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
Big D

Modesto, CA

#176643 Jan 22, 2013
Frankie Rizzo wrote:
<quoted text>
I have a sense of humor. So does Jesus! But not you.
You're not having fun. You're angry.
Wrong again I am having a blast, the worst offender on the boards telling others to stay on topic... hilarious, and the best part is everyone can see it.
Castro

Monrovia, CA

#176644 Jan 22, 2013
Piers Morgan is an idiot, ship his sorry as s back to his mother island.
Big D

Modesto, CA

#176645 Jan 22, 2013
Frankie Rizzo wrote:
<quoted text>
Wrong. I support your right to marry your boyfriend. And Jane's too! I love a gay wedding! Just not yours.
Well, that's settled. So why do you support monogamy but not polygamy? Do you think the judge would make the same decision if it involved polygamy?
I am already married, I donít happen to be gay, but as an American patriot I am for justice and so support the idea of same sex marriages

I donít really care about Poly marriage, have not put a lot of thought into it, and really donít need to right now, we can cross that bridge when we come to it. Not of any real interest to me, and not any serious legal action on that one right now.

But same sex marriage there is a lot of activity

I donít believe your support of gay marriage, because you would not be doing the standard bait and switch that the opponents of gay marriage use as a standard tactic.

You lie so easily and so often, I am not about to just believe whatever you say you are for or against. You have been defending the opponents of same sex marriages on this forum for weeks now, and bashing every supporter of it, I think that is more telling than what you say you support.

“Reality bites”

Since: Dec 11

Location hidden

#176646 Jan 22, 2013
Frankie Rizzo wrote:
<quoted text>
Tsk tsk Big D's fibbing again!
Wrong dipstick, he is verry much correct. You are here simply to deflect the topic at hand by using what you think is an equal issue. The cold hard reality is this, I have yet to see 2-3 percent of the population requset incest marriage or multiple partner marriage. Your tatic is plain as the nose on your face, we all see it. Now be a good lil asshat and go play on the freeway
The Worlds Biggest Lie

Pittsfield, MA

#176647 Jan 22, 2013
We can thank the subversive decadent behavior that America has been sanctioning through technology and follyhood for decades. Homosexuals like to point out the failures of other human beings to rationalize their own perverted, unhealthy, unnatural behavior that is no way to go through life.
Thanks to our greedy, sick, and perverted polititians, ss parenting has now become a reality here in the state of Assachewsetts. The same state that has had a pedo problem and an incest problem for decades. But gay parenting is the greatest mistake made yet. To think that two men, gay or straight should qualify as parenting is preposterous. All children should be afforded the basic human rights of a female mother and male father to ensure proper balance and structure within any household.
All children should also be provided with a female mother as well to ensure nurturing and compassion that only a 'female' mother can provide in the childs most indelible years of their lives. But because of money, votes, and political correctness, common sense is always abrogated.
When a state per order of the court places any child into another home because of extraordinary circumstances or 'failure' of the previous parents, why on earth punish the child even further by placing them into such a confusing unnatural environment that is homosexuality. That's just it, if common sense did prevail and this argument was championed, because it should be, the entire gay anything dominoes falls down the halls of injustice.
So as usual, we will learn the hard way. Just like the time homosexuality was considered a mental illness in the early 70's that on the surface at least would appear has contibuted to the further subversion of America and the "real war on life and women" by DEMOCRATS. So here we are, morally, physically, spiritually, and financially broken for many reasons and this is one of them. Go ask Barney how Freddy and Fanny are doin. Or Bubba Clinton, and now one of the worst Presidents in history.
When one cannot honor their own father and mother or be trusted by their own spouse how are we to trust them as representing we the people. Because they no longer do.

I support an end to the federal reserve bank and to abolish the tax code and choke off this cancer that is the United States of Israelity.

Goodbye Rome
Frankie Rizzo

Union City, CA

#176648 Jan 22, 2013
Jane Dodo wrote:
<quoted text>
Since my posts seem to ask questions you are incapable of answering, why don't you just ignore me?
Your posts don't ask questions that I am incapable of answering. But lets get on topic.

I think overturning prop 8 bodes well for polygamy. Don't you agree?
Jane Dodo

Hoboken, NJ

#176650 Jan 22, 2013
Frankie Rizzo wrote:
<quoted text>
Because it's fun to make you mad! You get so silly.
But mostly because you are a hypocrite advocating marriage be allowed to only groups you approve of and no others.
Really? And where did I say that? When are you going to learn to understand what you read and stop ASSuming?

FYI... you don't have the power to "make me mad."
Jane Dodo

Hoboken, NJ

#176651 Jan 22, 2013
Frankie Rizzo wrote:
Do you think the judge would make the same decision if it involved polygamy?
It would depend upon the testimony given, now wouldn't it? Was there ANY testimony given about polygamous relationships?
Big D

Modesto, CA

#176652 Jan 22, 2013
Jane Dodo wrote:
<quoted text>
FYI... you don't have the power to "make me mad."
He asks that so often, I think it is his primary motivation for being here.

That must be one sad little man
Frankie Rizzo

Union City, CA

#176653 Jan 22, 2013
Jazybird58 wrote:
<quoted text>Wrong dipstick, he is verry much correct. You are here simply to deflect the topic at hand by using what you think is an equal issue. The cold hard reality is this, I have yet to see 2-3 percent of the population requset incest marriage or multiple partner marriage. Your tatic is plain as the nose on your face, we all see it. Now be a good lil asshat and go play on the freeway
So your logic is that if too few people want equal rights they should not get them?

Where would you draw the line? If ten people want to marry their sister it shouldn't be allowed but if eleven want to they should make it legal? What's your number? 100? 1000?

Why do you restrict rights based on the number of people who need them? And how do you decide the number?

You think about these things carefully Fruitloops, then come back and maybe you can try and play with the big boys!
Jane Dodo

Hoboken, NJ

#176654 Jan 22, 2013
Frankie Rizzo wrote:
<quoted text>
Your posts don't ask questions that I am incapable of answering.
Yet you never seem to be able to find the validating posts.
Frankie Rizzo

Union City, CA

#176655 Jan 22, 2013
Jane Dodo wrote:
<quoted text>Really? And where did I say that? When are you going to learn to understand what you read and stop ASSuming?
FYI... you don't have the power to "make me mad."
About a year ago. You remember silly. But this is another of your straw men, lets just skip it.

Or maybe just tell us your opinion and stop making us guess? Whatever.

Do you agree that overturning prop 8 bodes well for legalizing polygamy? Why or why not?

Thanks!
Frankie Rizzo

Union City, CA

#176656 Jan 22, 2013
Jane Dodo wrote:
<quoted text>Really? And where did I say that? When are you going to learn to understand what you read and stop ASSuming?
FYI... you don't have the power to "make me mad."
I guess you're always mad then! Thought it was just me! That's good.

So. I can only ASSUME you are against polygamy by your hostile ad hominem non-answers since you refuse to tell us.

I won't bother asking anything on topic now, I get the hint. You won't ANSWER anyway.
Frankie Rizzo

Union City, CA

#176657 Jan 22, 2013
Jane Dodo wrote:
<quoted text>Yet you never seem to be able to find the validating posts.
I'm not looking for them Miss Thing.

You are against equality for polyamorists and you are afraid to say it for fear of revealing your hypocrisy.

When you stop with the straw men, maybe we can get on topic?
Frankie Rizzo

Union City, CA

#176658 Jan 22, 2013
Jane Dodo wrote:
<quoted text> It would depend upon the testimony given, now wouldn't it? Was there ANY testimony given about polygamous relationships?
No, there wasn't silly! But overturning prop 8 bodes well for poly does it not?
Frankie Rizzo

Union City, CA

#176659 Jan 22, 2013
Big D wrote:
<quoted text>
He asks that so often, I think it is his primary motivation for being here.
That must be one sad little man
Still mad eh? YUK!YUK!YUK!

“Reality bites”

Since: Dec 11

Location hidden

#176660 Jan 22, 2013
Frankie Rizzo wrote:
<quoted text>
Your posts don't ask questions that I am incapable of answering. But lets get on topic.
I think overturning prop 8 bodes well for polygamy. Don't you agree?
No idiot, prop 8 is about the removal of an existing right, based on the lone aspect of two persons sex or sexuality.
You see dipshit at one time samesex marriage was legal in Calf. Prop 8 was desighned to remove that law based on the fact of homosexuality. Thats discrimination ya moron

“Reality bites”

Since: Dec 11

Location hidden

#176662 Jan 22, 2013
Frankie Rizzo wrote:
<quoted text>
So your logic is that if too few people want equal rights they should not get them?
Where would you draw the line? If ten people want to marry their sister it shouldn't be allowed but if eleven want to they should make it legal? What's your number? 100? 1000?
Why do you restrict rights based on the number of people who need them? And how do you decide the number?
You think about these things carefully Fruitloops, then come back and maybe you can try and play with the big boys!
Its not about the numbers at all.

Since: Apr 11

North Hollywood, CA

#176663 Jan 22, 2013
Jimmy crapped corn wrote:
According to studies 70% of people who turned gay was because of being molested
That's BS, David.

Since: Apr 11

North Hollywood, CA

#176664 Jan 22, 2013
Jimmy crapped corn wrote:
<quoted text> your doing someone in the Azz and I need help ??? Really ??? The last time I checked , my azz nothing wen't in
What about your head?

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
CA CA Proposition 23 - Global Warming (Oct '10) 48 min RiccardoFire 7,966
CA California Proposition 19: the Marijuana Legali... (Oct '10) 5 hr do it here 16,011
CA California seeks to ban free, single-use carryo... (Jun '10) Sep 28 No Time for Tea 5,084
child molester at large in dhs Sep 25 Karen Wood 1
Review: Soho Sep 24 Mrs Matthew Olson 1
CA Jury reaches verdict in Oakland BART shooting t... (Jul '10) Sep 21 theos 2,275
Perrotte gains support for early release (Jun '07) Sep 20 ET SNELL 26

Palm Springs Jobs

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 ]