know nothing of marriage whatsoever, you have proven that repeatedly here.
Same sex marriages do indeed exist, and are recognized on the state and federal level regardless of your closing your eyes to the fact.
Plural marriages do exist, and in more cultures and times than SSM. Even in this country, albeit without legal recognition, and in some places subject to criminal sanction. Yet you ignore the very reality of plural marriage families, as though they are not worthy of your respect, due in part for,your hatred of all things religious.No SIR, it is YOU, who knows nothing about marriage. You treat SSM as a secular sacred cow, and belittle those who would dare oppose such a fundamental social change, as if the only opposition could be borne of "bigotry". A "bigotry" that only you and others who share such a view are allowed to define. I suggest you examine your true motivations for belittling individuals who object to the rejection of conjugal marriage in several states, and the efforts by some to extend that rejection nationwide.

“Vita e' Bella.”

Since: May 12

Location hidden

#205591 Jul 29, 2013
Big D wrote:
<quoted text>
Oh you used the word sterile again, I should remind you that the ability to have children has not kept us from issuing marriage licenses through our entire history, it has never ever been even a consideration.
You lose again :)
Nor does it need to be. I should remind you SIR, that marriage, the legally recognized union of husband and wife is just that. A union of both sexes. Recognition of marriage contains within it, the understanding of marriage as a sexual union, one that can and does, create new life. Are you not familiar with such terms as"consummation", "marital relations", and "presumption of paternity" , words that reference the male female sexual union?

No SIR the nation loses when we reject the understanding of marriage as a monogamous conjugal union. Where is the line drawn? Are you willing to accept other alternative forms of marriage, such as plural marriage, which is far older and has been, and is, practiced in far more times and places than SSM, in the name of Orwellian "marriage equality"?
Cowboy Dan

Sacramento, CA

#205594 Jul 29, 2013
Big D wrote:
<quoted text>
I question the faith of any Christian that stands in judgment of others.
we'll i agree Big D, those m'fer's should stay in the closet unless they are asked to talk! Only the atheist should stand in judgement since we born that ol way. Even the pope said gay is not his judgement. That Frankie comes on here all day and just posts after posts!
Tommy Tucker

San Francisco, CA

#205595 Jul 29, 2013
Let Obama Boo Boo ram his love up your ram hole.
Big D

Modesto, CA

#205596 Jul 29, 2013
Cowboy Dan wrote:
<quoted text>we'll i agree Big D, those m'fer's should stay in the closet unless they are asked to talk! Only the atheist should stand in judgement since we born that ol way. Even the pope said gay is not his judgement. That Frankie comes on here all day and just posts after posts!
First off, I am straight, secondly, I am not afraid of any judgment.

If some evil toad sits on a throne and proclaims "worship me or I will torture you" I would rather be tortured than worship such an evil thing, I don't negotiate with terrorists

“Vita e' Bella.”

Since: May 12

Location hidden

#205597 Jul 29, 2013
http://www.reveal.co.uk/real-life-stories/new...

The girl with seven mums! Meet Britain's only open polygamous family
Published Tuesday, Jun 18 2013, 18:30 BST | By Sarah Whiteley |

Philip Sharp, also known as 'the rampant rabbi', lives with his seven wives and 19 children and is the head of Britain's only open polygamous family.

Ellie, his 10-year-old daughter, takes centre stage in Channel 5's documentary The Girl With 7 Mums, which follows this unusual family set-up, in which she states: "I couldn't bear not living with all my mummies."

Because polygamy is illegal in Britain, Philip isn't actually married to any of his wives but they all wear rings and have taken on his surname after he had what he terms a calling.

"God revealed things to me. He spoke to me as if I were a king."

He was already with one lady, Judith, 53, but then went onto start other relationships with Vreni, 41, Hannah, 54, Chava, 67, Margo, 42, Karyn, 32 and Tracey, 45 - all of whom he knew through the synagogue where he was a rabbi.

The seven women share his bed and Judith admits that at the start, it was difficult to establish ground rules: "There was a lot of jealousy and we argued constantly."

But Ellie seems to be perfectly comfortable with the living arrangement. She has nicknames for her mums, calling Judith "Everything Mum", Karyn "Fun Mum" and Margo "Yard Mum".

She even says: "I've told my dad that in my future I wouldn't mind having a man with seven wives. I've grown up like that."

But it seems that not everyone is as happy with the situation as, at the start of the programme, Tracey has already left and Karyn has left him after filming.
Cowboy Dan

Sacramento, CA

#205598 Jul 29, 2013
Big D wrote:
<quoted text>
First off, I am straight, secondly, I am not afraid of any judgment.
If some evil toad sits on a throne and proclaims "worship me or I will torture you" I would rather be tortured than worship such an evil thing, I don't negotiate with terrorists
you m'fered told them Big D, we agee on that one big guy. I'd rather burn in hell too Big D, they should put them all in that porison.
Huh

Faribault, MN

#205599 Jul 29, 2013
Big D wrote:
<quoted text>
First off, I am straight, secondly, I am not afraid of any judgment.
If some evil toad sits on a throne and proclaims "worship me or I will torture you" I would rather be tortured than worship such an evil thing, I don't negotiate with terrorists
AWESOME POST.....What kind of so called good god say so as I say or fry....Sounds like an evil god to me.
Cowboy Dan

Sacramento, CA

#205600 Jul 29, 2013
Tommy Tucker wrote:
Let Obama Boo Boo ram his love up your ram hole.
you shut yoiur trap yoiu son of sam, he's the best president and is very honest over that bushy you had!

“KiMare'a the Monster Mutation”

Since: Nov 10

Location hidden

#205602 Jul 29, 2013
Big D wrote:
<quoted text>
First off, I am straight, secondly, I am not afraid of any judgment.
If some evil toad sits on a throne and proclaims "worship me or I will torture you" I would rather be tortured than worship such an evil thing, I don't negotiate with terrorists
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.
Cowboy Dan

Sacramento, CA

#205603 Jul 29, 2013
John Marteny wrote:
Today, homosexuality.
Tomorrow, pedophilia.
We'll take our victories in small numbers.
hey you big m'fer shut up! As long as it don[t hurt you, why do you care? My kids used to stop fighting real faast when i told them they might be going to the neverland ranch.
Tommy Tucker

San Francisco, CA

#205604 Jul 29, 2013
Cowboy Dan wrote:
<quoted text>you shut yoiur trap yoiu son of sam, he's the best president and is very honest over that bushy you had!
Obama Boo Boo is the best, the very best, AHOLE ever! Bush came in 2nd!
Big D

Modesto, CA

#205605 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.
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 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
Garland

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..
Huh

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.

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
CA California Proposition 19: the Marijuana Legali... (Oct '10) 4 hr big meech 16,010
CA California seeks to ban free, single-use carryo... (Jun '10) Sep 28 No Time for Tea 5,084
CA CA Proposition 23 - Global Warming (Oct '10) Sep 27 Bucketeers 7,965
Review: Oroville Tacos Sep 25 MarmotaCaligata 3
Leslie Bond sentenced to life in prison (Jul '10) Sep 23 RYGAR530 14
CA Jury reaches verdict in Oakland BART shooting t... (Jul '10) Sep 21 theos 2,275
beating Sep 4 psychomike 1

Oroville Jobs

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 ]