Judge overturns California's ban on same-sex marriage

Aug 4, 2010 Full story: www.cnn.com 201,795

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.

Read more
LYIN AYN RYAN

Anderson, CA

#162990 Oct 13, 2012
Martina Navratilover wrote:
<quoted text>I am against marijuana period and illegal immigration, if you must know. The operative word is illegal, and yes, I do have friends who are here illegally.
Go back to school.
Spelling lesson:
convenient
you'll
probably
so in other words.....

federal law is only used when convienient??

you typical teabuttlicker...

who can take you seriously

ps: federal law applies to applying the constitution....that is it!!
Winston Smith

Temple Hills, MD

#162991 Oct 13, 2012
R Hudson wrote:
<quoted text>
Yeah, and that sure beats stabbing ass, any day of the week. Wipe the jizz off now....
What does, having a need to lie to complete strangers about the sexy woman you want others to believe you're bagging? The tune that pops into my head at this point in time is an oldie by ARS. Imaginary lover. Lemme know if you heard it in your youth...
Winston Smith

Temple Hills, MD

#162992 Oct 13, 2012
akpilot wrote:
<quoted text>
You idiots are amazing. Who would of thought that a post which claims DOMA is unconstitutional would get 6 poor judge-its??
Goes to show that you are all just a bunch of sheep who can't think for yourselves.
Ya know what AK? You and I differ in regards to which one of the two possibilities we're going to have as the next POTUS. What I'd be willing to wager is that the two of us are of the mind that the choices are dismal. And this is nothing new - in reality it is so old it is expected.
Winston Smith

Temple Hills, MD

#162993 Oct 13, 2012
R Hudson wrote:
<quoted text>
Obammy's rescinding of Clintons "don't ask, don't tell" opened the door for the lesbians in the US Army, one of whom was ogling my niece in the shower from a tree the day before her grauation from Boot Camp. Answer that...Leching from a tree and denying same. True Story.
Whether or not your story is true, it isn't beyond reality to think that it is. OTOH, it isn't a valid argument against a policy that doesn't examine members of the military through a looking glass that attempts to be a screen for sexual preference. There are plenty of stories involving sexual impropriety directed toward young female troops by men in the armed forces. That it occurs betweem men in the role of superior against women in subordinate military ranks is no argument against heterosexuality. Why should sane people accept the counterpart as evidence against homosexualit?

Since: Jun 07

Location hidden

#162994 Oct 13, 2012
Winston Smith wrote:
<quoted text>
Ya know what AK? You and I differ in regards to which one of the two possibilities we're going to have as the next POTUS. What I'd be willing to wager is that the two of us are of the mind that the choices are dismal. And this is nothing new - in reality it is so old it is expected.
We have a choice? I'm still looking for the difference.

At least Romney said the words- "State Right" a few times during the debate, thought I feel he had to hold back a chuckle each time he did so.

So I guess he has that going for him?

Since: Jun 07

Location hidden

#162995 Oct 14, 2012
Winston Smith wrote:
<quoted text>
Whether or not your story is true, it isn't beyond reality to think that it is. OTOH, it isn't a valid argument against a policy that doesn't examine members of the military through a looking glass that attempts to be a screen for sexual preference. There are plenty of stories involving sexual impropriety directed toward young female troops by men in the armed forces. That it occurs betweem men in the role of superior against women in subordinate military ranks is no argument against heterosexuality. Why should sane people accept the counterpart as evidence against homosexualit?
The only issue/concern I see with the tossing of DADT is the effect it will have on housing.

We know that homosexuals have served honorably for, well, forever. So one is hard pressed to find any reason why one should be allowed to serve openly.

The only part which concerned me was the housing of troops. In Basic there are many troops housed in open bays together. In that situation we separate male from female for obvious reasons. We do the same in the dormitories and tents.

This was simple when gender was the only issue, as sexual orientation was assumed- albeit foolishly. The answer isn't as simple when we are dealing with homosexuality. How should they be segregated? Or should they?

I don't really know the answer to this question, and one could say since there have been no issues, publicly at least, that it is a non-issue. But I am not so sure that the lack of issues doesn't have more to do with homosexuals self-employing their own DADT policy?

But I do agree that sexual harassment occurs in both the heterosexual and homosexual community, and is not an argument either for or against this policy. But it did seem simpler when the answer was simply the separation of the sexes, which could be employed to at least attempt to quell and head off the issue before it occurred.

Since: Jun 07

Location hidden

#162996 Oct 14, 2012
****We know that homosexuals have served honorably for, well, forever. So one is hard pressed to find any reason why one should be allowed to serve openly.****

Should have read:

We know that homosexuals have served honorably for, well, forever. So one is hard pressed to find any reason why one shouldn't be allowed to serve openly.

“SCOTUS will Rule in June for”

Since: Aug 08

MARRIAGE EQUALITY:-)

#162997 Oct 14, 2012
akpilot wrote:
<quoted text>
The only issue/concern I see with the tossing of DADT is the effect it will have on housing.
We know that homosexuals have served honorably for, well, forever. So one is hard pressed to find any reason why one should be allowed to serve openly.
The only part which concerned me was the housing of troops. In Basic there are many troops housed in open bays together. In that situation we separate male from female for obvious reasons. We do the same in the dormitories and tents.
This was simple when gender was the only issue, as sexual orientation was assumed- albeit foolishly. The answer isn't as simple when we are dealing with homosexuality. How should they be segregated? Or should they?
I don't really know the answer to this question, and one could say since there have been no issues, publicly at least, that it is a non-issue. But I am not so sure that the lack of issues doesn't have more to do with homosexuals self-employing their own DADT policy?
But I do agree that sexual harassment occurs in both the heterosexual and homosexual community, and is not an argument either for or against this policy. But it did seem simpler when the answer was simply the separation of the sexes, which could be employed to at least attempt to quell and head off the issue before it occurred.
In my opinion, there is no need for separate berthing just because someone is Gay or Lesbian......that would be the same thing as when we separated troops based solely on skin color.

Gay men and straight men should be grown-up enough to handle the situation, besides.....it's not like Gay men are attracted or will hit on straight men and if straight men think they will, well, they shouldn't flatter themselves!!!

Since: Oct 12

Coolidge, AZ

#162998 Oct 14, 2012
So after he finally got my pants off, he said "Oh my God ! You aint stickin that huge thing in me !" And then he left.

And that ended our date.

:(

“KiMare'a the Monster Mutation”

Since: Nov 10

Location hidden

#162999 Oct 14, 2012
LYIN AYN RYAN wrote:
<quoted text>\
read slower
eventually when gay rights are actaully recognized by the federal government, they will add it to the constiution...
but many states will join those that have already made the plunge. like mass and vt.
it is great to see barney frank getting married as he retires from a long career of public service.
dont fight it, it is just natural for people to be different..
I beg you show tolerance.
no?
then enjoy irrelevancy, as those who just want to be treated the same as you, fight for(and gain) their rights!!
it has happened before, and equality will happen again..
why do you fools on the right, have to be on the wrong side of history all the time....
just look at all the progress on gay rights in the past 20 years!
huge!!
same with medicinal marijuana.
attitudes are changing....
dont be left behind!
There is no such thing as gay 'marriage'.

It is a simple denial of reality,

A foolish attempt to impose an imposter relationship on the single and only birthplace of every single other type of relationship.

Attitudes change for right and wrong reasons and there will always be idiots.

“KiMare'a the Monster Mutation”

Since: Nov 10

Location hidden

#163000 Oct 14, 2012
NorCal Native wrote:
<quoted text>
In my opinion, there is no need for separate berthing just because someone is Gay or Lesbian......that would be the same thing as when we separated troops based solely on skin color.
Gay men and straight men should be grown-up enough to handle the situation, besides.....it's not like Gay men are attracted or will hit on straight men and if straight men think they will, well, they shouldn't flatter themselves!!!
So you are saying that homosexuals don't have the same degree of sexual attraction that heterosexuals do? So it is fair that heterosexuals are segregated, but okay for homosexuals to not be?

You are saying that there is no risk of rape by homosexuals (in a overtly authoritarian setting), like the current problem in the military with heterosexual rape?

In my opinion, you are a lying idiot. Your gay twirl puts our nation and military at risk.

“SCOTUS will Rule in June for”

Since: Aug 08

MARRIAGE EQUALITY:-)

#163001 Oct 14, 2012
KiMare wrote:
<quoted text>
So you are saying that homosexuals don't have the same degree of sexual attraction that heterosexuals do? So it is fair that heterosexuals are segregated, but okay for homosexuals to not be?
You are saying that there is no risk of rape by homosexuals (in a overtly authoritarian setting), like the current problem in the military with heterosexual rape?
In my opinion, you are a lying idiot. Your gay twirl puts our nation and military at risk.
It's fair that the genders are segregated, if that was what you were getting at!!!

Did my post mention rape at all? I don't believe it did!!!

I know.....everyone who makes a post that you don't like makes it some gay twist or twirl.....what a true idiot you are!!!

Gays and Lesbians DON'T put our Nation or our Military at Risk.......but people like you should be considered a threat to National Security!!!

“ Ah see's lanlubbers Cap'n BT!”

Since: Oct 10

Location hidden

#163002 Oct 14, 2012
Jeeeesuuus christ!!! Don't you ever git tired of the damned sock routine??

WTF!!!
LIE Buster
Oscar Wilde 1->
Jedi 1->
mirror mirror
Martin T >
"Martina" T>
Chunky
Doctor 1->
Judge Monitor >
Gate Keeper 1->
Yadda Yadda Yadda Yadda Yadda???

Like I said kid-
Grow ta hell up!!!

“SCOTUS will Rule in June for”

Since: Aug 08

MARRIAGE EQUALITY:-)

#163003 Oct 14, 2012
Black Thunder 42 wrote:
Jeeeesuuus christ!!! Don't you ever git tired of the damned sock routine??
WTF!!!
LIE Buster
Oscar Wilde 1->
Jedi 1->
mirror mirror
Martin T >
"Martina" T>
Chunky
Doctor 1->
Judge Monitor >
Gate Keeper 1->
Yadda Yadda Yadda Yadda Yadda???
Like I said kid-
Grow ta hell up!!!
You ask to much of that particular poster......lol:-)

“ Ah see's lanlubbers Cap'n BT!”

Since: Oct 10

Location hidden

#163004 Oct 14, 2012
NorCal Native wrote:
<quoted text>
You ask to much of that particular poster......lol:-)
This guy is a nut case!
==========
@ Martina Navratilover

This is a guy by the way.


You should have never posted under my handle, let alone on multiple threads.
You should have never changed my posts on those threads.
I don't do it to anyone else, and I won't stand for anyone doing it to me.
It is against TOS rules for obvious reasons.

You have crossed the line, and you will suffer the consequences.

YOU did it-not me.

You NEVER learn

“SCOTUS will Rule in June for”

Since: Aug 08

MARRIAGE EQUALITY:-)

#163005 Oct 14, 2012
Black Thunder 42 wrote:
<quoted text>
This guy is a nut case!
==========
@ Martina Navratilover
This is a guy by the way.
You should have never posted under my handle, let alone on multiple threads.
You should have never changed my posts on those threads.
I don't do it to anyone else, and I won't stand for anyone doing it to me.
It is against TOS rules for obvious reasons.
You have crossed the line, and you will suffer the consequences.
YOU did it-not me.
You NEVER learn
I know......sad and pathetic that one!!!

“KiMare'a the Monster Mutation”

Since: Nov 10

Location hidden

#163006 Oct 14, 2012
NorCal Native wrote:
<quoted text>
It's fair that the genders are segregated, if that was what you were getting at!!!
Did my post mention rape at all? I don't believe it did!!!
I know.....everyone who makes a post that you don't like makes it some gay twist or twirl.....what a true idiot you are!!!
Gays and Lesbians DON'T put our Nation or our Military at Risk.......but people like you should be considered a threat to National Security!!!
Honey, go back and read what I wrote slowly. Think about it before you respond. Then think about again before you respond.

Here is some help;

-Genders are separated because of orientation.

-You are right, you didn't mention rape. You sanitized the issue by talking about 'gays and straights behaving'. My point is they don't and are not. There are already cases where gays in authority have violated their position. Or, maybe you missed the Navy vet politician who talked about 'pillow fights' with his subordinates BEFORE the repeal of DADT! Not to mention the horrendous problem with heterosexual rape occurring right now because of the mix of heterosexuals in the military setting.

The distinction of how the female POW was dealt at the beginning of the war with Iraq and male POW's since is a example of unintended and unplanned consequences that these idiotic decisions incur.

Your blissful and deliberate ignorance is putting the US at risk and makes you a traitor.

“SCOTUS will Rule in June for”

Since: Aug 08

MARRIAGE EQUALITY:-)

#163007 Oct 14, 2012
KiMare wrote:
<quoted text>
Honey, go back and read what I wrote slowly. Think about it before you respond. Then think about again before you respond.
Here is some help;
-Genders are separated because of orientation.
-You are right, you didn't mention rape. You sanitized the issue by talking about 'gays and straights behaving'. My point is they don't and are not. There are already cases where gays in authority have violated their position. Or, maybe you missed the Navy vet politician who talked about 'pillow fights' with his subordinates BEFORE the repeal of DADT! Not to mention the horrendous problem with heterosexual rape occurring right now because of the mix of heterosexuals in the military setting.
The distinction of how the female POW was dealt at the beginning of the war with Iraq and male POW's since is a example of unintended and unplanned consequences that these idiotic decisions incur.
Your blissful and deliberate ignorance is putting the US at risk and makes you a traitor.
Genders are separated STRICTLY because of the physical difference......nothing to do with their sexual orientation!!!

They actually do and can behave........and I was HARDLY sanitizing anything......as for your comment about Gays in authority violating their position......that has been happening by males in authority towards women for over 40 years......so, please don't make it sound as one is worse than the other.....both are equally wrong!!!
You have some proof to back up this story that was told, right?

Have you served? or are you just talking BS out of your azz?
DorN

La Puente, CA

#163008 Oct 14, 2012
KiMare wrote:
<quoted text>
So you are saying that homosexuals don't have the same degree of sexual attraction that heterosexuals do? So it is fair that heterosexuals are segregated, but okay for homosexuals to not be?
You are saying that there is no risk of rape by homosexuals (in a overtly authoritarian setting), like the current problem in the military with heterosexual rape?
In my opinion, you are a lying idiot. Your gay twirl puts our nation and military at risk.
----------
If men and women were quartered together, pregnancy would result.
LYIN AYN RYAN

Anderson, CA

#163009 Oct 14, 2012
KiMare wrote:
<quoted text>
There is no such thing as gay 'marriage'.
It is a simple denial of reality,
A foolish attempt to impose an imposter relationship on the single and only birthplace of every single other type of relationship.
Attitudes change for right and wrong reasons and there will always be idiots.
Ive seen two gay guys together many times......

it doesnt seem like they are in denial to me ...

by being together I dont think they are "imposing" anything on you.

try to explain that one a little better(but ill bet you cannot)

yes there will always be idiots...

those who cant roll with the changes (because of phony religious values) are the first to come to mind.

and from another lame post of yours??

people in power abusing their power??

ive never heard of that happening before(sarc)
I cant believe a gay guy was the first to abuse his power(sarc)

you sound a little sheltered.

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
Nomor tante girang terbaru 7 hr jajal aja 1
News Soledad Canyon a " California Mar 25 Ravenite Coffee 2
does anyone need a good dog walker (May '07) Mar 25 chicagodawg 46
Review: Cathy Jean Shoes (Jan '09) Mar 23 Shoe Collector 84
does 4-stroke scooter take regular oil Mar 21 styxxx116 1
News German-American International School will move ... Mar 20 Samuel 1
News City Council Approves Parks and Recreation Depa... Mar 9 Nita Singler 1
Redwood City Dating
Find my Match
More from around the web

Redwood City People Search

Addresses and phone numbers for FREE

Personal Finance

Mortgages [ See current mortgage rates ]