Judge overturns California's ban on s...

Judge overturns California's ban on same-sex marriage

There are 201862 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.

Since: Dec 09

Knoxville, TN

#203315 Jul 17, 2013
Rocky Hudsony wrote:
<quoted text>
Oh, now..
You cannot be serious...
"Social science (and basic common sense) defines marriage as a legal union that meets the needs of two people."...pshaw. You may be able to quibble about definitions, splitting hairs. SOCIETY defines marriage as the bond between man and woman. Simple, no need to dissect and cherrypick.
Marriage isn't defined SOLELY as a bond between man and woman. In 13 states and in 16 countries around the globe, marriage is also defined as a LEGAL bond between same-gender couples.

I know it kills you each time somebody points that out to you.

Oh... By the way... I never did get an answer as to why you were forced to change your name.

Would you care to elaborate?

Since: Dec 09

Knoxville, TN

#203316 Jul 17, 2013
Rocky Hudsony wrote:
<quoted text>
Did you just catch on? I was banned yet again....LOL. I'm the "new ditz" that you were replying to... Sorry it took you this long to catch on.
Maybe I'm not being clear... What particular comment got you banned?

I know who you are.
sheesh

United States

#203317 Jul 17, 2013
Irving wrote:
<quoted text>
Could you slow down your post, Jed? The brilliance is coming in way too fast.
Next to you the deepest recesses of Krubera Cave are brilliant.
sheesh

United States

#203318 Jul 17, 2013
Irving wrote:
<quoted text>
I thought you weren't new here, shitferbrains.
You actually had a thought? Best make a note of that, there's a first time for everything.
sheesh

United States

#203319 Jul 17, 2013
Drop China favored status wrote wrote:
<quoted text>

U.S. needs to drop the most favored trading status from the Communist Chinese at once, America needs it's jobs back.
America says Communist China has Spoiled Tech Tariff Talks.
Do you shop at MalWart? Your source for cheap plastic crap? If so, you better stop.
Clueless

Anaheim, CA

#203320 Jul 17, 2013
What?
laughing man

UK

#203321 Jul 17, 2013
veryvermilion wrote:
<quoted text>
Would you care to elaborate?
Now there's no question that Tennessee Trash is the fink.
laughing man

UK

#203322 Jul 17, 2013
sheesh wrote:
<quoted text>
You actually had a thought? Best make a note of that, there's a first time for everything.
OMFG, you are King Shit of the comebacks.

“KiMare'a the Monster Mutation”

Since: Nov 10

Location hidden

#203324 Jul 18, 2013
veryvermilion wrote:
<quoted text>
I want you to pay attention to the differences between the following two sentences:
--"Marriage is a cross cultural constrain on evolutionary mating behavior."
--"Marriage MIGHT BE a cross cultural constraint on evolutionary mating behavior, according to a theory put forth by David Buss and David Schmitt."
--"Marriages have been used by many as a cross cultural constraint on evolutionary mating behavior--according to a theory. However, since not all marriages involve mating behavior, one CANNOT conclude that marriage IS ALWAYS defined in this manner."
----------
Now, I know you're a little slow. And I know just how much you're "married" (get it?) to your little definition of marriage. But even someone as witless as you should be able to see how incorrect you are.
If you read the article in its entirety, you will see that your definition applies only to "relationships" and not necessarily "marriage".
I'm sorry my response to your comment was so lengthy. In the future I will try to remember your short attention span and create my responses by way of "sock-puppet theater", which I will then upload to YouTube.
Let me help you;

"Mating is a human universal."

"All known societies have formal marriage alliances between MEN AND WOMEN (emphasis added)."

"More than 90% of all people in all societies marry at some point in their lives."

"In a cross cultural perspective, marriages are usually regarded as formal reproductive alliances (NOTE THE TIE-IN WITH CHILD BIRTH) that contain the features of (a) mutual obligation between husband and wife (NOTE THE GENDER DIVERSITY)(b) rights of sexual access (c) an expectation that marriage will persist through pregnancy, lactation, and child rearing and (d), and recognition of the legitimate status of the couple's children."

There is no 'theory' involved. There is simply a social science identified commonality that encompasses nearly all cross-cultural marriages. The rest of the article addresses their theory.

Face it queen, that single paragraph destroys virtually every claim gay twirl trolls like you make.

“KiMare'a the Monster Mutation”

Since: Nov 10

Location hidden

#203325 Jul 18, 2013
guest wrote:
<quoted text>
Oh you silly troll. Practicing your copy paste skills again, I see. How many thousands of times have you posted those same exact sentences, as if that will make them mean something? Silly old man.
Might want to check your comprehension skill with the above post...

“KiMare'a the Monster Mutation”

Since: Nov 10

Location hidden

#203326 Jul 18, 2013
KiMare wrote:
<quoted text>
I'm guessing on Mother's Day YOU got the honors and not the woman who abandoned her children?
guest wrote:
<quoted text>
Would that be an example of an ad hominem attack?
Hardly. A legitimate exposure of someone deliberately depriving a child of their mother. You call that 'ad hominem'???

“KiMare'a the Monster Mutation”

Since: Nov 10

Location hidden

#203327 Jul 18, 2013
veryvermilion wrote:
<quoted text>
Marriage isn't defined SOLELY as a bond between man and woman. In 13 states and in 16 countries around the globe, marriage is also defined as a LEGAL bond between same-gender couples.
I know it kills you each time somebody points that out to you.
Oh... By the way... I never did get an answer as to why you were forced to change your name.
Would you care to elaborate?
It is simply stupid to call a mutually sterile, duplicate gendered half of marriage, marriage.

Clearly not the same.

“KiMare'a the Monster Mutation”

Since: Nov 10

Location hidden

#203328 Jul 18, 2013
veryvermilion wrote:
<quoted text>
Oh... By the way... I never did get an answer as to why you were forced to change your name.
Would you care to elaborate?
A gay troll fishing...

“KiMare'a the Monster Mutation”

Since: Nov 10

Location hidden

#203329 Jul 18, 2013
Rocky, you are on a roll!!!

Succinct and piercing!

“Crusading Fundies r hilarious!”

Since: Feb 11

Location hidden

#203331 Jul 18, 2013
KiMare wrote:
<quoted text>
Anal sex is inherently harmful, unhealthy and demeaning. It is why it is considered illegal in many countries, and was here until recently.

Yawn. These are your unfounded opinions. Nothing more. What's illegal elsewhere or elsewhen is completely irrelevant. But don't let facts get in the way of your obsession over anal sex.
KiMare wrote:
<quoted text>
That medical fact has not changed,
You didn't state a medical fact, you stated unfounded opinions.
KiMare wrote:
<quoted text>
and is a major part of how AIDS originated in our country and spread.
Oh, now your going to try AIDS as your talking point. Got it. Yawn. AIDS originated in Africa at the turn of the century. It spread predominately through heterosexual sex and from mother to child for over 60 years before it ever entered the United States and the gay community. Since no one knew it existed, it was spread rapidly through the gay male community, mostly because males tend to have more recreational sex then women, especially in the 70s free love period. Your desire to blame victims for the spread of a disease they didn't know they had is repugnant.

And for the record, if it weren't for the fact that it did become predominant within the gay community, it would have taken decades longer to connect all the various opportunistic infections to each other and a common cause, so our ability to identify HIV as early as we did is in huge part due to the suffering of the early gay carriers. In addition, ALL the major organizations that exist today as related to AIDS prevention, AIDS care, and AIDS assistance were created by the gay community. So make sure to thank them for all the money they saved you in the long run.
KiMare wrote:
<quoted text>
THAT IS STILL COSTING ALL OF US IN MANY WAYS.
Was capitalizing it supposed to make us feel that you are suffering personally? Lot's of diseases cost us. Lots of unwanted pregnancies cost us. Lot's of things cost us. Get over it. The vast majority of people on this planet carrying HIV are straight people. And AIDS has absolutely nothing to due with marriage.
KiMare wrote:
<quoted text>
So take your self-righteous hissy fit and stuff it.
Right back at you, you ugly sanctimonious c*nt.

“Crusading Fundies r hilarious!”

Since: Feb 11

Location hidden

#203333 Jul 18, 2013
KiMare wrote:
<quoted text>
However, there is life-long mating behavior among animals, marriage WITHOUT the law.
I see. So now you are going to refer to life-long mating as marriage. Got it.

BTW, those natural life-long mating behaviors among animals include homosexual mating, oh, excuse me, homosexual marriage WITHOUT law.

Smile.

Since: Dec 09

Knoxville, TN

#203335 Jul 18, 2013
KiMare wrote:
<quoted text>
Let me help you;
"Mating is a human universal."
"All known societies have formal marriage alliances between MEN AND WOMEN (emphasis added)."
"More than 90% of all people in all societies marry at some point in their lives."
"In a cross cultural perspective, marriages are usually regarded as formal reproductive alliances (NOTE THE TIE-IN WITH CHILD BIRTH) that contain the features of (a) mutual obligation between husband and wife (NOTE THE GENDER DIVERSITY)(b) rights of sexual access (c) an expectation that marriage will persist through pregnancy, lactation, and child rearing and (d), and recognition of the legitimate status of the couple's children."
There is no 'theory' involved. There is simply a social science identified commonality that encompasses nearly all cross-cultural marriages. The rest of the article addresses their theory.
Face it queen, that single paragraph destroys virtually every claim gay twirl trolls like you make.
But girlfriend, you ALWAYS gloss over their use of the word "USUALLY" in the first paragraph. This indicates that NOT ALL marriages are regarded as formal reproductive alliances.

Why you don't get it is beyond me.

When a study is presented to a professional journal, every single word is scrutinized. I'm sure they didn't casually throw the word "usually" in their discussion.

And NOTHING in this article even addresses your claim that same-sex relationships or marriages are harmful to children.

You CANNOT draw conclusions from a study that the authors, themselves, did not draw.

Keep yammering, queen... Maybe you'll convince yourself.

Until David Buss and David Schmitt provide us with a study that directly deals with MARRIAGE--both gay and straight--and not mating behavior, you have no case.

“Crusading Fundies r hilarious!”

Since: Feb 11

Location hidden

#203336 Jul 18, 2013
KiMare wrote:
<quoted text>
Here is the bottom line.
In the first paragraph, they verified my concise statement; Marriage is a cross cultural constraint on evolutionary mating behavior.
As to the rest of the content, I knew exactly where it went. As I noted with my first reference, I have chosen brief summaries that prove my statement.
You should take note of the practice of 'briefness'...
Again, you can find that statement in other articles regarding marriage and mating behavior.
No dear, HERE'S the bottom line. Mating behavior is completely irrelevant to the state issuing a marriage license. Always has been, always will be. All your precious articles regarding mating behavior will ALWAYS be irrelevant. Like you.

Since: Dec 09

Knoxville, TN

#203337 Jul 18, 2013
KiMare wrote:
<quoted text>
It is simply stupid to call a mutually sterile, duplicate gendered half of marriage, marriage.
Clearly not the same.
It's simply stupid to continue to make claims that have no basis in legal fact.

I'll bet you just bark at the moon when you see more and more states and countries pass marriage equality laws.

The TOP queen gave her official approval for same-sex marriage in the U.K. yesterday.

LONG LIVE THE QUEEN!!

“Sara for Fun (( M 2 F ))”

Since: Aug 10

Bahrain

#203338 Jul 18, 2013
veryvermilion wrote:
<quoted text>
It's simply stupid to continue to make claims that have no basis in legal fact.
I'll bet you just bark at the moon when you see more and more states and countries pass marriage equality laws.
The TOP queen gave her official approval for same-sex marriage in the U.K. yesterday.
LONG LIVE THE QUEEN!!
LONG LIVE THE QUEEN!!

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
Review: Lifetouch Prestige Portraits Aug 13 Mad mom 1
Complaint CATHEDRAL CITY POLICE DEPARTMENT (Jan '08) Aug 13 EvilDave 50
News Man Pleads Guilty in Fatal 2012 New Year's Shoo... Aug 3 MomsWhoKill 2
News Costco readies for new opening (Dec '06) Jul '15 Maria Anderson 157
Desert Hot Springs Police Dept. Great Public Se... Jul '15 Dorris 7
News Man petitions road name change to mend racial t... Jul '15 inewsmaster 1
Review: jumpers zone party rentals Jul '15 Yaneth 1
More from around the web

Personal Finance

Palm Springs Mortgages