Judge overturns California's ban on s...

Judge overturns California's ban on same-sex marriage

There are 201811 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

#191311 May 8, 2013
Bruno wrote:
<quoted text>
As long as it's not California, the sane state. I don't see queers running to these states to get married!!
I would not make a wager on California being the next state, another state may slip in under the wire before Prop 8 goes down the tubes

But California already has same sex marriage, some 18,000 same sex couples are legally married and recognized in California today. The equal rights questions over prop 8 are why some same sex couples are already legally married and others cannot, that is a slam dunk argument in the courts, it is why everyone is expecting Prop 8 to fail, the equal rights issue is obvious.
Bruno

Westminster, CA

#191312 May 8, 2013
Frankie Rizzo wrote:
<quoted text>
What's up Bruno you silly jackass?
Wanna gay marry me after prop 8 goes down?
R u on drugs or just stupid, you know I'm against SSM you moron. Ask that tranny Ho Negro ... lol and before you ask, NO I will not attend your weding
Frankie Rizzo

Union City, CA

#191313 May 8, 2013
Pietro Armando wrote:
<quoted text>
Stealing lines from "Animal House"?
It's funny what Jizzy thinks witty. That's why I love the silly jackass!
Praise Jesus

Harrisonburg, VA

#191314 May 8, 2013
Frankie Rizzo wrote:
<quoted text>
"just the facts" is the latest sock of "Jazybird58". I call the silly jackass "Jizzy", or Jizzybird.
He's a real dope. Very angry too.
Okay.
Frankie Rizzo

Union City, CA

#191315 May 8, 2013
just the facts wrote:
<quoted text>why you mad Frank? Flat tire on your chair? Tell us the one how you where a War hero when the Nazi's bombed Pearl Harbor
The Nazis never bombed Pearl Harbor you big dope.

Too funny!
Frankie Rizzo

Union City, CA

#191316 May 8, 2013
Bruno wrote:
<quoted text>
R u on drugs or just stupid, you know I'm against SSM you moron. Ask that tranny Ho Negro ... lol and before you ask, NO I will not attend your weding
Too funny!

Relax power ranger.
Big D

Modesto, CA

#191317 May 8, 2013
Bruno wrote:
<quoted text>
The idea of SSM only appeals to the cult itself, odd balls and is out of alingment and compliance to science.
Your religious cult has no basis in US law, Same Sex marriage is a reality in the US, over 120,000 legally married same sex couples are in the us today, and 18,000 of them where married in California and legally recognized here.

Science has proven over and over that homosexuality is a common and normal occurrence in mammalian species

so far you got zip

“Vita e' Bella.”

Since: May 12

Location hidden

#191318 May 8, 2013
Big D wrote:
<quoted text>
I have not heard one yet
The procreation argument was dead on arrival
The history/tradition argument was dead before arrival
There is no religious argument that applies to US law
I have not heard a single argument that was anything more than laughing stock.
Don't forget the voters, they too were dead, or at least their wiil, was, on arrival . Oh wait I forgot, your patriotism isn't invoked for the voters.

“Vita e' Bella.”

Since: May 12

Location hidden

#191319 May 8, 2013
Big D wrote:
<quoted text>
Your religious cult has no basis in US law,
[/QUOTE[

Nor, apparently, the will of the voters.

[QUOTE[
Same Sex marriage is a reality in the US, over 120,000 legally married same sex couples are in the us today,
Okaaaaaaay.....
and 18,000 of them where married in California and legally recognized here.
Against the will of the people.....twice.
Science has proven over and over that homosexuality is a common and normal occurrence in mammalian species
so far you got zip
But they don't wear rainbow stickers on their butts.
Rock Hudson

Wooster, OH

#191320 May 8, 2013
Rose_NoHo wrote:
<quoted text>
IOW, you can't come up with a rational argument against gay marriage, so you just lie and claim you have one I won't except.(Why not just post the actual argument? Oh, yeah, you don't have one!)
And then you called me names.
Then you had to look up the term "non sequitur" because you didn't know what it means. And it's clear you still don't.
Must suck to high heaven to be you!
In very plain words, you ignore all the rational arguments that have been delivered. Then you act as if you haven't heard any. Then you attempt (pitifully) to imply that I don't know what "non sequitur" means, and you've made that claim several times before, so your memory is also lacking, as is the rest of your act. Tell me, do you sing and tap dance, too, or is that your whole act? Your whole act sucks. And you know it. those other rooms and forums? They say the same things as I do, so you know that wherever you go, you'll get mocked for playing the same tired old routines. "Yawn"..
Rock Hudson

Wooster, OH

#191322 May 8, 2013
Xavier Breath wrote:
<quoted text>
What kind of horseshit are they making up about you now? These losers are SO desperate.
...Yeah....Keep talking....Not that any of it's true, but.....Keep talking....
Big D

Modesto, CA

#191323 May 8, 2013
Pietro Armando wrote:
<quoted text>
Okaaaaaaay.....
<quoted text>
Against the will of the people.....twice.
<quoted text>
But they don't wear rainbow stickers on their butts.
How many times do I need to explain to you that we are not an Athenian style democracy, it is not the rule of the mob here.

Donít worry, if the Supremes get it wrong, that vote will come up again, and every poll shows Prop 8 crashing and burning, and good luck with the court case challenging that ( chuckle )

It was much easier front the other perspective because bias and injustice were easily shown, and no harm whatsoever was shown by the opposition. That is why they have crashed and burned in front of every court so far.
Big D

Modesto, CA

#191324 May 8, 2013
Pietro Armando wrote:
<quoted text>
Don't forget the voters, they too were dead, or at least their wiil, was, on arrival . Oh wait I forgot, your patriotism isn't invoked for the voters.
Welcome to the United States, you are confusing it with ancient Athens that was a pure democracy, we are also a republic

Perhaps you should go to elementary school, or better go to an immigration center that has classes on citizenship and learn just a little bit about your new country here before making more foolish posts.

In this country, a majority cannot decide to remove rights from a minority over bias, and when ther is no harm to the majority. This is a very different land than ancient athens.

I hope you enjoy your stay and decide to actually become a citicezn of our great nation.
Rock Hudson

Wooster, OH

#191325 May 8, 2013
veryvermilion wrote:
<quoted text>
Then what is your personal objection to gays and lesbians?
I have no personal objection to them, but my official stance is that marriage is for 1 man/1 woman. And I object to the use of the govermental mandates and the misappropriation of traditional roles. Some things should just be left as they were. As per your personal relationships, have at it. Knock your socks off. It's not my place to tell you where you may sleep at night. I'll be the first one to say enjoy what you will. But I do not accept the definition of SSC's as "married". Sorry. Marriage is a contract that is intended to benefit 1 man and 1 woman having their own children. Adopted kids can fit into that, but when we start to change too many of the ingredients in a "marriage", it's not that, anymore.
Rock Hudson

Wooster, OH

#191326 May 8, 2013
Rose_NoHo wrote:
<quoted text>
Name one special right.
Ooops, looks like you are going to have to STFU!
No, it doesn't look like that, at all. Are you on the dope again?
Xavier Breath

Hoboken, NJ

#191327 May 8, 2013
Pietro Armando wrote:
<quoted text>
Don't forget the voters, they too were dead, or at least their wiil, was, on arrival . Oh wait I forgot, your patriotism isn't invoked for the voters.
Patriotism? Doesn't that involve knowing how the system actually WORKS???????? Judicial review is part of what makes America great. You don't like it? TOUGH!
Xavier Breath

Hoboken, NJ

#191328 May 8, 2013
Rock Hudson wrote:
<quoted text>
I have no personal objection to them, but my official stance is that marriage is for 1 man/1 woman.
Wait a minute..... all that whining you did about polygamy was because.......?
Rock Hudson

Wooster, OH

#191329 May 8, 2013
Stocking wrote:
<quoted text>
There used to be a thing (at least in UK law) called 'common law' marriage where a couple weren't 'married' but were regarded as such because of the nature of their relationship. One thing this meant was they could use it to back up, say, any claim on a Will.
A great many families are either single parent families or those where both partners are not living at the family home. The amount of abuse by (hetero) step parents is very common, as is murder of children by them. From people (Ok, not stats) sharing their experience many site divorce and living with a (hetero) couple who are at odds with one another as deeply disturbing and something which must have effected them strongly enough for them to still be talking about long into adulthood. This is the nature of relationships. It has been said by some sociologists that the family unit although theoretically is the ideal (according to most psychologists) is in fact inherently damaging and dysfunctional to many - ie. it cuts both ways. I might suggest One reason children from SSM are less well adjusted is because of the bigotry their parents face; and beneath the surface is the thought that their family is not to be considered normal. Do you have the same issue with, say a mother and daughter raising that daughter's child, or where the father is in the mother role of housekeeper and primary caregiver because the wife is the one that has a career. Studies (no, I can't reference them, it's been a while since college) I recall conclude that it doesn't directly matter who (or how many) the bond parent or primary care giver is as long as the child does bond and is able to then feel secure enough to become (attach then detach) an independent individual within the family or whatever social setting they are being brought up in.
I would say most couples having children has some basis in narcissism.
I don't see how you can equate the natural biological function with a personality flaw. How can you even propose that?
Big D

Modesto, CA

#191330 May 8, 2013
Rock Hudson wrote:
<quoted text>
I have no personal objection to them, but my official stance is that marriage is for 1 man/1 woman. And I object to the use of the govermental mandates and the misappropriation of traditional roles. Some things should just be left as they were. As per your personal relationships, have at it. Knock your socks off. It's not my place to tell you where you may sleep at night. I'll be the first one to say enjoy what you will. But I do not accept the definition of SSC's as "married". Sorry. Marriage is a contract that is intended to benefit 1 man and 1 woman having their own children. Adopted kids can fit into that, but when we start to change too many of the ingredients in a "marriage", it's not that, anymore.
I am opposed to you BIG government types, the ones that want to get into our personal lives and tell us who we can marry and who we cant.
Xavier Breath

Hoboken, NJ

#191331 May 8, 2013
Rock Hudson wrote:
Marriage is a contract that is intended to benefit 1 man and 1 woman having their own children. Adopted kids can fit into that, but when we start to change too many of the ingredients in a "marriage", it's not that, anymore.
Now where have I heard that before? History books? Yep.... it's the same ol' bitter whine....

You are SO afraid of change..... why does it scare you so much? If you can't change your mind, are you sure you still have one?

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
News Costco readies for new opening (Dec '06) 3 hr City Counselman 156
Touch Of Class Consignment (Cathedral City, Ca. May 26 Dorthy 3
Review: Utopia Management May 23 MichaelJames20178 2
mexican landscapers dump in the desert (Nov '14) May 22 Sandy 54
Fraud Website against Winderemere Real Estate. ... May 21 Palm Desert Local 3
Mayor Pougnet dodges questions about conflict o... May 21 California Resident 3
Any housekeepers near indio?? May 20 BigJG 1
More from around the web

Palm Springs People Search

Addresses and phone numbers for FREE

Personal Finance

Mortgages [ See current mortgage rates ]