Judge overturns California's ban on same-sex marriage

Aug 4, 2010 Full story: www.cnn.com 200,987

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

“Reality bites”

Since: Dec 11

Location hidden

#181975 Mar 1, 2013
Big D wrote:
<quoted text>
Oh come on, what about line marriages?
It is a marriage that potentially never ends.
( I had no knowledge of line marriages until I read a Heinlein book, The Moon is a Harsh Mistress, great read.)
Not 6 wives, 6 positions. I have 1 wife, why in the hell would I want more?
Big D

Modesto, CA

#181976 Mar 1, 2013
Frankie Rizzo wrote:
<quoted text>
You don't get it. Prop eight bans polygamy EQUALLY to banning same sex marriage.
It's a simple concept really. What don't you understand about restricting marriage to "A" man and "A" woman? Does that mean 2 men can marry another man? Think real hard.
No you donít get it, polygamy was illegal before Prop 8, was still illegal after Prop 8, and will still be illegal when Prop 8 is overturned.

Polygamy was already banned before, and will continue to be banned after.

Prop 8 did not change polygamy laws in any way whatsoever, and will continue to have zero effect when it is overturned.
Xavier Breath

Hoboken, NJ

#181977 Mar 1, 2013
Big D wrote:
<quoted text>
No polygamy was already illegal, same sex marriage was not, Prop 8 only affected same sex marriage making it illegal, when it was not before.
Prop 8 had no effect on polygamy laws at all.
Doesn't seem THAT difficult to me. Frankie must be easily confused, or else he really believes in the "double illegal" theory. shaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa
Xavier Breath

Hoboken, NJ

#181978 Mar 1, 2013
Frankie Rizzo wrote:
<quoted text>
You don't get it. Prop eight bans polygamy EQUALLY to banning same sex marriage.
Polygamy was banned BEFORE Prop 8. Do you have a problem with linear time?
Xavier Breath

Hoboken, NJ

#181979 Mar 1, 2013
Big D wrote:
<quoted text>
Yeah, he has a vested interest in not comprehending the simplest statements of fact.
I think his problem is that he cannot admit to being incorrect.
Big D

Modesto, CA

#181980 Mar 1, 2013
Jazybird58 wrote:
<quoted text>Not 6 wives, 6 positions. I have 1 wife, why in the hell would I want more?
Oh come on..... 2 wives would have twice as many chores for you to do. You would keep busier.

And when it was time to watch a movie, you would be outvoted, you would get to see ALL the chick flicks.

This is an opportunity for you ;)
Big D

Modesto, CA

#181981 Mar 1, 2013
Xavier Breath wrote:
<quoted text>
I think his problem is that he cannot admit to being incorrect.
I think you are right

“Reality bites”

Since: Dec 11

Location hidden

#181982 Mar 1, 2013
Frankie Rizzo wrote:
<quoted text>
You don't get it. Prop eight bans polygamy EQUALLY to banning same sex marriage.
It's a simple concept really. What don't you understand about restricting marriage to "A" man and "A" woman? Does that mean 2 men can marry another man? Think real hard.
Look Frank I will try one more time. A few years ago, in the state of California, Same sex marriage was legal. Prop 8 was put on the ballot to ban, same sex marriage. Given that it ( same sex marriage) was legal, the voter initiative was overturned by a federal judge, due to its unconstitutionality. The ruling was crafted to apply only to California. Whilst polygamy is still illegal, and has been for a very long time. Your Polygamy stance would go a lot farther in say, North Carolina. There the law is a general ban, that does not change an existing law. Lets say that Iowa, next week votes to ban same sex marriage, a law that is on the books. I would venture to say, it would be struck down. You cant remove an existing law, for a select group of people based on sexuality. In the state of Illinois, EVERYONE, must wear seat belts when operating, or ridding in a motor vehicle, with the exception of buses and motor driven cycles. It does not narrow the law to only apply to people with blue eyes.
Frankie Rizzo

Union City, CA

#181983 Mar 1, 2013
Jazybird58 wrote:
<quoted text>Having seen his wife, ummm all I can say is Dayummm
I have also seen his wife. She's cute.

“Reality bites”

Since: Dec 11

Location hidden

#181984 Mar 1, 2013
Big D wrote:
<quoted text>
Oh come on..... 2 wives would have twice as many chores for you to do. You would keep busier.
And when it was time to watch a movie, you would be outvoted, you would get to see ALL the chick flicks.
This is an opportunity for you ;)
Exactly my point, that and they no doubt would have timed periods. The Midol expense could be more than I could handle.
Frankie Rizzo

Union City, CA

#181985 Mar 1, 2013
Big D wrote:
<quoted text>
That isnít the issue
the issue is youíre not comprehending that polygamy was illegal ( regardless if that is good or bad ) before prop 8, that Prop 8 had no effect on polygamy laws at all
What was true before, was still true after.
Not so with same sex marriage which was legal before prop 8 and illegal after prop 8.
Prop 8 had no effect on polygamy laws at all, prop 8 being overturned will also not change polygamy laws.
If there were no other laws against poly, prop 8 would be the only law left against poly in CA.

It's simple concept really. What don't you understand about "a man and a woman"? Does that mean 2 men and a woman? 3 men? Think real hard.
Frankie Rizzo

Union City, CA

#181986 Mar 1, 2013
Jazybird58 wrote:
<quoted text>Look Frank I will try one more time. A few years ago, in the state of California, Same sex marriage was legal. Prop 8 was put on the ballot to ban, same sex marriage. Given that it ( same sex marriage) was legal, the voter initiative was overturned by a federal judge, due to its unconstitutionality. The ruling was crafted to apply only to California. Whilst polygamy is still illegal, and has been for a very long time. Your Polygamy stance would go a lot farther in say, North Carolina. There the law is a general ban, that does not change an existing law. Lets say that Iowa, next week votes to ban same sex marriage, a law that is on the books. I would venture to say, it would be struck down. You cant remove an existing law, for a select group of people based on sexuality. In the state of Illinois, EVERYONE, must wear seat belts when operating, or ridding in a motor vehicle, with the exception of buses and motor driven cycles. It does not narrow the law to only apply to people with blue eyes.
Look Jizzy, all that is true. Also true is that prop 8 prohibits poly marriage EQUALLY to prohibiting same sex marriage.
Frankie Rizzo

Union City, CA

#181987 Mar 1, 2013
Big D wrote:
<quoted text>
I think you are right
I am incorrect in saying that "a man and a woman" prohibits poly marriage as well as same sex marriage? How so?
Frankie Rizzo

Union City, CA

#181988 Mar 1, 2013
Jazybird58 wrote:
<quoted text>Exactly my point, that and they no doubt would have timed periods. The Midol expense could be more than I could handle.
And in a polyandry marriage imagine the poor woman's beer and PPV sports events bills!

“Reality bites”

Since: Dec 11

Location hidden

#181989 Mar 1, 2013
Frankie Rizzo wrote:
<quoted text>
Look Jizzy, all that is true. Also true is that prop 8 prohibits poly marriage EQUALLY to prohibiting same sex marriage.
Is polygamy already illegal? Why yes it is.
Why would a law then be crafted, to outlaw something that's already illegal?
Xavier Breath

Hoboken, NJ

#181990 Mar 1, 2013
Frankie Rizzo wrote:
<quoted text>
If there were no other laws against poly, prop 8 would be the only law left against poly in CA.
It's simple concept really. What don't you understand about "a man and a woman"? Does that mean 2 men and a woman? 3 men? Think real hard.
If....

Yeah... that has a chance of happening....
Xavier Breath

Hoboken, NJ

#181991 Mar 1, 2013
Frankie Rizzo wrote:
<quoted text>
Look Jizzy, all that is true. Also true is that prop 8 prohibits poly marriage EQUALLY to prohibiting same sex marriage.
Double illegal! Wow! That will be hard to overturn.
Xavier Breath

Hoboken, NJ

#181992 Mar 1, 2013
Jazybird58 wrote:
<quoted text>Is polygamy already illegal? Why yes it is.
Why would a law then be crafted, to outlaw something that's already illegal?
Because double illegal serves Frankie's logic.

“Reality bites”

Since: Dec 11

Location hidden

#181993 Mar 1, 2013
Proposition 8 was a California ballot proposition and a state constitutional amendment passed in the November 2008 state elections. The measure added a new provision, Section 7.5 of the Declaration of Rights, to the California Constitution, which provides that "only marriage between a man and a woman is valid or recognized in California."[2][3][4]

By restricting the recognition of marriage to opposite-sex couples, the proposition overturned the California Supreme Court's ruling of In re Marriage Cases that same-sex couples have a constitutional right to marry. The wording of Proposition 8 was precisely the same as that which had been found in Proposition 22, which had passed in 2000 and, as an ordinary statute, had been invalidated by the State Supreme Court in 2008. California's State Constitution put Proposition 8 into immediate effect the day after the election.[5] The proposition did not affect domestic partnerships in California,[6] nor same-sex marriages performed before November 5, 2008.[7][8][9]

After the elections, demonstrations and protests occurred across the state and nation. Same-sex couples and government entities filed numerous lawsuits with the California Supreme Court challenging the proposition's validity and effect on previously administered same-sex marriages. In Strauss v. Horton, the California Supreme Court upheld Proposition 8, but allowed existing same-sex marriages to stand (under the grandfather clause principle).

United States District Court Judge Vaughn Walker overturned Proposition 8 on August 4, 2010 in the case Perry v. Schwarzenegger, ruling that it violated both the Due Process and Equal Protection clauses of the United States Constitution.[10] Walker issued an injunction against enforcing Proposition 8 and a stay to determine suspension of his ruling pending appeal.[11][12] The Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals continued the stay, keeping Walker's ruling on hold pending appeal.[13]

“Reality bites”

Since: Dec 11

Location hidden

#181994 Mar 1, 2013
Continued:

On February 7, 2012, in a 2Ė1 decision, a Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals panel affirmed Walker's decision declaring the Proposition 8 ban on same-sex marriage to be unconstitutional.[14] The panel also unanimously affirmed Judge Ware's holding that Walker was not obligated to recuse himself from the case because he is gay.[15] Still, the panel continued a stay on the ruling, barring any marriages from taking place pending further appeals.[16] On June 5, 2012, a majority of the full Ninth Circuit denied a petition for rehearing en banc and stayed the ruling pending appeal.[17] The proposition's proponents filed a petition for certiorari with the U.S. Supreme Court, requesting that the Court review the case, on July 30, 2012. On December 7, 2012, the Supreme Court granted the proponents' petition for certiorari.[18][19] The Court is expected to issue its ruling in Hollingsworth v. Perry by late June 2013.[20]

Where does Polygamy come into play?

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.

Rancho Santa Margarita Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
CA CA Proposition 23 - Global Warming (Oct '10) 6 hr ForkBelly 7,962
Review: South County Psychotherapy - Paul M Fic... (Sep '09) 8 hr Emily W 11
Suspected con man sought in reported paving scam (Apr '09) 9 hr louisiana boy 57
CA California seeks to ban free, single-use carryo... (Jun '10) 12 hr Flaggstaff 5,083
On the road alone in L.A. (Jun '07) Sun fancy 134
CA Jury reaches verdict in Oakland BART shooting t... (Jul '10) Sun theos 2,276
CA California Proposition 19: the Marijuana Legali... (Oct '10) Sep 18 Pizza 16,000
•••

Rancho Santa Margarita News Video

•••
•••

Rancho Santa Margarita Jobs

•••
•••
•••

Rancho Santa Margarita People Search

Addresses and phone numbers for FREE

•••

Rancho Santa Margarita News, Events & Info

Click for news, events and info in Rancho Santa Margarita
•••

Personal Finance

Mortgages [ See current mortgage rates ]
•••