Judge overturns California's ban on same-sex marriage

[Dan C]

R Hudson wrote:

But, if Japanese is the language of the moment, you may now address me as "Hudson-SAMA". Ichi-ban-SAMA ! Chew on that, smartass.

Nah,,,

...I like Rock Hudson.

[Dan C]

R Hudson wrote:

<quoted text>
Because you have lots of erroneous thoughts.
Mine, and many others, as well.
'I' said "adopt", not foster care.
This whole room is full of shyte, even though "baka", or "baca" means "idiot", not "shyte"...try again ?

Post 171040;

"4) Who said that abusive foster care was better ? "

-Lie much?

LOL!!!

You mentioned it a couple of other times as well bright boy.

'Baca' in Spanish means mouth. In Japanese it's not idiot but means stupid.

Class dismissed.

LOL!!!

[Dan C]

R Hudson wrote:

<quoted text>
'I' am sorry that you feel diminished in my presence.
Sincerely, Hudson-sama. Ichi-ban-sama.

Oooooh....I do.

I DO!!!

You are the great and mighty Rock Hudson of the internet.

I bow to your greatness. Please don't destroy me on whim.

I quivier in fear given your almighty presence. Even now I'm slipping on a pair of Depends for fear I might soil myself should you decide to berate me.

BAH HAH HAH!!!!!

[Dan C]

R Hudson wrote:

<quoted text>
Konbanwa, you're such a suck-up.

Give me a minute.

Even though my wife is Japanese that's a new one.

And my suspicions lead me to believe Konbobo, Konbouya, Konocopia or whatver isn't a good thing.

[Dan C]

R Hudson wrote:

<quoted text>
Konbanwa, you're such a little suck-up.

Konbanwa means 'good evening'.

Well Rock Hudson....good evening to you my fine friend.

I'm curious about your earlier statements that "10%" shouldn't dictate to the other "90%" in terms of the '10%' being allowed to marry. Specifically gays.

Blacks constitute about 13% of the population. I think Asians number around 5%. Other minority groups less.

Do you think we should ban them from marrying because some dipshit like yourself thinks it's his business in how they live their personal life as well?

[Dan C]

R Hudson wrote:

That'd be this one ...
<quoted text>
...Because the issue is the definition of marriage.

Let me help you out.

Marriage is the legal union between two consenting adults which find attraction, love and a willingness to commit to this legal union.

Heterosexuals AND homosexuals have done this successfully.

Some later flamed by divorcing which I have no doubt you've experienced but there ya go Einstein.

[Dan C]

R Hudson wrote:

<quoted text>
'I' am using fancy words to illustrate the fact that we, as a race, have never recognized gay as being deserving of marriage. Up until recently, we would never have even entertained the notion of it. But, now, we have so many lawyers about, it is inevitable that we have to address the issue, at all.

Who's "we"?

You and the other dumpy losers who get sloppy drunk playing poker on Friday nights?

And fellow American citizens are not deserving of a basic civil liberty because you say so?

Good luck with that.

LOL!!

[Wakanatabi]

NoQ wrote:

<quoted text>
You had to go to Japan to find a Fa$$ot to marry. Really sick. A Japanese Fa$$ot. WOW

Now that's not nice.

[Wakanatabi]

R Hudson wrote:

<quoted text>
Not a very good example of a red herring. Gov't resources will be wasted PURSUING the question of allowing the gays to marry.
You'll have to better than that.

Specifically how?

And was it a waste when they debated whether or not to allow slaves freedom in the 1800's given that topic centered around American citizens gaining civil rights as well?

Here's where you're a mess - you fail to recognize all American citizens are due a full set of liberties. Being allowed to marry an adult of one's choice is simply that...a liberty.

See....I don't have to dance around like a 3 legged dog on a cocaine diet to get to the point like you.

[Wakanatabi]

NoQ wrote:

<quoted text>
Let me help you Fa$$ot. Marriage is the legal union between a man and a woman which find attraction, love and a willingness to commit to this legal union. That's not hard for most people to comprehend, but then, you're a fking idiot.

Nine states and growing says you're wrong in that same sexed couples are doing just that.

Gettin' HITCHED BABY!!!

Tom and Jerry, Kim and Suzy, Fred and Ted, Moe and Joe, Sally and Cindy amongst others are tradin' rings as symbols of wedding blings.

Now you can shit spaghtti until the contents of your last meal is gone my little mental chihuahua but them's the facts.

LOL!!!

[Mike DiRucci]

Wakanatabi wrote:

<quoted text>
Nine states and growing says you're wrong in that same sexed couples are doing just that.
Gettin' HITCHED BABY!!!
Tom and Jerry, Kim and Suzy, Fred and Ted, Moe and Joe, Sally and Cindy amongst others are tradin' rings as symbols of wedding blings.
Now you can shit spaghtti until the contents of your last meal is gone my little mental chihuahua but them's the facts.
LOL!!!

Bruce, Frank, and Dan Too!

Mary, Jane, and Joe!

I'm with you Danny boy. Equality.

[Wakanatabi]

NoQ wrote:

<quoted text>
41 states say I'm right. 30 of them which have written gay bans into their state constitution. Don't think it's going to be as easy as you Fa$$ots think.
Now you can eat the shit from the spaghetti I shit out until it's all gone, my little shiteater, but those are the real facts.

It used to be only one state.

What does that tell you genius?

LOL!!

Let me guess....you're single.

[mountainmarttrek s]

Cost Inclusive:

All airport/Hotel transfers
2 star accommodation in Kathmandu for 3 nights on BB plan
Welcome and farewell dinner
City tour by private transport
Full meals (Breakfast, Lunch & Dinner) during the trek
Hot drinks (Tea & Coffee)
Safe Drinking water
All mountain accommodation (3 Nights twin sharing Room with independent bathroom and hot shower; remaining nights soft, comfortable twin sharing private room but share bathroom)
Domestic flight (Kathmandu /Lukla / Kathmandu)
Airport taxes
An experienced English-speaking trek leader (Govt. registered trekking guide), assistant trek leader (4 trekkers: 1 assistant guide) and Sherpa porters to carry luggage (2 trekkers: 1 porter)
Guide & porter salary, insurance, equipment, flight, food and lodging
All necessary paper work and permits (National Park Permit & TIMS )
A comprehensive medical kit
All government and local taxes
Trekking equipment such as four season down jacket, sleeping bag, trekking boots, rain coat, walking stick and many more as per necessity

[Wakanatabi]

NoQ wrote:

<quoted text>
Not much, used to travel in space also. We don't now. Used to have polio running rapid also Fa$$ot, we don't now. Just a matter of time.
What does that tell you genius?

Tells me you're not discussing the aspect of gay marriage growing more and more queer.

LOL!!!

[Mike DiRucci]

Wakanatabi wrote:

<quoted text>
Tells me you're not discussing the aspect of gay marriage growing more and more queer.
LOL!!!

WHAT?

Anyone know what this means? Dan's not talking to me, can't ask him.

YUK!YUK!YUK!

Seriously, though. WTF?

[akpilot]

Big D wrote:

<quoted text>
actually that is NOT the case in a growing number of states, and it doesn’t matter how angry you get, but now many tens ( if not hundreds ) of thousands of same sex couples are legally married.
More will follow
Get over it
It hasn’t hurt my marriage that they can marry, maybe you should look to your own marriage ( if you have found someone that will have you ) for the stability you lack in your own.

As it stands now, there are more states with Constitutional Amendments restricting marriage to one man and one woman. Enough that you couldn't even get close to the ratification of a Constitutional Amendment to legalize it across the land- in fact quite the opposite is true as we are far closer to the ratification of one to the contrary.

So everything you say is simply fantasy.

[akpilot]

Rose_NoHo wrote:

<quoted text>
Stupid, my claim was: Skinner v OK was not a case about marriage. And it wasn't. It was a case about using forced sterilization as a means of punishment. Were any marriage laws changed because of Skinner?

Rose, if you don't know wtf you are talking about how do you expect anyone else to?

Like I said, call the court and tell them they screwed up and shouldn't have used Skinner v Oklahoma as precedent when calling marriage a "right" because Skinner v Oklahoma has nothing to do with marriage..

You are such an idiot.

[akpilot]

Rose_NoHo wrote:

<quoted text>
You're claiming we don't have checks and balances in our system of government? That was what I said, dummy.

Answer the question Rose, where is the check on the court?

I know you are dodging because you simply don't know. Why don't you just admit that and I could explain to you.

[akpilot]

Rose_NoHo wrote:

<quoted text>
Yes it did. Anybody can look.
http://www.law.cornell.edu/supct/html/histori...
<quoted text>
Whatever, b1tch.

Whatever, bitch is the best you got?

Skinner v Oklahoma did, they just affirmed it. Not once does the court say "Marriage is a Right" outside of the reference to Skinner v Oklahoma Rose.
That's why they cited Skinner v Oklahoma. Stop trying to act as if you understand law because you watch Judge Judy.

[mountainmarttrek s]

If you are coming in Nepal freely contact the mountainmarttreks because the company is one of the best trekking company in Nepal it trust on excellent service to the client.