Judge overturns California's ban on same-sex marriage

Aug 4, 2010 Full story: www.cnn.com 201,146

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

Since: Jun 07

Location hidden

#190182 Apr 26, 2013
For those whom are too lazy to look it up themselves.

"
Section 1.

The judicial power of the United States, shall be vested in one Supreme Court, and in such inferior courts as the Congress may from time to time ordain and establish. The judges, both of the supreme and inferior courts, shall hold their offices during good behaviour, and shall, at stated times, receive for their services, a compensation, which shall not be diminished during their continuance in office.
Section 2.

The judicial power shall extend to all cases, in law and equity, arising under this Constitution, the laws of the United States, and treaties made, or which shall be made, under their authority;--to all cases affecting ambassadors, other public ministers and consuls;--to all cases of admiralty and maritime jurisdiction;--to controversies to which the United States shall be a party;--to controversies between two or more states;--between a state and citizens of another state;--between citizens of different states;--between citizens of the same state claiming lands under grants of different states, and between a state, or the citizens thereof, and foreign states, citizens or subjects.

In all cases affecting ambassadors, other public ministers and consuls, and those in which a state shall be party, the Supreme Court shall have original jurisdiction. In all the other cases before mentioned, the Supreme Court shall have appellate jurisdiction, both as to law and fact, with such exceptions, and under such regulations as the Congress shall make.

The trial of all crimes, except in cases of impeachment, shall be by jury; and such trial shall be held in the state where the said crimes shall have been committed; but when not committed within any state, the trial shall be at such place or places as the Congress may by law have directed.
Section 3.

Treason against the United States, shall consist only in levying war against them, or in adhering to their enemies, giving them aid and comfort. No person shall be convicted of treason unless on the testimony of two witnesses to the same overt act, or on confession in open court.

The Congress shall have power to declare the punishment of treason, but no attainder of treason shall work corruption of blood, or forfeiture except during the life of the person attainted." US Constitution Article III
Frankie Rizzo

Union City, CA

#190183 Apr 26, 2013
destinythecreatorr wrote:
Awww but my friend is bi
That's nice fruitcake. Go play with him on the 5.
Mike the Pike

Glenn, CA

#190184 Apr 26, 2013
Next thing you know, marriage will be between a man and his dog!

Since: Dec 09

Knoxville, TN

#190185 Apr 26, 2013
KiMare wrote:
<quoted text>
ARe you serious??? Hollywood is the basis of your counter? That's priceless.
Do you understand your choice of example only validates the inability of gays to judge marriage and family? No marriage honoring or caring parent would equate with those examples.
Amazingly stupid...
Smirk.
OK... Let's look at "real America". In 2008, just over 40% of live births in this country were to single parent households. That's up from 18.4% in 1980.

I thought that evolutionary mating behavior (from a cross cultural perspective) depended on marriage.

Apparently not...

Don't throw gays under the bus just because you straight people can't seem to stay married.

Hundreds of thousands of us would love to be given the opportunity to marry someone for life.

You can't predict whether or not a gay couple will divorce any more than I can predict whether or not a straight couple will.

Since: Dec 09

Knoxville, TN

#190186 Apr 26, 2013
akpilot wrote:
<quoted text>
If marriage is so f$cked up, why would you want to be a part of it? Kind of like buying a new car for MSRP with a blown engine if you ask me.
Because not all marriages are so fucked up (you can write the word out). Some do last.

Since you probably didn't read my post clearly, you likely missed the point I was making to Kimare. I was simply trying to point out that not all marriages are a cross cultural constraint on evolutionary mating behavior.

Many people enter into marriage for reasons other than to raise families.

If marriage was solely about the creation of families, then laws would be in place that mandated fertility testing prior to marriage. There would also be laws in place that would automatically dissolve a marriage if it did not produce an offspring.

Wouldn't you agree?
Frankie Rizzo

Union City, CA

#190187 Apr 26, 2013
veryvermilion wrote:
<quoted text>
Because not all marriages are so fucked up (you can write the word out). Some do last.
Since you probably didn't read my post clearly, you likely missed the point I was making to Kimare. I was simply trying to point out that not all marriages are a cross cultural constraint on evolutionary mating behavior.
Many people enter into marriage for reasons other than to raise families.
If marriage was solely about the creation of families, then laws would be in place that mandated fertility testing prior to marriage. There would also be laws in place that would automatically dissolve a marriage if it did not produce an offspring.
Wouldn't you agree?
The reason the government is in the marriage business at all is that marriage is good for society. It is a stabilizing influence and a family is the building block of society. Children play very heavily into this but it is true that they are not the only reason the government encourages marriage. Families without children and or having no intent or ability to have children are still beneficial to society.

I believe same sex, opposite sex, poly marriage and yes, incest marriage all deserve EQUAL consideration and respect, for they all contribute to a stable prosperous society.

And I believe SSM supporters who don't support polygamy and incest marriage are hypocrites.

Since: Jun 07

Location hidden

#190188 Apr 26, 2013
veryvermilion wrote:
<quoted text>
Because not all marriages are so fucked up (you can write the word out). Some do last.
You seem to be centering your argument on the basis that they don't, and that is why same-sex marriage is a non-issue. Are you no longer interested in that line of reasoning?
veryvermilion wrote:
<quoted text>
Since you probably didn't read my post clearly, you likely missed the point I was making to Kimare.
You hardly ever have a point, you simply post talking points over and over again. Most times they don't even relate to the post you are replying to.
veryvermilion wrote:
<quoted text>
I was simply trying to point out that not all marriages are a cross cultural constraint on evolutionary mating behavior.
Marriage is a social construct created by homo-sapiens.
veryvermilion wrote:
<quoted text>
Many people enter into marriage for reasons other than to raise families.
If marriage was solely about the creation of families, then laws would be in place that mandated fertility testing prior to marriage. There would also be laws in place that would automatically dissolve a marriage if it did not produce an offspring.
Wouldn't you agree?
It doesn't matter if I agree or not. The historical basis for marriage, as the government regulates it in this country, was to protect and ensure stability for the children that could potentially be created from such a union. This is the entire reason the court has accepted that there is a State interest in marriage. If this is no longer the case, than what interest does the State have?

The State interest has always been in regards to "potential." You would know this if you would actually educate yourself rather than running around thinking any of your opinions have any basis if fact.

What is completely illogical, is a group of people not only inviting, but demanding the government regulate them.
Frankie Rizzo

Union City, CA

#190189 Apr 26, 2013
Mike the Pike wrote:
Next thing you know, marriage will be between a man and his dog!
Some will say animals cannot give consent to marry, but we don't need their consent to kill and eat them, why should we need it to marry them?
Mike the Pike

Glenn, CA

#190190 Apr 26, 2013
Marriage is a biblically defined relationship which only identifies one man and one woman as the legitimate participants. Once this definition is cast aside by society, ultimatly there will be no bounds to what constitutes an eligible party to a marriage! Man and Man, Man and Woman, Man and Bird, Dog and Cat, Man and Dog, etc.

The logic is flawless!

Since: Jun 07

Location hidden

#190191 Apr 26, 2013
veryvermilion wrote:
<quoted text>

Don't throw gays under the bus just because you straight people can't seem to stay married.
"Same-Sex Couple Fights for Right to Divorce in Maryland" http://www.nbcwashington.com/news/local/Same-...

"Texas, USA: Dallas Gay Couple Still Seeking Divorce After Four Years"
http://purpleunions.com/blog/2013/01/texas-us...

"Rhode Island Judge Faces Legal Quandary as Gay Couple Seeks Divorce"
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,231473,00...

There are more, but why bother. But one must enjoy the irony. Here we have a group of people screaming that they must be granted the acknowledgement of the government to unite them as one in marriage- because it is a RIGHT and to prevent such would be an infringement on their FREEDOM.

Note the term's- RIGHT and FREEDOM.

Now, since they were granted that "right" and "freedom" they must now fight the GOVERNMENT for their "RIGHT" and "FREEDOM" to dissolve that "MARRIAGE".

The irony being, they are neither "FREE" nor are they exercising a "RIGHT." They are exercising a government granted PRIVILEGE!

Without that silly little piece of paper, they would have been FREE and within their RIGHT to unite or dissolve said union or marriage at WILL!

That my friends is freedom, at least as our founders would have defined it.
Mike the Pike

Glenn, CA

#190192 Apr 26, 2013
Consent will not be a problem. I have yet to hear a dog say the word "NO"!

“Vita e' Bella.”

Since: May 12

Location hidden

#190193 Apr 26, 2013
akpilot wrote:
<quoted text>
You seem to be centering your argument on the basis that they don't, and that is why same-sex marriage is a non-issue. Are you no longer interested in that line of reasoning?
<quoted text>
You hardly ever have a point, you simply post talking points over and over again. Most times they don't even relate to the post you are replying to.
<quoted text>
Marriage is a social construct created by homo-sapiens.
<quoted text>
It doesn't matter if I agree or not. The historical basis for marriage, as the government regulates it in this country, was to protect and ensure stability for the children that could potentially be created from such a union. This is the entire reason the court has accepted that there is a State interest in marriage. If this is no longer the case, than what interest does the State have?
The State interest has always been in regards to "potential." You would know this if you would actually educate yourself rather than running around thinking any of your opinions have any basis if fact.
What is completely illogical, is a group of people not only inviting, but demanding the government regulate them.
Hmmmmm....ya know Ak.....that last line speaks volumes. I've thought it was odd the way SSMers would ague for the "freedom to marry" by asking the state to regulate their intimate personal relationship. It seems to contradict the desires result.
Frankie Rizzo

Union City, CA

#190194 Apr 26, 2013
veryvermilion wrote:
<quoted text>
Because not all marriages are so fucked up (you can write the word out).
You can, some of us cannot. Some posters are more equal than others on Topix.

Judged:

10

10

10

Reply »
Report Abuse Judge it!
Frankie Rizzo

Union City, CA

#190195 Apr 26, 2013
What kind of loser rates posts over and over again many times?
Jissthefacts

Covina, CA

#190198 Apr 26, 2013
Must have been a typo or something like that.
Frankie Rizzo

Union City, CA

#190199 Apr 26, 2013
just the facts wrote:
<quoted text>You Jackass
Nope. That's more your schtick.

And why would I rate my posts bad and yours good you big dummy? Boy are you stupid. Too funny!

P.S. Get an argument and get back to us.

Judged:

11

11

11

Reply »
Report Abuse Judge it!

Since: Dec 09

Knoxville, TN

#190200 Apr 26, 2013
akpilot wrote:
<quoted text>
You seem to be centering your argument on the basis that they don't, and that is why same-sex marriage is a non-issue. Are you no longer interested in that line of reasoning?
<quoted text>
You hardly ever have a point, you simply post talking points over and over again. Most times they don't even relate to the post you are replying to.
<quoted text>
Marriage is a social construct created by homo-sapiens.
<quoted text>
It doesn't matter if I agree or not. The historical basis for marriage, as the government regulates it in this country, was to protect and ensure stability for the children that could potentially be created from such a union. This is the entire reason the court has accepted that there is a State interest in marriage. If this is no longer the case, than what interest does the State have?
The State interest has always been in regards to "potential." You would know this if you would actually educate yourself rather than running around thinking any of your opinions have any basis if fact.
What is completely illogical, is a group of people not only inviting, but demanding the government regulate them.
You're of the opinion that you "know" quite a bit about this matter.

Tell me, why do you waste your time talking to us "idiots"?

If all of us are morons--ignorant and uneducated on the subjects of Constitutional law, marriage, etc., why do you bother coming here?

Shouldn't you be arguing in a courtroom? Shouldn't you offer your "valuable insight" to the real world?

I've pointed out your obvious flaw several times. You need to feel superior. You have anger issues.

What whips up such fury in someone like you?

Since: Dec 09

Knoxville, TN

#190203 Apr 26, 2013
akpilot wrote:
<quoted text>
"Same-Sex Couple Fights for Right to Divorce in Maryland" http://www.nbcwashington.com/news/local/Same-...
"Texas, USA: Dallas Gay Couple Still Seeking Divorce After Four Years"
http://purpleunions.com/blog/2013/01/texas-us...
"Rhode Island Judge Faces Legal Quandary as Gay Couple Seeks Divorce"
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,231473,00...
There are more, but why bother. But one must enjoy the irony. Here we have a group of people screaming that they must be granted the acknowledgement of the government to unite them as one in marriage- because it is a RIGHT and to prevent such would be an infringement on their FREEDOM.
Note the term's- RIGHT and FREEDOM.
Now, since they were granted that "right" and "freedom" they must now fight the GOVERNMENT for their "RIGHT" and "FREEDOM" to dissolve that "MARRIAGE".
The irony being, they are neither "FREE" nor are they exercising a "RIGHT." They are exercising a government granted PRIVILEGE!
Without that silly little piece of paper, they would have been FREE and within their RIGHT to unite or dissolve said union or marriage at WILL!
That my friends is freedom, at least as our founders would have defined it.
Then throw all marriage out the window. Everyone is free to pair up, raise children, and then move on with their lives if they so choose.

We'll let churches own the word "marriage". Only those couples who are afraid of being damned to eternal hell would seek matrimony.

Let's just take government completely out of the business of marriage. No one gets rights or protections. Everyone--gay, straight, whatever--can fend for themselves.

Such a GREAT idea! Why didn't the founders think of that?
San Bernardino

Covina, CA

#190204 Apr 26, 2013
Athens services trash haulers strike again!

http://www.dailybreeze.com/news/ci_23118173/a...
San Bernardino

Covina, CA

#190205 Apr 26, 2013
Still cheating the public, Athens?

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.

Pomona Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
Athens Services is 4th grade down 33 min Athens cases 2
Athens trash Service is a rolling train wreck 37 min built on trashy p... 3
Glendora city council has lowest ratings ever 1 hr city hall village... 6
UCLA FOOTBALL NOTEBOOK: Neuheisel says Prince w... (Sep '10) 4 hr Bruin For Life 28,250
Athens Services RICO gang (Oct '12) 5 hr Legal issues again 5
Athens is toxic to local governments (May '14) 6 hr BendOvers 3
What Athens services employees say about company 6 hr Kissers 1

Pomona News Video

Pomona Dating
Find my Match

Pomona People Search

Addresses and phone numbers for FREE

Pomona News, Events & Info

Click for news, events and info in Pomona

Personal Finance

Mortgages [ See current mortgage rates ]

NFL Latest News

Updated 8:51 pm PST