Judge overturns California's ban on same-sex marriage

Aug 4, 2010 Full story: www.cnn.com 201,187

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
Bribos

West Covina, CA

#171608 Dec 18, 2012
How many bribes does it tke to keep a foolish city council?

Just ask those in Glendora, California.

Since: Apr 11

Santa Monica, CA

#171610 Dec 18, 2012
R Hudson wrote:
<quoted text>
But, silly, I haven't claimed to be a muslim. Have you wondered why Gardnerian is my style, yet ? Have you figured out why I chose THAT particular discipline ? NO, you haven't......
Wow, you are dumb. I was making a hypothetical statement when I said, "It's like your claiming to be a Muslim, then saying in every other post that Muhammad was just another dude."

Since: Apr 11

Santa Monica, CA

#171612 Dec 18, 2012
R Hudson wrote:
<quoted text>
Now, in order to help you understand the big old world in which you live, let me explain that the question of marriage is not about a civil right at all.
Sorry, bigfoot, that's all it's about.
R Hudson wrote:
It is about the nature of reality and interpretations of reality that precede the law. Those who now argue that same-sex couples should be included, as a matter of civil right, within the legal definition of marriage are appealing to the constitutional principles of equal protection and equal treatment. But this is entirely inappropriate for making the case for same-sex "marriage." To argue that the Constitution guarantees equal treatment to all citizens, both men and women, does not say anything about what constitutes marriage, or a family, or a business enterprise, or a university, or a friendship.
WTF?
R Hudson wrote:
An appeal for equal treatment would certainly not lead a court to require that a small business enterprise be called a marriage just because two business partners prefer to think of their business that way.
So, were you sitting around thinking, "Hey, I can come up with something even stupider!" until you came up with that?
R Hudson wrote:
Nor would equal treatment of citizens before the law require a court to conclude that those of us who pray before the start of auto races should be allowed to redefine our auto clubs as churches.
And then you came up with that!
R Hudson wrote:
The simple fact is that the civil right of equal treatment cannot constitute social reality by declaration. Civil rights protections function simply to assure every citizen equal treatment under the law depending on what the material dispute in law is all about. Law that is just must begin by properly recognizing and distinguishing identities and differences in reality in order to be able to give each its legal due.
If someone wants to argue that two people who have not in the past been recognized as marriage partners should now be recognized as marriage partners, one must demonstrate that marriage law (not civil rights law) has overlooked or misidentified something that it should not have overlooked or misidentified. For thousands of years, marriage law has concerned itself with a particular kind of enduring bond between a man and a woman that includes sexual intercourseóthe kind of act that can (but does not always) lead to the woman's pregnancy. A homosexual relationship, regardless of how enduring it is as a bond of loving commitment, does not and cannot include sexual intercourse leading to pregnancy. Thus it is not marriage.
Those who choose to live together in life-long homosexual relationships; or brothers and sisters who live together and take care of one another; or two friends of the same sex who are not sexually involved but share life together in the same homeóall of these may be free to live as they do, and they suffer no civil rights discrimination by not being identified as marriages.
There is no civil rights discrimination against an eight-year-old youngster who is denied the right to enter into marriage. There is no civil rights discrimination being practiced against a youngster who is not allowed the identity of a college student because she is not qualified to enter college. There is no civil-rights discrimination involved when the law refuses to recognize my auto club as a church. A marriage and a homosexual relationship are two different kinds of relationships and it is a misuse of civil rights law to use that law to try to blot out the difference between two different kinds of things.
Zzzzz...
Oh, um, yeah...
Legally, marriage is a contract. Men and women should have equal rights when it comes to entering that contract.

Since: Apr 11

Santa Monica, CA

#171613 Dec 18, 2012
R Hudson wrote:
<quoted text>
If this happens, we will need to pay close attention to the consequences. Judges and public officials will then be required to recognize as a marriage any sexually Intimate bond between two people who want to call themselves married. Which means that there will no longer be any basis for distinguishing legally between a heterosexual union and a homosexual relationship. Which means henceforth that there will be no legal basis for restrictions against a homosexual couple obtaining children in any way they choose, for such restrictions would constitute discrimination...
Rose's Law: Morons with no real argument scream, "But what about the children!?"

Hate to break it to you, gay couples can already "obtain children" in any way they choose. Marriage is a separate issue.

Since: Apr 11

Santa Monica, CA

#171614 Dec 18, 2012
Mona Lott wrote:
Judge overturns California's ban on same-sex marriage.
And now SCOTUS will hear the case. How can they come to any other conclusion than Prop8 is discriminatory?
Since prop H8 is clearly discriminatory, seems their only way out would be to say it's not a Federal issue, or some such.

“Formerly Frankie Rizzo”

Since: Sep 12

Canarsie, NY

#171615 Dec 18, 2012
Big D wrote:
<quoted text>
Oh he didnít eject, these were choppers, they were going down, but semi controlled.
Engine or hydraulics hits I assume, I donít know
I've autorotated down in a Huey. Nothing to it. The pilot actually dives and picks up airspeed when close to the ground then uses that to set it down nice and soft. Gives you confidence in the future you're not going to fall out of the sky if you lose power. I'd actually prefer to land without power in a helo than a fixed wing.

Since: Jun 07

Location hidden

#171616 Dec 18, 2012
Big D wrote:
<quoted text>

I think the real question is, will they came back with the narrow division that will overturn it in California, or the broad decision that will have consequences nation wide
I give it 60/40 with a 60% Chance for the narrow result, and 40% for the broader one.
I would prefer the broader decision but will not be disappointed for the narrow.
This is why your opinion doesn't amount to a hill of beans.

If the court wanted to keep this decision solely effecting California they wouldn't have taken the case, there was no need to as that is exactly what the 9th Circuit did.

There are only two possible outcomes. The SCOTUS overturns the 9th and ultimately Walkers decision or they make this a national issue. The real question is are they really ready for another Roe v Wade?

And, will the court contradict itself? Let's not forget they are also hearing the DOMA decision, which clearly states that the Federal Government has NO say in marriage laws, that it is an issue left to the States. In order to uphold the Prop 8 and the DOMA ruling they truly create a contradiction. On one hand you have the Federal Government regulating marriage through the federal court system, on the other you have them saying the federal government lack the power to regulate it?

Interesting situation the court has put itself in.

“Formerly Frankie Rizzo”

Since: Sep 12

Canarsie, NY

#171617 Dec 18, 2012
Big D wrote:
<quoted text>
I never did any of that kind of stuff myself, my second 3 years were spent on Yerba Buena Island which most people mistake and call Treasure island, it is the natural island on the bay bridge to San Francisco.
I was a firefighter, but scheduled on boat watch crews on duty days, usually pulled jumpers out of the water under the GG bridge. You could call it SAR, but they were always already dead, and we have to knock the sharks off of them before pulling them on board.
Most interesting story there was an inspection on a large sailboat. It was obviously overladen and the crew looked pretty scummy, so we took our longest hair and laid back looking guardsman, he pulled the shirt tails out of his pants and tried to look like he didnít give a crap and boarded them for a safety inspection.
He check thier life preservers and other small crap, gave them a certificate of passage and left.. he told us the boat was just packed to the gills with bales of what was obviously Marijuana, he said it was all over the deck.
The sailboat headed into Oakland and we informed the police and then backed them up with a 50 footer, I donít know if you have seen a Coast guard 50 footer but it will scare the pants off anything smaller, and some things quite a bit larger. A 50 footer will really move, they are designed to catch fast boats.
I wasnít on the 50, but was told there was a firefight on the docks with the Oakland police when they showed up, the cut loose ( just into the water ) with the twin 50 caliber machine guns behind the sailboat and they surrendered to the police.
The police told the boat captain that they would have surrendered too after hearing that.
You Coasties are heroes and you do a great job and save lives and protect our country and waterways and all that good sh!t but lets face it, you're f*&%ing narcs!

I know. You don't make the rules or the policies just do or die like we did.

Did you ever commandeer a little of the evidence, you know, leakage.:)

“Formerly Frankie Rizzo”

Since: Sep 12

Canarsie, NY

#171619 Dec 18, 2012
akpilot wrote:
<quoted text>
This is why your opinion doesn't amount to a hill of beans.
If the court wanted to keep this decision solely effecting California they wouldn't have taken the case, there was no need to as that is exactly what the 9th Circuit did.
There are only two possible outcomes. The SCOTUS overturns the 9th and ultimately Walkers decision or they make this a national issue. The real question is are they really ready for another Roe v Wade?
And, will the court contradict itself? Let's not forget they are also hearing the DOMA decision, which clearly states that the Federal Government has NO say in marriage laws, that it is an issue left to the States. In order to uphold the Prop 8 and the DOMA ruling they truly create a contradiction. On one hand you have the Federal Government regulating marriage through the federal court system, on the other you have them saying the federal government lack the power to regulate it?
Interesting situation the court has put itself in.
California is unique in that rights were already granted and then taken away.

“Formerly Frankie Rizzo”

Since: Sep 12

Canarsie, NY

#171620 Dec 18, 2012
Pig Mania wrote:
I hope $3 Bill shares some of his war stories with us, I heard he was really good at mopping the deck and polishing the brass.
Cumon Bill, can I get a 'SHUT YOUR PIE HOLE'?
Some guys I talked to down at the Livermore VFW who were on the ship with Bill said he was the Captain's favorite and he gave Bill extra privileges. The Captain said that was because he was always swabbing the poop deck and polishing the brass knobs and balls and such real good.

Then Bill came in and told them to "Shut your pieholes!"

“Formerly Frankie Rizzo”

Since: Sep 12

Canarsie, NY

#171621 Dec 18, 2012
Rose_NoHo wrote:
<quoted text>
Rose's Law: Morons with no real argument scream, "But what about the children!?"
Hate to break it to you, gay couples can already "obtain children" in any way they choose. Marriage is a separate issue.
Hate to break it to you (not really!) but you can't make up "laws" name them after yourself and expect anyone to give a sh!t.

“Formerly Frankie Rizzo”

Since: Sep 12

Canarsie, NY

#171622 Dec 18, 2012
Big D wrote:
<quoted text>
Oh he didnít eject, these were choppers, they were going down, but semi controlled.
Engine or hydraulics hits I assume, I donít know
Do you notice your war stories get good judge-its and my war stories get bad judge-its?

I guess you're a hero! Congratulations coastie!
Hrdy

West Covina, CA

#171623 Dec 18, 2012
A simple dust of will do.

Since: Jun 07

Location hidden

#171624 Dec 18, 2012
Mike DiRucci wrote:
<quoted text>
California is unique in that rights were already granted and then taken away.
True, and I have said that many times. But again, if that was the issue than the SCOTUS had no reason to revisit it as the ruling would stand and prop 8 would be tossed.

I am very interested to see what kind of BS the court comes up with on this issue. I won't even pretend to know what they are going to do after the ruling on ObamaCare, where they actually wrote law to make it "Constitutional". I guess if the POTUS can legislate, why not the SCOTUS? Perhaps our 3 branch system is as out-dated as the Constitution? LOL
Purpled

West Covina, CA

#171625 Dec 18, 2012
This type of illegal activity the USPS was convicted of in Court would be the samething Glendora, California is and has done to Senior citizens and other resdients.

In addition to ordering the USPS to reimburse the soldier for nearly 13 years in back postal wages, the board also told USPS to immediately begin paying Erickson his postal salary ó even if the USPS opts to appeal, a move that could extend the case another two years. Erickson said he doesnít recall his hourly wage rate in 2000.

“Formerly Frankie Rizzo”

Since: Sep 12

Canarsie, NY

#171626 Dec 19, 2012
Pig Mania wrote:
I hope $3 Bill shares some of his war stories with us, I heard he was really good at mopping the deck and polishing the brass.
Cumon Bill, can I get a 'SHUT YOUR PIE HOLE'?
I saw Bill's posts on another thread.

No "shut your piehole!" or thorazine drip stories, but he was accusing other posters of being gay.
Big D

Modesto, CA

#171627 Dec 19, 2012
Mike DiRucci wrote:
<quoted text>
I saw Bill's posts on another thread.
No "shut your piehole!" or thorazine drip stories, but he was accusing other posters of being gay.
Well being called Gay isnít an insult, I would just politely tell him he is incorrect and point the way to a gay bar somewhere where he might troll for companionship more easily
Lined

West Covina, CA

#171629 Dec 19, 2012
D does still come after C, right?
Big D

Modesto, CA

#171630 Dec 19, 2012
Mike DiRucci wrote:
<quoted text>
Bill says he's not gay. But he says he supports gay rights. The way he does it is to accuse everyone who doesn't of being gay. That's stupid.
Bill's a real funny guy. He doesn't think things through.
I donít happen to be Gay, I fully support Gay rights, but I donít "accuse" people of being gay as I donít see that as any kind of insult. It is like accusing someone of having blue eyes.
FutureNews

West Covina, CA

#171631 Dec 19, 2012
A story biline might look like this:

GPD officer on patrol saw Douglas & Gene run a red light while driving eastbound at Route 66 at Compromise Line Road.

Officers attempted to pull the driver and passanger over, but they refused. The driver drove at freeway speeds then slowed down to a crawl. The driver played cat and mouse with the following officrs in their cars.

The driver circled streets surrounding Glendora High School, favoring to Lone Hill Avenue, Route 66 and Palopinto Avenue.

GPD officers immediately identified the subjects, knowing there might be issues with mental problems.

The pursuit was terminated, because GPD had identified them, an knew where they lived and had past contact with them.

The whole chase lasted less than 10 minutes.

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.

Palm Springs Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
Touch Of Class Consignments, Cathedral City, ca. (Aug '13) Tue Mike 132
stores with bad customer service {list your wor... Dec 18 Tracy 3
mexican landscapers dump in the desert Dec 11 Jean 22
Re-Thinking Southern California Earthquake Scen... Dec 8 Rick 1
Lower gas prices means more people on the road ... Dec 7 Ronald 6
Costco readies for new opening (Dec '06) Dec 6 Bobbo Yogi 154
Review: Inter-City Plumbing (Jun '09) Dec 3 Jean 11
Palm Springs Dating
Find my Match
More from around the web

Palm Springs People Search

Addresses and phone numbers for FREE

Palm Springs News, Events & Info

Click for news, events and info in Palm Springs

Personal Finance

Mortgages [ See current mortgage rates ]

NFL Latest News

Updated 3:13 pm PST