Judge overturns California's ban on same-sex marriage

Aug 4, 2010 | Posted by: Topix | Full story: www.cnn.com

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.

Comments
161,021 - 161,040 of 200,602 Comments Last updated 23 hrs ago
endocannabanoid system

Anderson, CA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#184431
Mar 25, 2013
 

Judged:

6

6

6

Brian_G wrote:
<quoted text>We agree, marriage between mothers and fathers is good because it protects, shelters and provide for children.
.
<quoted text>But less than traditional marriage; same sex marriage harms children by creating a new norm of gender segregation marriage where our ideal of man/woman marriage doesn't.
.
<quoted text>The difference between 100% and the unknown failure rate of same sex marriage is the rational reason to maintain the male/female ideal of perfectly integrated and diverse opposite sex marriage.
'perfectly intergrated"

really??

last time i checked, the divorce rate among straights was WAY higher than that for same sex couples.

and somehow I doubt you are for
"diversity" in marraige.

“KiMare'a the Monster Mutation”

Since: Nov 10

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#184432
Mar 25, 2013
 

Judged:

8

8

8

Xavier Breath wrote:
<quoted text>
Brian. Children raised by a married mother and father have better outcomes. That DOES NOT mean that all other combinations fail 100%. There is no rational reason to deny the benefits of marriage to children same sex parents... unless you think punishing their children is a moral thing to do.
According to a recent study, children of a 'committed relationship' have better outcomes. Moreover, the government benefits for default family situations exceed those for married couples! SS couples have a problem with the committed part.

Smile.

“KiMare'a the Monster Mutation”

Since: Nov 10

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#184433
Mar 25, 2013
 

Judged:

8

8

8

Xavier Breath wrote:
<quoted text>Check with any university library. Hell, Google it, LazyBoy.
I already did regarding the law.

See my next response to VV.

“KiMare'a the Monster Mutation”

Since: Nov 10

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#184434
Mar 25, 2013
 

Judged:

8

8

8

veryvermilion wrote:
<quoted text>
Morality? Who's talking morality? I'm talking science.
Look, the world is round, the sky is blue, and homosexuals are normal. It's not up for discussion.
Why is this so hard for people to get?
More BS gay twirl lies.

The latest science says homosexuality is a epi-marker mistake.

Moreover, the most intimate imitation of natural sex, anal sex, is inherently harmful, unhealthy and demeaning. I've posted that fact from a gay friendly medical site many times if someone doesn't have the common sense to know the anus is not a vagina.

Could be just a couple reasons why it's so hard for every culture in all of human history to get...

Snicker.

“KiMare'a the Monster Mutation”

Since: Nov 10

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#184435
Mar 25, 2013
 

Judged:

8

8

8

endocannabanoid system wrote:
<quoted text>
that is not QUITE what the american pediatrics association said last week, when they came out in favor of gay marraige.
Yeah, they said anyone outside a 'family' can take the place of a dad. Tell that to your father and see how it goes...

And that was using the same studies that were discredited as unscientific and biased.

Smirk.

“KiMare'a the Monster Mutation”

Since: Nov 10

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#184436
Mar 25, 2013
 

Judged:

7

7

7

veryvermilion wrote:
<quoted text>
"The petitioners [Lawrence and Garner] are entitled to respect for their private lives. The State CANNOT DEMEAN THEIR EXISTENCE OR CONTROL THEIR DESTINY by making their private sexual conduct a crime." (Justice Anthony Kennedy, Lawrence v. Texas).
Sounds like he was saying that homosexual behavior cannot be considered a crime. And if it's not a crime and heterosexual behavior is not a crime, then they must be equally legal under the law.
The ruling made no claim of 'normal' as you claimed.

The ruling was based on private behavior and self-incrimination. If the law made the determination you claim, it would conflict with scientific fact that sodomy obviously is harmful, unhealthy and demeaning.

Nor can you claim that sodomy is 'equally' legal under the law. It can only be legal by the avoidance of exposing the inherent harm, unhealthiness and demeaning nature of sodomy. Natural sex has no such hindrance.

Smile.

“KiMare'a the Monster Mutation”

Since: Nov 10

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#184437
Mar 25, 2013
 

Judged:

8

8

8

endocannabanoid system wrote:
<quoted text>
"man and women were put on this earth with complimentary sex organs"..........is that your proof?
kinda specualting there arnt we??
Speculation? And you are a doctor?

Funny stupid scary.

That goes along with claiming that pot makes you smarter than common sense.

Smirk.

Since: Dec 09

Knoxville, TN

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#184438
Mar 25, 2013
 

Judged:

6

6

6

KiMare wrote:
<quoted text>
More BS gay twirl lies.
The latest science says homosexuality is a epi-marker mistake.
Moreover, the most intimate imitation of natural sex, anal sex, is inherently harmful, unhealthy and demeaning. I've posted that fact from a gay friendly medical site many times if someone doesn't have the common sense to know the anus is not a vagina.
Could be just a couple reasons why it's so hard for every culture in all of human history to get...
Snicker.
You are an unadulterated liar! The latest science DOES NOT SAY that homosexuality is an epigenetic mistake.

They have made no final decision re: epigenetics.

And NONE of them are calling it an "epigenetic mistake". That is YOUR own term that you continue to pull from the recesses of your ASS.

Since: Dec 09

Knoxville, TN

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#184439
Mar 25, 2013
 

Judged:

6

6

6

KiMare wrote:
<quoted text>
The ruling made no claim of 'normal' as you claimed.
The ruling was based on private behavior and self-incrimination. If the law made the determination you claim, it would conflict with scientific fact that sodomy obviously is harmful, unhealthy and demeaning.
Nor can you claim that sodomy is 'equally' legal under the law. It can only be legal by the avoidance of exposing the inherent harm, unhealthiness and demeaning nature of sodomy. Natural sex has no such hindrance.
Smile.
The courts found no evidence that sodomy is "demeaning", "unhealthy", or "harmful".

They had access to scientific facts when they made their determination.

Bottom line, heterosexual intercourse and homosexual intercourse are both legal acts in the U.S. This makes them equal in the eyes of the law.

Since: Dec 09

Knoxville, TN

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#184440
Mar 25, 2013
 

Judged:

7

7

7

KiMare wrote:
<quoted text>
Speculation? And you are a doctor?
Funny stupid scary.
That goes along with claiming that pot makes you smarter than common sense.
Smirk.
Well if that's not the pot calling the kettle "black"... You're a disgraced "pastor", pretending you know about medicine, psychiatry, genetics, etc.

You're a joke...

“I Luv Carbon Dioxide”

Since: Dec 08

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#184441
Mar 25, 2013
 

Judged:

7

7

7

veryvermilion wrote:
When the people arguing in favor of Proposition 8 had their days in court, they had the opportunity to bring experts indicating that homosexual relationships would have a negative impact on the family. Their experts COULD NOT prove this to Judge Walker's satisfaction.
When the 3 person appellate court heard their arguments, they also did not find in favor of the supporters of Proposition 8.
So, not even the best experts you guys could muster up were able to convince 4 federally appointed judges that homosexual relationships would have a negative impact on the family.
What makes you think that you could do better than them? What makes you believe you know more about the law? What makes you think you know more about same-sex relationships than them?
Judge Walker excluded evidence and witnesses; that's why he misruled. The US Supreme Court has reviewed a state's right to redefine marriage as one man and one woman in Baker v Nelson; that stands as precedent.

“Vita e' Bella.”

Since: May 12

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#184442
Mar 25, 2013
 

Judged:

7

7

7

Big D wrote:
<quoted text>
for now... if DOMA falls, any challenge to the states that ban them will be easily overturned on constitutional grounds
You are on the wrong side of right and wrong, and certainly on the wrong side of history
Time will tell as to whether or not I'm on the "wrong see side of history" or not. History may ultimately vindicate those who oppose SSM by proving it, as it did with "no fault' divorce, a bad idea.

“I Luv Carbon Dioxide”

Since: Dec 08

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#184443
Mar 25, 2013
 

Judged:

7

7

7

endocannabanoid system wrote:
'perfectly intergrated" really??
Marriage as one man and one woman is integrated, same sex marriage is gender segregated.

.
endocannabanoid system wrote:
last time i checked, the divorce rate among straights was WAY higher than that for same sex couples.
Same sex marriage is so novel, there are no reliable statistics. Anecdotal evidence shows, one of the couples that first sued Massachusetts for same sex marriage has already divorced.

Divorce maintains consent in marriage; same sex marriage supporters don't understand that fact. If same sex marriage becomes legal, consent will be the next target for the left.

If you value consent, keep marriage one man and one woman.

.
endocannabanoid system wrote:
and somehow I doubt you are for
"diversity" in marraige.
Male/female marriage is gender diverse while same sex marriage brings a new standard of gender apartheid to marriage.

“"It's Only Your Opinion"”

Since: Nov 11

Hollywood California

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#184444
Mar 25, 2013
 

Judged:

7

7

7

Brian_G wrote:
<quoted text>Judge Walker excluded evidence and witnesses; that's why he misruled. The US Supreme Court has reviewed a state's right to redefine marriage as one man and one woman in Baker v Nelson; that stands as precedent.
No he didn't you are a liar! Try again,I've read the transcripts meny times and he did NO such thing! Try again bumper sticker boy! What are you going to do when the Supreme court upholds Judge Walkers decision and also the 9th circuit higher courts decision and DOMA also gets overturned? More whining perhaps? I'm betting you haven't even read the transcripts have you?

“Vita e' Bella.”

Since: May 12

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#184445
Mar 25, 2013
 

Judged:

7

7

7

endocannabanoid system wrote:
<quoted text>
last time i checked, the divorce rate among straights was WAY higher than that for same sex couples.
Which demonstrates "straights" no longer take marriage seriously as they did not too long ago. If they did, would SSM be legal, or a consideration at all? Time will tell whether or not married SSCs will continue to experience lower divorce/dissolution rates than "straights".

“Vita e' Bella.”

Since: May 12

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#184446
Mar 25, 2013
 

Judged:

7

7

7

veryvermilion wrote:
<quoted text>
Bottom line, heterosexual intercourse and homosexual intercourse are both legal acts in the U.S. This makes them equal in the eyes of the law.
"Bottom line"? Pun intended? Simply because they occur does not mean they are equal. Would "homosexual intercourse" constitute "consummation" of the marital relationship?
Some Never Came Home

Beacon, NY

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#184447
Mar 25, 2013
 

Judged:

6

6

6

Brian_G wrote:
<quoted text>Marriage as one man and one woman is integrated, same sex marriage is gender segregated.
.
<quoted text>Same sex marriage is so novel, there are no reliable statistics. Anecdotal evidence shows, one of the couples that first sued Massachusetts for same sex marriage has already divorced.
Divorce maintains consent in marriage; same sex marriage supporters don't understand that fact. If same sex marriage becomes legal, consent will be the next target for the left.
If you value consent, keep marriage one man and one woman.
.
<quoted text>Male/female marriage is gender diverse while same sex marriage brings a new standard of gender apartheid to marriage.
If you value Freedom and equality and fairness for all Americans,uphold the unconstitutionality of Prop rightfully rightfully so! 9 states now and D.C. and counting! 3 of those states by popular vote in the last election! 10 years in Massachusetts now and LO and behold not a damn thing has changed marriage wise,other than same sex marriages having a lower divorce rate than heteros! You're bigotry is in fact taking it's last dying gasp so enjoy it while you can!

“Vita e' Bella.”

Since: May 12

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#184448
Mar 25, 2013
 

Judged:

7

7

7

Some Never Came Home wrote:
<quoted text>
If you value Freedom and equality and fairness for all Americans,uphold the unconstitutionality of Prop rightfully rightfully so! 9 states now and D.C. and counting! 3 of those states by popular vote in the last election! 10 years in Massachusetts now and LO and behold not a damn thing has changed marriage wise,other than same sex marriages having a lower divorce rate than heteros! You're bigotry is in fact taking it's last dying gasp so enjoy it while you can!
Absolutely.....freedom....fair ness....equality for all....polygamist families too.
Big D

Modesto, CA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#184450
Mar 25, 2013
 

Judged:

3

3

3

Pietro Armando wrote:
<quoted text>
Which demonstrates "straights" no longer take marriage seriously as they did not too long ago. If they did, would SSM be legal, or a consideration at all? Time will tell whether or not married SSCs will continue to experience lower divorce/dissolution rates than "straights".
You donít take it more seriously

We do, being forced to stay in a bad marriage is not the key to saving marriage but to belittling it

Staying in a marriage because you are in a good marriage strengthens it

we will see, very shortly, although in truth, we have already seen, more and more states and nations are recognizing gay marriage
christina remzy

United States

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#184451
Mar 25, 2013
 

Judged:

4

4

4

It does not matter to me gays and lesbos should be happy like any person I'm not going to be gay just because they pass that law I'm happy the way I'm

Tell me when this thread is updated: (Registration is not required)

Add to my Tracker Send me an email

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.

Other Recent Palm Springs Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
CA California Proposition 19: the Marijuana Legali... (Oct '10) 1 hr Browser 15,957
CA California seeks to ban free, single-use carryo... (Jun '10) 17 hr Either Or 4,992
City Manager Martin Magana hires Charles "Chuck... 23 hr Dr_Zorderz 16
Touch Of Class Consignments, Cathedral City, ca. (Aug '13) Aug 19 Ned 123
CA CA Proposition 23 - Global Warming (Oct '10) Aug 18 Mudflys to 7,901
Tony Casas, 77; Former Prisons Official Worked ... (Sep '07) Aug 17 Vivian Was Always... 685
Taggers: (Feb '06) Aug 11 endamerikkkascurr... 247

Search the Palm Springs Forum:
•••
•••
Palm Springs Dating

more search filters

less search filters

•••

Palm Springs Jobs

•••
Enter and win $5000
•••
•••

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 ]
•••