Judge overturns California's ban on same-sex marriage

Aug 4, 2010 Full story: www.cnn.com 201,794

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
Big D

Modesto, CA

#181816 Feb 28, 2013
Frankie Rizzo wrote:
<quoted text>
This bears further investigation
why were they nice to you, did you act like you do here?
- Because they are my friends and neighbors. We have Sunday dinners with each other often. We live in a very social private community of VERY diverse and friendly people. We have a community kitchen available with full restaurant quality equipment capable of preparing meals for 200 people. that's where I whipped up the chili.
And yes, I act like I do here but not as rude, the rudeness is because you deserve it. They don't.
Whenever they tried to talk about anything at all did you immediately switch the subject to poly and get upset with them if they tried to discuss anything else?
-We speak of true marriage equality often. One couple are gay married men. They express much interest, they are not afraid of it and generally support it.
Did you end every response to anything they said by calling them a jackass or a dope?-No because they are not jackasses or dopes.
Did you belittle every ideal they had, and attack any of them that were in support of same sex marriage?
-I don't attack anyone for supporting SSM, I support it myself. I attack them for hypocrisy, common here, uncommon with my friends.
I wonder what the difference was in your behavior, that they treated you nicely.
- They like me and respect me, you don't.
Hope that helped.
Of course I donít, no one does

because you Do attack every single person that supports SSM

You end every response with "jackass" or "dope" or something else

you freak out if anyone says anything about something other than what you are so obsessed with

I am willing to make a wager, that when you had this party, you didnít do that.

I am not the one complaining here, you were when you posted about this party, I expect your childish behavior because that is all you have ever shown me.
Big D

Modesto, CA

#181817 Feb 28, 2013
Frankie Rizzo wrote:
<quoted text>
When did I say there were no problems and it would be a cinch, Liar Big D?
I say there is an image problem, you say there is not

I say it may take a decade or so, you call me a bigot

I say I would vote for it, and you scream at the top of your lungs about my non-support as if you didnít read what I wrote

I have not heard you mention a single obstacle, you act as if there arenít any.

are you ready to acknowledge that some work needs to be done before this could possibly happen?

p.s. did you call everyone at that party a Liar?

“Reality bites”

Since: Dec 11

Location hidden

#181818 Feb 28, 2013
Big D wrote:
<quoted text>
It strikes me, that you and I donít always agree, I am probably more supportive of Poly than you are. I found your list of legal issues hilarious, and my first thought was.... Think of the very happy lawyers and all the billable hours they will enjoy sorting all that stuff out. But heck if people want to complicate their lives that muchÖ go have fun, just donít ask me to pay for it.
The difference is, you and I can disagree, without belittling the other. I strongly support the freedom of people to marry who they choose, regardless of race, creed, color, sex, religion, orientation, or national origin.
I am certain you share that vision of freedom as well.
Even if we disagree on other things
Frankie cannot disagree with anyone without his tantrum, that is the difference.
As I have said before, who or how many a person wants to marry makes no difference. For the most part someones marriage has little if any affect on my marriage. That being said, poly marriage will have an affect on our legal system, good or bad it will have an affect. That can not be said of same sex marriage. The reality is this, the topic of this thread is not polygamy or incest marriage. I gave Frank his own thread for that purpose.

“Reality bites”

Since: Dec 11

Location hidden

#181819 Feb 28, 2013
Frankie Rizzo wrote:
<quoted text>
Prop 8 says marriage in CA is "one man one woman" You do the math (if you're capable). Does it effect polygamy? Think real hard creep.
No this thread pertains to a federal judge who overturned a ban on same sex marriage. Did he have the right to do so. Did the portions of the Constitution that he sighted pertain to his ruling. At one time Same sex marriage was legal in California, did the voters of California have the right to remove and deny marriage based on sexuality?? Did the action of the voters violate the U.S. Constitution? At what time was Polgamy legal in the State of California?
Frankie Rizzo

Union City, CA

#181820 Feb 28, 2013
Big D wrote:
<quoted text>
I say there is an image problem, you say there is not
- No I don't, I say the image problem is the result of ignorance and bigotry.

I say it may take a decade or so, you call me a bigot
-No I don't I say why does it matter how long it takes.

I say I would vote for it, and you scream at the top of your lungs about my non-support as if you didnít read what I wrote.
-I don't scream, calm down. You say you would vote for it but no one else will because it is well known that polygamists are criminals using polygamy to commit their crimes.

I have not heard you mention a single obstacle, you act as if there arenít any.
-That's not true.

are you ready to acknowledge that some work needs to be done before this could possibly happen?-Never said it would be easy jackass.

p.s. Did you call everyone at that party a Liar?
-No, because they didn't lie. I only met a few of them. My gay neighbors asked if I would make chili they would supply the premium beer (gays don't fly coach!- calm down, they told me that one among others)I'm not a man to turn down free beer!
Hope that helps.
Frankie Rizzo

Union City, CA

#181821 Feb 28, 2013
Jazybird58 wrote:
<quoted text>As I have said before, who or how many a person wants to marry makes no difference. For the most part someones marriage has little if any affect on my marriage. That being said, poly marriage will have an affect on our legal system, good or bad it will have an affect. That can not be said of same sex marriage. The reality is this, the topic of this thread is not polygamy or incest marriage. I gave Frank his own thread for that purpose.


PROPOSITION EIGHT effects polygamy as much as it does same sex marriage.
Big D

Modesto, CA

#181822 Feb 28, 2013
Jazybird58 wrote:
<quoted text>As I have said before, who or how many a person wants to marry makes no difference. For the most part someones marriage has little if any affect on my marriage. That being said, poly marriage will have an affect on our legal system, good or bad it will have an affect. That can not be said of same sex marriage. The reality is this, the topic of this thread is not polygamy or incest marriage. I gave Frank his own thread for that purpose.
I just saw something I had not considered.

I know that some companies support same sex marriage, in fact I know some companies will not build an office in places where same sex benefits are not fully recognized.

But now the language is changing, over 60 major companies now are filing a brief with the supreme court saying it is a "business imperative" that same sex marriage be recognized, that they are having difficulty hiring, and moving people the best people to different states where different rules apply.

I knew most major business were on board, but I had not considered that aspect.

up to today I have been expecting the narrow ruling, affecting California alone. I may have to alter that, as more and more pile on, I suspect DOMA is going to be struck down and the ruleing may make changes across all 50 states.

If so, this will be historic.
Yammers

Covina, CA

#181823 Feb 28, 2013
I've heard enough haven't you?\\
Frankie Rizzo

Union City, CA

#181824 Feb 28, 2013
Jazybird58 wrote:
<quoted text> No this thread pertains to a federal judge who overturned a ban on same sex marriage. Did he have the right to do so. Did the portions of the Constitution that he sighted pertain to his ruling. At one time Same sex marriage was legal in California, did the voters of California have the right to remove and deny marriage based on sexuality?? Did the action of the voters violate the U.S. Constitution? At what time was Polgamy legal in the State of California?
It is also a ban on polygamy dummy. Don't hog all the victimhood.

What don't you understand about ONE man ONE woman?
CopperHeads

Covina, CA

#181825 Feb 28, 2013
The Orange man calling himself John Boehner has had eschews Hastert rule for third time.

After a year and a half after its expiration, the Violence Against Women Act passed the House Feb. 28, 2013 Thursday by 286-138 vote and will soon be reauthorized once it's signed back in to law by the president Obama.

Stupid GOP, Republicans and Tea Party (CopperHeads) held it up
Big D

Modesto, CA

#181826 Feb 28, 2013
Big D wrote:
<quoted text>
I just saw something I had not considered.
I know that some companies support same sex marriage, in fact I know some companies will not build an office in places where same sex benefits are not fully recognized.
But now the language is changing, over 60 major companies now are filing a brief with the supreme court saying it is a "business imperative" that same sex marriage be recognized, that they are having difficulty hiring, and moving people the best people to different states where different rules apply.
I knew most major business were on board, but I had not considered that aspect.
up to today I have been expecting the narrow ruling, affecting California alone. I may have to alter that, as more and more pile on, I suspect DOMA is going to be struck down and the ruleing may make changes across all 50 states.
If so, this will be historic.
More have piled on, there are now over 200 companies on that brief

“Reality bites”

Since: Dec 11

Location hidden

#181827 Feb 28, 2013
Frankie Rizzo wrote:
<quoted text>
It is also a ban on polygamy dummy. Don't hog all the victimhood.
What don't you understand about ONE man ONE woman?
Gawwd you can not be that stupid, can you? I just posted what this thread is about. The ruling has nothing to do with polygamy. Its about removing an existing right granted by the state. When was Polygamy legal in California? Go read the findings, tell me where polygamy is listed.

“Reality bites”

Since: Dec 11

Location hidden

#181828 Feb 28, 2013
Big D wrote:
<quoted text>
I just saw something I had not considered.
I know that some companies support same sex marriage, in fact I know some companies will not build an office in places where same sex benefits are not fully recognized.
But now the language is changing, over 60 major companies now are filing a brief with the supreme court saying it is a "business imperative" that same sex marriage be recognized, that they are having difficulty hiring, and moving people the best people to different states where different rules apply.
I knew most major business were on board, but I had not considered that aspect.
up to today I have been expecting the narrow ruling, affecting California alone. I may have to alter that, as more and more pile on, I suspect DOMA is going to be struck down and the ruleing may make changes across all 50 states.
If so, this will be historic.
I hope all companies pile on.
Dirty Harry

Covina, CA

#181829 Feb 28, 2013
Clint Eastwood to Supreme Court, Drop California's ban on same-sex marriage and that was a lot to be said even to a empty CHAIR.
Xavier Breath

Hoboken, NJ

#181830 Feb 28, 2013
Frankie Rizzo wrote:
<quoted text>
PROPOSITION EIGHT effects polygamy as much as it does same sex marriage.
Polygamy was illegal BEFORE Prop8. Prop 8 made same sex marriage illegal.
Frankie Rizzo

Union City, CA

#181831 Feb 28, 2013
Jazybird58 wrote:
<quoted text>Gawwd you can not be that stupid, can you? I just posted what this thread is about. The ruling has nothing to do with polygamy. Its about removing an existing right granted by the state. When was Polygamy legal in California? Go read the findings, tell me where polygamy is listed.
Gawwd you can not be that stupid, can you?
-As stupid as you? No, never.

I just posted what this thread is about. The ruling has nothing to do with polygamy.
-Prop 8 says ONE man ONE woman, the "man woman" is not more valid than the "one".

Its about removing an existing right granted by the state. When was Polygamy legal in California?
-1862

Go read the findings, tell me where polygamy is listed.
-Prop 8 says marriage is ONE Man ONE woman. Again the gender part is not more valid or worthy than the number part.
Xavier Breath

Hoboken, NJ

#181832 Feb 28, 2013
Jazybird58 wrote:
<quoted text>Gawwd you can not be that stupid, can you? I just posted what this thread is about. The ruling has nothing to do with polygamy. Its about removing an existing right granted by the state. When was Polygamy legal in California? Go read the findings, tell me where polygamy is listed.
How many times have we gone over this? Poor Frankie... he just doesn't get it. kinda sad to be that addled.
Edgar

Spring, TX

#181834 Feb 28, 2013
Frankie Rizzo wrote:
<quoted text>
PROPOSITION EIGHT effects polygamy as much as it does same sex marriage.
As long as we're making unfounded allegations, Frankie Rizzo is really a depressed turtle who resorts to internet trolling to compensate for his loneliness.
Edgar

Spring, TX

#181835 Feb 28, 2013
Frankie Rizzo wrote:
<quoted text>
It is also a ban on polygamy dummy. Don't hog all the victimhood.
What don't you understand about ONE man ONE woman?
And who do hermaphrodites marry? Are they just completely cut out from the institution? They're not a man or a woman. Or this law doesn't specify for them.

You and akpilot say we're all just for a cause, for self-affirmation, and if we were really for letting everyone be happy, we would support poly marriage. But where are the hermaphrodites in this? They exist. Their conditions are genetic. Neither you nor akpilot have mentioned that.

Please, enlighten me on your insight to this.

Since: Apr 11

North Hollywood, CA

#181836 Feb 28, 2013
Randy-Rock-Hudson wrote:
<quoted text>
Silly thing, we have ... You just wish to dismiss them... LOL
But there isn't a rational argument against gay marriage.
Most idiots like you either prattle on about god, or say gay couples can't reproduce.
Well, there is no god. And you don't have to be able to reproduce in order to marry.

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.

Riverbank Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
Debate: Gay Marriage - Ceres, CA (Jan '12) Mar 19 Blondesin 9
Review: Andrews Appliance Repair (Oct '13) Mar 18 Julia 3
News Family fights for dog's lifeTurlock pet schedul... (Dec '12) Mar 18 Renee 6
News Scott Peterson family asking for donations (Jul '09) Mar 16 Cathy Odell 60
News $1.8 million mosque rising at Islamic Center in... (Feb '14) Mar 15 truthseekerss 34
Review: Northern California Cancer Center Mar 11 Anonymous 1
News 9 hurt in garage roof collapse at California co... Mar 10 Harry 2
Riverbank Dating
Find my Match
More from around the web

Riverbank People Search

Addresses and phone numbers for FREE

Personal Finance

Mortgages [ See current mortgage rates ]