Judge overturns California's ban on s...

Judge overturns California's ban on same-sex marriage

There are 201878 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.

“Love thy neighbor!”

Since: Dec 06

Westland , MI

#134983 Apr 3, 2012
Prof Marvel wrote:
<quoted text>
Shut, Gay Mom, and go bake a beef pie for your lesbian husband, and a fruit pie for your gay son.
I was just saying to Rose, you know when you are winning, when the opposition evades the issue and starts calling you names.

Prof Marvel

“The Great and Wonderful Marvel”

Since: Aug 09

Indianapolis, IN

#134988 Apr 3, 2012
Gay Mom wrote:
<quoted text>
I was just saying to Rose, you know when you are winning, when the opposition evades the issue and starts calling you names.
"Winning" ...?

You end up with a gay son and a lesbian husband/wife and you have the nerve to talk about winning?

I'm curious, Gay Mom -- at what point do you admit you're "losing"?

“Facts”

Since: May 08

Location hidden

#134995 Apr 3, 2012
Prof Marvel wrote:
<quoted text>
"Winning" ...?
You end up with a gay son and a lesbian husband/wife and you have the nerve to talk about winning?
I'm curious, Gay Mom -- at what point do you admit you're "losing"?
Everyday just before falling asleep reality creeps in........

And that is why they are all so bitter.....

They know they are abnormal so all they can do is to try and force the normal people to accept their abnormalities in the hope that it will make them feels less abnormal....

Prof Marvel

“The Great and Wonderful Marvel”

Since: Aug 09

Indianapolis, IN

#134996 Apr 3, 2012
Gay Mom wrote:
<quoted text>
I was just saying to Rose, you know when you are winning, when the opposition evades the issue and starts calling you names.
"Winning," Gay Mom?

Your son turns out gay and what do you do? You go out and get a lesbian husband/wife.

Is that what you call "winning" Gay Mom?

Do you really think yourself a role model for young women?

“WAY TO GO”

Since: Mar 11

IRELAND

#134997 Apr 3, 2012
Prof Marvel wrote:
<quoted text>
The only point I was trying to make is that Lawrence vs Texas doesn't establish gays as a suspect class as, Lides, the forum psychopath, keeps stupidly arguing.
If the case reaches SCOTUS these old men will surely decide sexual orientation has no Constitutional foundation -- that gays should be considered ordinary citizens, nothing more.
In fact, Lawrence vs Texas won't even come up, for it it did, and question of sodomy comes up, it will be hard to drop it later on when the question of "What are homosexuals?" comes up as it must.
Therefore, without a single SCOTUS Stare Decisis how do gays make their case? What do they point to? State decisions won't work because they're from an inferior court none of the justices will feel bound by.
SCOTUS is not going to let some San Francisco homosexual judge decide the question which means his decision gets overturned.
Who was talking Lawrence? That case has already been decided

Actually regardless of Judge Walker's sexual orientation.....his ruling will stand and SCOTUS won't touch it!!!

“WAY TO GO”

Since: Mar 11

IRELAND

#134998 Apr 3, 2012
Gay Mom wrote:
<quoted text>
I was just saying to Rose, you know when you are winning, when the opposition evades the issue and starts calling you names.
Exactly.......lol!!!

Religionthebigli e

“saved From jesus”

Since: Jul 11

Location hidden

#134999 Apr 3, 2012
Here Is One wrote:
<quoted text>
Everyday just before falling asleep reality creeps in........
And that is why they are all so bitter.....
They know they are abnormal so all they can do is to try and force the normal people to accept their abnormalities in the hope that it will make them feels less abnormal....
Irrational homophobes are funny that way.

“KiMare'a the Monster Mutation”

Since: Nov 10

Location hidden

#135001 Apr 3, 2012
The idiocy grows... Proof gays have no business in the military.

http://radio.foxnews.com/toddstarnes/top-stor...

“Where is the concern now for angering Afghan Muslims who vehemently oppose homosexuality?” he aside.“The issue is as much an issue of military security as it is of religious morality. What price will we pay because some want to use the military to show their gay pride?”

Since: Feb 12

Location hidden

#135003 Apr 3, 2012
Prof Marvel wrote:
<quoted text>
You're utterly confused, pal.
As we see in Massachusetts what immediately follows same-sex marriage is the "nomalization of homosexuality." This is what the doctors I linked are warning us about.
http://www.obamnesty.com/index.php...
If we teach children homosexuality is normal, safe, and as wholesome as mom's apple pie many of those children will end up on the beach at Fire Island taking on all comers. Others will wind-up in your gay "pride" parades in penis suits or half-nude on the end of a dog leash being led down the street by their "top."
And where do you think the young boys who end up at "Rent-A-Boy" come from? These are not all kids born with your fabled "gay gene"; many are kids who were convinced by a gay pimp that becoming a "Rent-A-Boy" was a cool way to make piles of money.
This is not rocket science. If you're gullible you buy into the line gays are peerless human beings with not an untoward thought in their saintly heads. If you've actually studied these people the way I have you know they're all train wrecks heading full steam over the same cliff.
When you become a homosexual you're a disaster waiting to happen and all the laws, gay pride marches, gay friendly curriculum in world won't change this.
Homosexuality is an aberrant, destructive lifestyle choice. And don't tell me marching down Broadway in a penis suit leading your half-nude bottom behind you on a dog leash isn't a choice, fella.
Just don't go there, OK?
Wow, just wow.

First where do you get the idea that's what they're teaching them? When I was in school they covered gay issues all they brought up were factual points in history and in sex ed, as they did with heterosexual sex, how to have safe sex and the dangers and diseases. No one said it was moral or immoral or safe or wholesome or any other bullshit anymore than they did with regular sex. They just covered the facts.

I never once said they are peerless saintlike human beings, I encourage you to quote where I do. I am saying they are human beings like everyone else.

I hardly even know how to address the rest of that bullshit. How do some people in a gay pride parade represent an entire group of people? Studied these people, lawl, and "they're all train wrecks". Wow. Really? You're going to go with an absolutes? The fact that you, "professor" seem to sweep all gays into a single category is proof enough that you have no idea in hell what you ramble on about.

"Homosexuality is an aberrant, destructive lifestyle choice." Where's the proof of that?

"And don't tell me marching down Broadway in a penis suit leading your half-nude bottom behind you on a dog leash isn't a choice, fella."
It IS a choice to dress in such a way, which is why I nor anyone I have ever known has done so. How does some gay people doing things like this make any statement about the rest of us. Some heterosexuals are disgusting perverts and I don't associate every single heterosexual on the planet as therefore also being one.

I also have no the fuck idea what rent-a-boy is.
Reality

Windsor, VT

#135004 Apr 3, 2012
Winston Smith wrote:
<quoted text>
Rather it ties procreation to marriage.
correct thereby establishing a "link".
So marriage and procreation are linked even though THERE IS NO REQUIREMENT OF PROCREATION TO MARRY.

Wouldn't EVERY CHILD of a gay marriage technically be a bastard?

See how it just doesn't fit?
Reality

Windsor, VT

#135005 Apr 3, 2012
RnL2008 wrote:
<quoted text>
Who was talking Lawrence? That case has already been decided
Actually regardless of Judge Walker's sexual orientation.....his ruling will stand and SCOTUS won't touch it!!!
Walker's ruling was already overruled by the 9th circuit.

Walker announced a federal right to gay marriage and the 9th circuit refused to find such a right.

The 9th limited the decision to CA thereby avoiding scotus review.

In short, what you wrote is very wrong in almost every way.
Reality

Windsor, VT

#135006 Apr 3, 2012
RnL2008 wrote:
<quoted text>
Exactly.......lol!!!
then why do you guys do that all the time?

Religionthebigli e

“saved From jesus”

Since: Jul 11

Location hidden

#135008 Apr 3, 2012
Reality wrote:
<quoted text>
correct thereby establishing a "link".
So marriage and procreation are linked even though THERE IS NO REQUIREMENT OF PROCREATION TO MARRY.
Wouldn't EVERY CHILD of a gay marriage technically be a bastard?
See how it just doesn't fit?
Applying that label to any child doesn't fit. There is nothing technical about the word bastard. It is a derogatory label and is only used for that purpose.
Reality

Windsor, VT

#135009 Apr 3, 2012
Religionthebiglie wrote:
<quoted text>
Applying that label to any child doesn't fit. There is nothing technical about the word bastard. It is a derogatory label and is only used for that purpose.
right, except for all the places the term bastard, meaning a child born out of wedlock, is used in the law.

Since: Feb 12

Location hidden

#135010 Apr 3, 2012
Reality wrote:
<quoted text>
correct thereby establishing a "link".
So marriage and procreation are linked even though THERE IS NO REQUIREMENT OF PROCREATION TO MARRY.
Wouldn't EVERY CHILD of a gay marriage technically be a bastard?
See how it just doesn't fit?
I still don't see what difference it makes. The kid is in a safe and happy home that can provide for it who the hell cares if the parents are or aren't married or are both related to the kid or are both the same sex or anything the hell else. If the kid is getting what they need, and they are, the rest is unimportant.

“WAY TO GO”

Since: Mar 11

IRELAND

#135011 Apr 3, 2012
Reality wrote:
<quoted text>
Walker's ruling was already overruled by the 9th circuit.
Walker announced a federal right to gay marriage and the 9th circuit refused to find such a right.
The 9th limited the decision to CA thereby avoiding scotus review.
In short, what you wrote is very wrong in almost every way.
Sorry, how stupid of me to not acknowledge your lawyer skills!!!

The 9th didn't overturn Judge Walker's ruling.....but you are entitled to believe what ya want!!!

“Facts”

Since: May 08

Location hidden

#135012 Apr 3, 2012
Religionthebiglie wrote:
<quoted text>
Irrational homophobes are funny that way.
Just the facts..........LOL
Reality

Windsor, VT

#135013 Apr 3, 2012
MerryMarauder wrote:
<quoted text>I still don't see what difference it makes. The kid is in a safe and happy home that can provide for it who the hell cares if the parents are or aren't married or are both related to the kid or are both the same sex or anything the hell else. If the kid is getting what they need, and they are, the rest is unimportant.
I support CU's and are only explaining the legal underpinnings for the link between marriage and procreation.

So, you are right, I would not want to interfere in anything like you describe. But a "marriage" is what it is and has been and marriage as it relates to procreation continues to be the cornerstone of society...

but...kids should optimally (all other things being equal) have both a mom and dad who are married, not something i would even consider remotely controversial.
Reality

Windsor, VT

#135014 Apr 3, 2012
RnL2008 wrote:
<quoted text>
Sorry, how stupid of me to not acknowledge your lawyer skills!!!
The 9th didn't overturn Judge Walker's ruling.....but you are entitled to believe what ya want!!!
did walker announce a right to gay marriage?
yes.

On review, did the 9th circuit?
No.

hmm?

Animus Thick and Thin
The Broader Impact of the Ninth Circuit Decision in Perry v. Brown
responding to The Ninth Circuit’s Perry Decision and the Constitutional Politics of Marriage Equality by William N. Eskridge Jr.
PDF Print Author's Bio
March 19, 2012 64 Stan. L. Rev. Online 111 Responses
by Nan D. Hunter
Professor of Law and Associate Dean for Graduate Programs, Georgetown University Law Center

There is a concern among supporters of marriage equality, especially those in the legal academy, that the decision of the Ninth Circuit in Perry v. Brown[1] was too good to be true or, perhaps, too clever to be sustainable.[2] Judges Reinhardt and Hawkins crafted a decision that struck down Proposition 8[3] with reasoning that applies only to California. All but ignoring Judge Walker’s far-reaching trial court opinion in Perry v. Schwarzenegger, they grounded their analysis in an application of heightened rational basis scrutiny, derived from Romer v. Evans,[4] that emphasized the significance of taking away an important right from an unpopular minority.

http://www.stanfordlawreview.org/online/animu...

Just so you see it:
"All but ignoring Judge Walker’s far-reaching trial court opinion in Perry v. Schwarzenegger,
All but ignoring Judge Walker’s far-reaching trial court opinion in Perry v. Schwarzenegger,

this is a great read regarding the nuances here that have apparently escaped you...
Reality

Windsor, VT

#135015 Apr 3, 2012
RnL2008 wrote:
<quoted text>
Sorry, how stupid of me to not acknowledge your lawyer skills!!!
The 9th didn't overturn Judge Walker's ruling.....but you are entitled to believe what ya want!!!
I will admit they did not "overturn" it technically speaking. They certainly ignored it and refused to find the right that Walker so boldly declared.

Say, would you say it was significant if we found out today that Walker was a strict catholic who wanted gay marriage to be banned and he had decided to affirm the ban?
(I know you would NEVER answer that)

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.

Redwood City Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
Moving to San Mateo/ Burlingame area need a ren... 6 hr Enirak 1
News Hidden streets of Menlo Park: Croner Avenue Jul 24 Hellary Clitass 4
News Trump seeks to dismiss lawsuit over Trump Unive... Jul 24 Callme TRUMP 2
La Victoria's Orange Sauce (Jan '06) Jul 21 TMM 131
ANyone know what happened to the girl in east p... (Mar '07) Jul 20 No more illegals 43
News Complex view of Islam found in poetry of Iran, ... Jul 18 The Proclaimer 1
News Electric Car Sales Up Despite Low Gasoline Prices Jul 16 Solarman 1

Redwood City Jobs

More from around the web

Personal Finance

Redwood City Mortgages