Judge overturns California's ban on s...

Judge overturns California's ban on same-sex marriage

There are 201846 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.

“All things considered”

Since: Jun 12

Location hidden

#144937 Jun 8, 2012
thisGuy wrote:
<quoted text>
You mean deny rights that are NATURAL & JUST, like heterosexuality?
Cool Story Bro.
i would hope some gays would not take the action to belittle heterosexuality like many sdtraight individuals have taken the effort to belittle homosexuality. it would make no sense.

“All things considered”

Since: Jun 12

Location hidden

#144938 Jun 8, 2012
Rick in Kansas wrote:
<quoted text>You prove that you would have failed the reading comprehension portion that test and yet it is I who should get a GED. Interesting. Maybe I'll try and fit one in after that PhD I've been thinking about now that I don't have a business to bother with.
<quoted text>Pay attention dear, the cases which have dealt with the issue of Utah's polygamy law, over the last 20 odd years, have involved men for whom being charged with polygamy was the LEAST of their legal problems, but the issue that would make most of the others go away if the law against it were overturned. Their other legal problems involved at least one underage "bride" and a "forced" marriage or two among others.
<quoted text>Yes dear, we're all aware that poly relationships have been around as long, if not longer than mono relationships, but since in most parts of the world, mono relationships predominate, poly relationships, much like same sex relationships, have been in and out of favor with the "majority". Was there a point to telling us something we already knew, other than it being another opportunity for another childish insult?
rick,

from what i have read many child brides were essentially brainwashed into taking older husbands in a culture that could be considered cultist. this apparently is one of the reasons the government banned polygamy with official rulings in the late 19th century and again in the early 20th century.

still it's inclusion in this discussion has no bearing given we are not discussing multiple parties involved in a single marriage. i would cease to banter on with those choosing to include it.
thisGuy

Stephenville, TX

#144939 Jun 8, 2012
Pam Jordan wrote:
<quoted text>
that is incorrect as well. there is no inherent rule that married couples must have offspring.
No it's not a rule. But if you pay attention to the amount of heterosexual getting married, you can expect there will be many of them having offsprings of their own
thisGuy

Stephenville, TX

#144940 Jun 8, 2012
Pam Jordan wrote:
<quoted text>
i would hope some gays would not take the action to belittle heterosexuality like many sdtraight individuals have taken the effort to belittle homosexuality. it would make no sense.
No it would make perfect sense! Homosexuals can't procreate, & their sex practices don't accomplish anything..except higher STD rates lol
thisGuy

Stephenville, TX

#144941 Jun 8, 2012
Pam Jordan wrote:
<quoted text>
i understand many people think of homosexuality as a perversion. of course beastiality and pedophelia are. i do not know about 'furries' but this may be equally deemed a perversion.
the distinct nature or difference in gays versus the others you mentioned are that they include 2 adults whom apparently have the makings and capability to form a couple. there are no animals or objects directly involved. myself i am heterosexual. i do not fully understand why someone would find attraction in some members of the same sex but we as individuals find attractions in each other that are distinctly our own as humans. gays find this with some of their own gender who exhibit features they themselves find attractive.
you may consider this a perversion which is within your rights but the psychology professionals no longer see being gay as abnormal. and i would think had it truly been a perversion it would have been illegal for just cause. it is not.
and you are incorrect. gays can reproduce. many have. of course same sex couples cannot have children which contain each dna examples of the two partners involved but gays have had children either through previous relationships or other methods. they can also adopt children whom were unwanted by their own biological parents which can prove to be a benefit.
you are entitled to your opinion hoever.
It is no longer considered a mental illness because the Sodomites harassed them. Just wait until the zoophiles do the same thing for their sick destructive behaviors
thisGuy

Stephenville, TX

#144942 Jun 8, 2012
Pam Jordan wrote:
<quoted text>
that is incorrect as well. there is no inherent rule that married couples must have offspring.
Hmm...no why have heard so much about Lesbian Bed Death?...ROFL
Bruno

Westminster, CA

#144943 Jun 8, 2012
I leave for a couple of days and you queers turn on each other . . . LMAO

“All things considered”

Since: Jun 12

Location hidden

#144944 Jun 8, 2012
thisGuy wrote:
<quoted text>
No it's not a rule. But if you pay attention to the amount of heterosexual getting married, you can expect there will be many of them having offsprings of their own
very true.

“All things considered”

Since: Jun 12

Location hidden

#144946 Jun 8, 2012
thisGuy wrote:
<quoted text>
No it would make perfect sense! Homosexuals can't procreate, & their sex practices don't accomplish anything..except higher STD rates lol
i would have to see realistic statistics to believe this. in regards to the sexually transmitted disease aspect.

i came into these forums searching for discovery but often have found skewed reports from one side or the other. many of these were based on claims gays transmitted more disease through their sexual activity and that they were much more promiscuous than heterosexuals. i also saw studies that debunked these as myths so i find it hard to believe gays are no better nor worse than heterosexuals on either of these points at this time.

in terms of 'sex practices' humans have sex for pleasure as well as a method to procreate. given humanity is not in a state of needing additional members i can see no harm in the fact members of our communities whom are gay or those heterosexuals whom are sterile prove to be either a threat of nuisance.

“All things considered”

Since: Jun 12

Location hidden

#144947 Jun 8, 2012
thisGuy wrote:
<quoted text>
It is no longer considered a mental illness because the Sodomites harassed them. Just wait until the zoophiles do the same thing for their sick destructive behaviors
i would have to ask for proof of this you understand and some evidence if you have it. not to offend you but this strongly looks like an inflammitory remark made by yourself to do nothing more than incite.

“All things considered”

Since: Jun 12

Location hidden

#144948 Jun 8, 2012
thisGuy wrote:
<quoted text>
Hmm...no why have heard so much about Lesbian Bed Death?...ROFL
i cannot comment as i have never heard the term.

“Yellow Brick Road”

Since: Mar 12

The Land of OZ

#144949 Jun 8, 2012
Frank Rizzo wrote:
So Clyde and my other detractors, to answer your question about why I don't debate, the angry fundie "Jonah1" has just demonstrated for us what happens if I try to discuss marriage equality. So that is why I no longer try.
Dear Pancetta azz move on to a different thread.

“Yellow Brick Road”

Since: Mar 12

The Land of OZ

#144951 Jun 8, 2012
RiccardoFire wrote:
<quoted text>The difference is that I'm not Homophobic. I'm just not in favor of gay marriage. I have several long time friends that are gay, what people do in their private life is their business. So you got your information messed up again Jack.
Dear Lucy.
If you had several long time friends who where gay, then why don't you understand what it is that they want? I support my friends.
Mona Lott

Hoboken, NJ

#144952 Jun 8, 2012
_Reality Speaks_ wrote:
<quoted text>
It is also a FACT that marriage is between a man and a woman only. You want to change the facts to suit you and we just wont let you. Keep puching and we will keep pushing back even harder. WE are winning, not you.
Charlie Sheen, is that you?

Push all you want. Your bullshit will be overturned by one SCOTUS decision. It will be big fun to see you ignoids get a lesson in reality.

“Yellow Brick Road”

Since: Mar 12

The Land of OZ

#144953 Jun 8, 2012
RnL2008 wrote:
<quoted text>
Yes........let's do that:-)
Sweet, bottle of red, some grapes a little french bread and some cheese. Look here comes one now.
Mona Lott

Hoboken, NJ

#144954 Jun 8, 2012
thisGuy wrote:
<quoted text>
You mean deny rights that are NATURAL & JUST, like heterosexuality?
Cool Story Bro.
What rights are heterosexuals being denied?
Mona Lott

Hoboken, NJ

#144955 Jun 8, 2012
thisGuy wrote:
<quoted text>
Then what are straight married couples doing? Giving birth to biological children of their own? Plueeeeez. The whole purpose of marriage is stay committed & REPRODUCE. So spare me the heterophobic insolence
Reproduction is not a requirement for marriage.
Frank Rizzo

Union City, CA

#144956 Jun 8, 2012
The Great Sly_Clyde wrote:
<quoted text>Dear Pancetta azz move on to a different thread.
He says, answering his own question and proving my point about why I don't debate.

“ reality, what a concept”

Since: Nov 07

this one

#144958 Jun 8, 2012
Pam Jordan wrote:
rick,
from what i have read many child brides were essentially brainwashed into taking older husbands in a culture that could be considered cultist. this apparently is one of the reasons the government banned polygamy with official rulings in the late 19th century and again in the early 20th century.
still it's inclusion in this discussion has no bearing given we are not discussing multiple parties involved in a single marriage. i would cease to banter on with those choosing to include it.
While child brides and other such issues aren't inherent to poly relationships, they have been part of the baggage brought to the court by those who have been challenging Utah's law against such relationships.

Opponents of equality in marriage like to bring up red herrings like poly relationships and even people way too friendly with the animal kingdom as a way of saying it ain't really us they're against, but if they allow us to marry, look at what else they're going to have to allow. When the subject comes up, I usually just explain to them why bans against legal poly relationships are constitutional in their own right and try to get them back on the actual subject. Some people, like the one I was responding to, require a little more explanation..
Frank Rizzo

Union City, CA

#144960 Jun 8, 2012
Rick in Kansas wrote:
<quoted text>While child brides and other such issues aren't inherent to poly relationships, they have been part of the baggage brought to the court by those who have been challenging Utah's law against such relationships.
Opponents of equality in marriage like to bring up red herrings like poly relationships and even people way too friendly with the animal kingdom as a way of saying it ain't really us they're against, but if they allow us to marry, look at what else they're going to have to allow. When the subject comes up, I usually just explain to them why bans against legal poly relationships are constitutional in their own right and try to get them back on the actual subject. Some people, like the one I was responding to, require a little more explanation..
Did anyone ever try to explain away same sex marriage? How did you like it? How did you respond to them?

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.

San Clemente Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
Loud Rumbling Noise in Aliso Viejo (Jun '09) 2 hr Sarah 48
Dana Pride Needs Boating Etiquette Course! Feb 6 Captain Jack 1
Did your tires get slashed in San Clemente on 1... Feb 1 hadmytiresslashed 1
Novel set in Dana Point and the OC Jan 31 Brandon 6
Review: ARI Novick PHD (Feb '13) Jan 31 Eugine 6
News Mercado del Barrio Adds New Shops, Eateries, Gym Jan 28 CarmenintheBarrio 1
News Orange County deputy loses rifle, search underway Jan 27 JACKIE 1
More from around the web

Personal Finance

San Clemente Mortgages