Judge overturns California's ban on same-sex marriage

Aug 4, 2010 Full story: www.cnn.com 201,363

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
Trickle

Monrovia, CA

#197809 Jun 25, 2013
June 2013

The Supreme Court says a key provision of the landmark Voting Rights Act cannot be enforced until Congress comes up with a new way of determining which states and localities require close federal monitoring of elections.

1.) on the list is Glendora, California.

2.) on the list is El Monte, Californ1a.

3.) on the list is Bell, California.
Frank Rizzo

Union City, CA

#197811 Jun 25, 2013
Zoro wrote:
Hummm, a few posts seem to be missing.
Don't be proud of censorship, Jizzy you moron! Censorship sucks and just proves that you are a loser.

Glad I bother you so much that you resort to dirty tricks. Brings out your true poor character for everyone to marvel at.

Whoop!~Whoop!

“No Headline available”

Since: Jan 08

Defiance, Ohio

#197813 Jun 25, 2013
Frank Rizzo wrote:
<quoted text>
Don't be proud of censorship, Jizzy you moron! Censorship sucks and just proves that you are a loser.
Glad I bother you so much that you resort to dirty tricks. Brings out your true poor character for everyone to marvel at.
Whoop!~Whoop!
Actually, it proves that your witless attacks on other users have not gone unnoticed by the moderator, and they further indicate that you have no valid on topic argument, which is why you descend into such infantile rants.

Your off topic, frequently profane, ad hominem attacks speak volumes to your character, or rather your lack thereof.

Congratulations, well played.
Frankie Rizzo

Union City, CA

#197814 Jun 25, 2013
lides wrote:
<quoted text>
Actually, it proves that your witless attacks on other users have not gone unnoticed by the moderator, and they further indicate that you have no valid on topic argument, which is why you descend into such infantile rants.
Your off topic, frequently profane, ad hominem attacks speak volumes to your character, or rather your lack thereof.
Congratulations, well played.
An off topic ad hominem witless attack from lides, justifying censorship.
Priceless!
Frankie Rizzo

Union City, CA

#197815 Jun 25, 2013
Zoro wrote:
<quoted text>LOL I did not dump your posts, Admin did that. Hey I don't even report you. Get a clue Frankie, you cant end your posts with jacka$$.
Liar. Why are my posts only censored when you're here Jizzy, you moron? You're too stupid to make it believable, stop trying.

What an imbecile!
Frankie Rizzo

Union City, CA

#197816 Jun 25, 2013
Don't be proud of censorship, Jizzy you big dopey galoot! Censorship sucks and just proves that you are a loser.

Glad I bother you so much that you resort to progressive dirty tricks. Brings out your true poor character for everyone to marvel at.

Whoop!~Whoop! Jizzy. What a loser!
Frankie Rizzo

Union City, CA

#197817 Jun 25, 2013
As I was attempting to discuss yesterday but was loudly shouted down with witless ad hominem attacks, indicating posters with no argument, new Pew Research shows heavy media bias in favor of SSM.
Frankie Rizzo

Union City, CA

#197818 Jun 25, 2013
On same-sex marriage, and on any aspect of gay culture, the Times doesnít practice journalism, but rather publicity. But the Pew study indicates that this is a problem not only at the Times, but across the news media. The problem is that journalists donít see it as a problem, because they cannot imagine that anybody could be against same-sex marriage for any reason other than bigotry, and they donít believe they should be expected to be fair and balanced towards bigots.

http://www.theamericanconservative.com/dreher...
Frankie Rizzo

Union City, CA

#197819 Jun 25, 2013
Frankie Rizzo

Union City, CA

#197821 Jun 25, 2013
I don't care who you are or what you support, censorship sucks. And my posts are no worse than anyone else here.

So you can be proud of someone's dishonesty and dirty tricks or you can accept it for what it is, the tactics of a loser.

“Crusading Fundies r hilarious!”

Since: Feb 11

Location hidden

#197822 Jun 25, 2013
Frankie Rizzo wrote:
On same-sex marriage, and on any aspect of gay culture, the Times doesnít practice journalism, but rather publicity. But the Pew study indicates that this is a problem not only at the Times, but across the news media. The problem is that journalists donít see it as a problem, because they cannot imagine that anybody could be against same-sex marriage for any reason other than bigotry, and they donít believe they should be expected to be fair and balanced towards bigots.
http://www.theamericanconservative.com/dreher...
Blah, blah, blah.

The article you cut and paste creates an argument around the fact that there are gays "opposed" to marriage equality. But that sentiment is only reflected in the headline, since that is all most nincompoops like yourself are going to read. The very gay person that this article uses to try and demonstrate the "bias" it is trumping, is very clear, and is quoted as follows, "ďIím not saying that people who want that [marriage] shouldnít have it but for me, all that matters is the legal stuff.Ē

So he is hardly "opposed" to gay marriage. There are lots of straight people that find domestic partnerships or civil unions acceptable for themselves, that doesn't mean they are "opposed" to other straight people marrying.

By the way, your post above includes lots of examples of calling things "problems" but never demonstrating why they have been labeled as such. In other words, your cut and paste demonstrates the very bias it is claiming to be able to demonstrate in others. But then, you were probably too stupid to notice that, given your zeal to try and show how you aren't really a bigot!!!!! But you are.
Frankie Rizzo

Union City, CA

#197823 Jun 25, 2013
Jonah1 wrote:
<quoted text>
Blah, blah, blah.
The article you cut and paste creates an argument around the fact that there are gays "opposed" to marriage equality. But that sentiment is only reflected in the headline, since that is all most nincompoops like yourself are going to read. The very gay person that this article uses to try and demonstrate the "bias" it is trumping, is very clear, and is quoted as follows, "ďIím not saying that people who want that [marriage] shouldnít have it but for me, all that matters is the legal stuff.Ē
So he is hardly "opposed" to gay marriage. There are lots of straight people that find domestic partnerships or civil unions acceptable for themselves, that doesn't mean they are "opposed" to other straight people marrying.
By the way, your post above includes lots of examples of calling things "problems" but never demonstrating why they have been labeled as such. In other words, your cut and paste demonstrates the very bias it is claiming to be able to demonstrate in others. But then, you were probably too stupid to notice that, given your zeal to try and show how you aren't really a bigot!!!!! But you are.
I support your right to marry your boyfriend sport, no need for all your angry nonsense. Same sex marriage is a reality now, stop worrying and getting angry.

Having said that, Pew Research has found heavy media bias favoring SSM. This is a fact fruitcake. Don't shoot the messenger.

Calm down.
Frankie Rizzo

Union City, CA

#197824 Jun 25, 2013
On same-sex marriage, and on any aspect of gay culture, the media doesnít practice journalism, but rather publicity.

The problem is that liberal journalists donít see it as a problem, because they cannot imagine that anybody could be against same-sex marriage for any reason other than bigotry, and they donít believe they should be expected to be fair and balanced towards bigots.

This is the problem with the liberally biased media on most issues, not just same sex marriage. Any opposition to progressive policies is "bigotry" and therefore worthy of censorship and bias.
jan

Charlottesville, VA

#197825 Jun 25, 2013
So
Frankie Rizzo

Union City, CA

#197827 Jun 25, 2013
I find it difficult to see the logic of defending monogamous marriage as the historic norm when the laws of several states have already departed from the principle that it is heterosexual, monogamous marriage that is essential to social stability.

If heterosexuality is no longer legally, morally or socially relevant to marriage, why should monogamy continue to be so important?
Frankie Rizzo

Union City, CA

#197831 Jun 25, 2013
That's a red herring!
Frankie Rizzo

Union City, CA

#197832 Jun 25, 2013
What harm would a loving marriage of three consenting adult women cause Jizzy?

Why is he a hypocrite deciding who should be allowed marriage equality based on his hate of religion?

Since: Jun 13

Sacramento, CA

#197833 Jun 25, 2013
KiMare wrote:
<quoted text>
Untrue.
I'm on here protecting marriage and family from an impostor relationship by pointing out the conflict with reality of how ss couples fail to equate.
You are consistently threatened by the truth.
Ahh yes thank you so much for protect marriage it are so sacred and holy more 50% of marriage are end in divorce in this cuntry no one better do sumthing messing up that HAHAHAHAHAHA marriage meaning nuthing in this cuntry
Caligula R Us

UK

#197834 Jun 25, 2013
very Caligula wrote:
<quoted text>
Nope... Next question...
Tolerance for Caligula, but not for thee?
Frankie Rizzo

Union City, CA

#197835 Jun 25, 2013
Zoro wrote:
<quoted text>"But I find it difficult to see the logic of defending monogamous marriage as the historic norm in the west when the laws of Canada have already departed from ... monogamous marriage that is essential to social stability"
http://www.google.com/url...
The least you could do is credit the original author.
That author is talking about Canada you moron. But he is asking the same question I am. Why is polygamy illegal? If the gender part of "one man one woman" is now irrelevant why is number part still relevant?
Answer the question Jizzy, don't delete my post and claim it was a violation of TOS.

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
Any gay men in coachella valley, Ca. Who'd like... 7 hr Denny 6
mexican landscapers dump in the desert 15 hr Jean 46
stores with bad customer service {list your wor... 16 hr Bart 12
Why Blame the Police for Aggressive Behavior Feb 24 Culture Auditor 5
Gated Communiies - PEEPERS aka LANDSCAPERS! - B... Feb 24 VigilanteBlonde 1
Review: Coachella Valley Collection Service Feb 24 Undyingdebt 2
Review: Utopia Management Feb 22 RonaldHirschman 1

Winter Storm Warning for Riverside County was issued at February 28 at 4:08AM PST

Palm Springs Dating
Find my Match
More from around the web

Palm Springs People Search

Addresses and phone numbers for FREE

Personal Finance

Mortgages [ See current mortgage rates ]

NFL Latest News

Updated 7:03 am PST