Judge overturns California's ban on s...

Judge overturns California's ban on same-sex marriage

There are 201887 comments on the www.cnn.com story from Aug 4, 2010, titled Judge overturns California's ban on same-sex marriage. In it, www.cnn.com reports that:

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.

Join the discussion below, or Read more at www.cnn.com.

Big D

Modesto, CA

#184873 Mar 27, 2013
heartandmind wrote:
<quoted text>
no, pietro.
try reading the Prop 8 SCOTUS transcripts - they deal with homosexuals not being allowed to marry because they're same sex. and so far, it's not looking good for you side, buddy.
good luck.
From what I have seen so far today, I don’t see how DOMA can survive this

it won’t shock me if they do the same thing with Prop 8, determine there is no standing to bring action to attack the appeal.

That would mean both DOMA and Prop 8 would be defeated

Since: Mar 09

Location hidden

#184874 Mar 27, 2013
Well Brian, you seem to avoid conversations. Is it because you really have no ability to debate?
Here's a post you didn't/couldn't respond to:

For the love of pete, Brian, I have never had a conversation with someone that was more exasperating than one with you. I asked you to explain yourself and all you do is repeat the same statements with absolutely no supporting argument. You don't seem capable of elaborating on anything with any degreeof intelligence.
You keep mentioning gender apartheid and segregation look up the definition of things before you use them:
gender apartheid (also called sex apartheid) is economic and social sexual discrimination against women, including strict sex segregation, as well as an "absence of justice for women in much of the non-Western world." Practices deemed instances of gender apartheid include the legal killing of wives for adultery in Syria and Haiti, wife beating in Nigeria, women needing their husband's consent for divorce in Israel, and legal kidnapping and marriage of women in Guatemala and Lebanon. Aspects of the treatment of women under fundamentalist Islam, Christianity, Judaism and Buddhism have also been described as gender apartheid.
segregation: the separation or isolation of a race, class, or ethnic group by enforced or voluntary residence in a restricted area, by barriers to social intercourse, by separate educational facilities, or by other discriminatory means
Now, one last time, try explaining just what it is you’re trying to claim instead of just repeating yourself. No group is being isolated. In fact one group is asking for inclusion and people like you insist on the continued isolation of them. If anyone is promoting apartheid it is you.

~~~~~~~~~~

While you're avoiding a response to that perhaps you can avoid a response to this...

If same sex marriage leads to all these destructive things why wouldn't same sex unions lead to them? Why no forced same sex unions in prison? Why no gender apartheid? Whatever it is you mean by that. Why no segregation?

“Vita e' Bella.”

Since: May 12

Location hidden

#184875 Mar 27, 2013
Xavier Breath wrote:
<quoted text>
Mkay.......... wacko. Who is calling for sending bigots to re-education camps? Is it the same boogey man that you use for every other excuse... this nebulous, un-named liberal?
So are you saying that gay people who disagree with legally redefining marriage for the same reason straight people do are "bigots"......nice. That must be from the Al Sharpton school of political activism.

“Vita e' Bella.”

Since: May 12

Location hidden

#184876 Mar 27, 2013
heartandmind wrote:
<quoted text>
no, pietro.
try reading the Prop 8 SCOTUS transcripts - they deal with homosexuals not being allowed to marry because they're same sex. and so far, it's not looking good for you side, buddy.
good luck.
Actually homosexuals can marry in every state in the union, and have their marriage valid in all fifty states. What is being asked is that marriage redefined, from a legally recognized exclusive union of husband AND wife, to one of "spouses for life, regardless of gender composition".

“Vita e' Bella.”

Since: May 12

Location hidden

#184877 Mar 27, 2013
It Is a Conspiracy wrote:
<quoted text>
If some people, straight or gay, get married for companionship or money, which happens all the time, then should they not be allowed to get married?
if a man and a woman, one straight one gay/bi marry for the same reasons you posted, should they be allowed to marry?
Can you point to any reputable social scientist who opines that gay parenting is somehow harmful to children? I think not.
Can you point to any reputable social scientist who opines children should not be raised by THEIR OWN married biological mother and father in a stable home?
Randy -Rock- Hudson

Wooster, OH

#184878 Mar 27, 2013
endocannabanoid system wrote:
<quoted text>
you bigots havn't ever succeeded in presenting a rational arguement as to WHY you think homosexuality is wrong...
the rest of us DO NOT think of it as WRONG....but simply as a preference, and a civil rights issue.
you claimimg some sort of moral high ground, with your bigotry is laughable!!!
I appreciate your attempt to obfuscate here, but....never said homosexuality was wrong. Did say it wasn't a proper relationship upon which which to bestow the title of "Marriage". Thank you for clouding the issue, but it was unnecessary, and set straight.
Randy -Rock- Hudson

Wooster, OH

#184879 Mar 27, 2013
endocannabanoid system wrote:
<quoted text>
the majority of people ARE behind gay marriage being accepted.
58% of them, according to the ABC/washington post poll that came out last week.
up from 23% in 1996.
showing clearly that you are on the wRONg side of this issue, historically,.
No, that is a lie, as I keep telling you. It is propaganda, being used to facilitate the indoctrination agenda. 95% of the people are not behind it. Most do not have an opinion. Of those that do, most are against it.
Big D

Modesto, CA

#184880 Mar 27, 2013
Pietro Armando wrote:
<quoted text>
So are you saying that gay people who disagree with legally redefining marriage for the same reason straight people do are "bigots"......nice. That must be from the Al Sharpton school of political activism.
No.. people that want to deny rights to others based on Race, Creed, Color, Sex, Religion, Orientation, or National Origin are bigots

and yes that is you
Randy -Rock- Hudson

Wooster, OH

#184881 Mar 27, 2013
endocannabanoid system wrote:
<quoted text>
so let me get this straight so everyone can see how silly you are!!
your arguement for why homosexuality is wrong, is that men have dicks and and women have vagina's???
can you elaborate??
or does it have something to do with your personal beliefes instead of an arguement based on reason and science.....
Allow me to help you. I know that this is hard for you. I will be kind, and use small words. Be gay, if you want to. I don't care. I care about the misappropriation of the title "Married" for gays. I know that this is a difficult detail for you to grasp. Try harder. It can be done.(I am sorry for the use of the 2 "big" words, but, if they confuse you any more, google them.)
Big D

Modesto, CA

#184882 Mar 27, 2013
Randy -Rock- Hudson wrote:
<quoted text>
No, that is a lie, as I keep telling you. It is propaganda, being used to facilitate the indoctrination agenda. 95% of the people are not behind it. Most do not have an opinion. Of those that do, most are against it.
You are behind the times, better check the polls

53% to 58%( depending on which poll ) are in favor of Same Sex marrage in the US
THE LONE WORKER
#184883 Mar 27, 2013
It Is a Conspiracy wrote:
<quoted text>
If some people, straight or gay, get married for companionship or money, which happens all the time, then should they not be allowed to get married?
Can you point to any reputable social scientist who opines that gay parenting is somehow harmful to children? I think not.
DIviation from the normal is bad for the whole nation. Perverts will eventually destroy what is sacred and true and good. It is hurtful to teach children that anything is OK sexually.

“Vita e' Bella.”

Since: May 12

Location hidden

#184884 Mar 27, 2013
Big D wrote:
<quoted text>
No it is marriage, inclusive of both in the eyes of the law, equal in the eyes of the law,
Yet not every aspect of marital jurisprudence applies to SSM, either entering it or exiting it.
embracing one does not mean hatred for the other.
Agreed
Love can be like a candle, you can light many candles from one, and none of them diminish the light from the candle they were lit from
That's a nice.
As I am having Italian tonight I may have a little wine… I am a cab man, I like the depth and complexity of a good Cab, I know Pinot Noir is ( or was ) in vogue, but to me, it is still the Cabernet
See.....you're not such a bad guy after all...even with all your pontificating from on high.:)

Buon Appetito. Mangia.
Randy -Rock- Hudson

Wooster, OH

#184885 Mar 27, 2013
endocannabanoid system wrote:
<quoted text>
what exactly does evolutionary design have to do with someones sexual preference??
..... our race has been expanding rapidly during the industrial age......why would a small percentage of the population being gay, matter for the over all survival of our race.
BTW: we have what is called "frozen sperm"
and frozen eggs...
so really,in throery, we wouldnt actually need marriage between a man and a women to survive as a race...
you are way out in right feild...
"Sexual preference" is no reason to covet a title which you do not rate. Being gay doesn't matter. Being gay and calling yourself "married" is a different matter. Capisce? In theory, we can legislate ourselves right out of existence, m'kay? Don't be silly...
It Is a Conspiracy

Torrance, CA

#184886 Mar 27, 2013
Pietro Armando wrote:
<quoted text>
if a man and a woman, one straight one gay/bi marry for the same reasons you posted, should they be allowed to marry?
<quoted text>
Can you point to any reputable social scientist who opines children should not be raised by THEIR OWN married biological mother and father in a stable home?
Sure, why shouldn't a gay person and a straight person be able to get married? We don't asked people about their sexual orientation when they get married.

And, you didn't answer the question: can you point to any reputable social scientist who opines that gay parenting is somehow
harmful to children?

Courts take away parental rights all the time. One's sexual orientation really has nothing to do with it. It's one conduct as a parent that is dispositive.
Randy -Rock- Hudson

Wooster, OH

#184887 Mar 27, 2013
Honey Boo Boo wrote:
<quoted text>
Mama says you are one of them homo-sexuals that everyone talks about.
She says you are evil.
Are you an evil homo-sexual, Mister Randy??
Let me see......If you have read any of my posts, and still have to ask that question, to which the answer is "No", then you are ignorant. Hope that helped you out...

Since: Dec 09

Knoxville, TN

#184888 Mar 27, 2013
KiMare wrote:
<quoted text>
VV, the conclusion is all but settled. The key word scientists use is 'normally'. You can deny the inevitable fact that homosexuality is an abnormal genetic mistake. You already deny the inherent harm, unhealthiness and demeaning nature of anal sex. You already deny redumbant genders are distinct from diverse gendered couples, no surprise...
Perhaps, you might find a scientific article that says what you are saying? I've posted articles of what they are.
Smile.
"All but settled"?!? Are you kidding me?!? Show me one scientist who has said this. Bring me one serious, scholarly article that implies this.

Scientists have discussed these issues ON PAPER! They've not even tried to show how this works on lab rats or any other test subjects at this point. No laboratory has started a project to prove it that we know of.

This is a THEORY. It is not FACT. It is not "all but settled".

Good GOD, you REALLY missed out on the scientific method when you were in school.

Here's a refresher's course:

Scientific Method Step 1: Ask a Question (Why are their gay people?)

Scientific Method Step 2: Make Observations and Conduct Background Research (Not all people are gay, there must be a reason for this)

Scientific Method Step 3: Propose a Hypothesis (based on information gathered from reading other research, perhaps epigenetics or some other biological inheritance related process that would explain why people are gay)**by the way, this is as far as scientists have gotten with regards to determining if epigenetics play a role**

Scientific Method Step 4: Design an Experiment to Test the Hypothesis (it's at this point a scientist would design a LABORATORY EXPERIMENT to see if epigenetics do play a role in homosexuality)

Scientific Method Step 5: Test the Hypothesis (scientists would run their experiment and record the results)

Scientific Method Step 6: Accept or Reject the Hypothesis (based on the results of the experiment, the scientists would either accept their hypothesis that epigenetics play a role in homosexuality or they would not)

Sorry to have to publicly school you on basic, grade school science, but your blatant lack of scientific knowledge makes it necessary.
It Is a Conspiracy

Torrance, CA

#184889 Mar 27, 2013
THE LONE WORKER wrote:
<quoted text>DIviation from the normal is bad for the whole nation. Perverts will eventually destroy what is sacred and true and good. It is hurtful to teach children that anything is OK sexually.
Think about what you just wrote" "it is hurtful to teach children that anything is OK sexually." Well, how did you get here? Was it not OK for your parents to have sex? Do you think that every time a married couple has sex that couple is trying to procreate?

The internet is full of idiots. Wow.
heartandmind

Moline, IL

#184890 Mar 27, 2013
Pietro Armando wrote:
<quoted text>
Actually homosexuals can marry in every state in the union, and have their marriage valid in all fifty states. What is being asked is that marriage redefined, from a legally recognized exclusive union of husband AND wife, to one of "spouses for life, regardless of gender composition".
since the judges used the terminology of "redefine" i'll grant you that. HOWEVER, they also conceded that homosexuals are barred (walled off) from enjoying the same fundamental right of marriage as heterosexuals.

so, no, homosexuals cannot marry a member of the same sex and have that legal union recognized in all 50 states as the laws are currently written. however, from the looks of things, if you read the transcripts, that's going to change. DOMA looks pretty much an over and done deal - the case brought before SCOTUS today dealt with a widow's claim of being forced by the irs to pay inheretance taxes on property she and her legally married female spouse shared.

however you may feel about same sex marriage will not stop the judges from changing the laws regarding same sex marriage. you may dislike their ruling. you may disagree with their ruling. but the laws will be what they will be.
Randy -Rock- Hudson

Wooster, OH

#184891 Mar 27, 2013
veryvermilion wrote:
<quoted text>
Alcoholism, unlike homosexuality, impacts a person's ability to function in society.
Homosexuals hold jobs, have families, go on vacations, go to church, and live happy and productive lives.
By its very definition, an alcoholic is someone who experiences consequences as a result of overindulgence. These may be medical, legal, social (family problems, job loss, etc.), psychological. An alcoholic cannot function due to their use.
You can find "alcohol abuse" and "alcohol dependence" in the "Diagnostic and Statistical Manual" (DSM), which lists psychiatric disorders. You can also find it in the "International Classification of Diseases" (ICD), which lists medical conditions.
You will not find homosexuality listed in either of these internationally recognized listings of disorders and diseases.
Aren't you splitting hairs, now? Any alcoholic will tell you that it is their right to be an alcoholic, and many also live happy, productive lives. This doesn't make the rest of us any more likely to applaud their choices.
heartandmind

Moline, IL

#184892 Mar 27, 2013
Randy -Rock- Hudson wrote:
<quoted text>
..... Did say it wasn't a proper relationship upon which which to bestow the title of "Marriage". Thank you for clouding the issue, but it was unnecessary, and set straight.
well that's your opinion and you're entitled to it. won't try to change it, either.

but, it appears the judges don't agree with you in either Prop 8 or DOMA.

and that's what the issues surround. the legalities, the public secular laws surrounding marriage.

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
facetime? (gay guys only) (Jul '11) Nov 30 Chechi6 67
Drugs on rise in Palm Springs (Sep '07) Nov 29 SnottyGurl 24
News The Pass2 men charged with attempted murder in ... Nov 24 Cabazon 4real 1
David Thornton Sells Obama Salts For Millions. ... Oct '16 Patriot 1
News Teens protest legislation (Mar '06) Oct '16 never really a part 227
Obama does not want you to check for ill Att. c... Oct '16 Luke 1
Obama does not want you to check for ill Att. c... Oct '16 Luke 1

Palm Springs Jobs

More from around the web

Personal Finance

Palm Springs Mortgages