Judge overturns California's ban on s...

Judge overturns California's ban on same-sex marriage

There are 201862 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

#144903 Jun 8, 2012
Frank Rizzo wrote:
<quoted text>
Yeah, yeah, "underage preteen child brides. forced marriages, cults, bla bla bla", please hold the bigotry for a moment. Let's say three men, all consenting adults, want to marry. What do you have against that?
if you wish a discussion i fail to see the need for your rudeness.

i have never seen 3 men wanting to marry. if there were 3 men wanting to marry each other they in turn would have to convince the government and those who determined harm in polygamy in order to convince them to create the allowance of it.

given we are discussing same sexed marriage amongst 2 adults i myself don't see the inclusion of polygamy being a factor.

and i have not exemplified bigotry, please do not make false inferences to my posts.

thank you for your time in this. i may come back later but for now have to leave.

Since: Nov 11

Location hidden

#144904 Jun 8, 2012
[QUOTE who="Here Is One. "]<quoted text>
31 states to 5 states does make you the small hate group
And people like rose ho prove that every time he posts[/QUOTE]

Agreed! These shrill gays in here just go crazy with the judgement icons thinking that what we are saying is somehow lessened. 5 states which have gay marriage which got in them because it was snuck in through the back door and not put to a vote. Gay marriage has NEVER been voted for in any state. Whats more, a full 32 states (more than 2/3) have put constitutional bans against it.

Dont they see that this means that if they push too hard, support is there to add a Constitutional Amendment to the US Constitution permanently banning it? They would do well to drop the adversarial relationship they have with everyone. They just piss more people off, and motivate people who would normally not care about it one way or another. My quiet neighbors are suddenly organizing prevent California from lifting the ban currently still in place after gay judge Walker overturned it.
Frank Rizzo

Union City, CA

#144905 Jun 8, 2012
Pam Jordan wrote:
<quoted text>
if you wish a discussion i fail to see the need for your rudeness.
i have never seen 3 men wanting to marry. if there were 3 men wanting to marry each other they in turn would have to convince the government and those who determined harm in polygamy in order to convince them to create the allowance of it.
given we are discussing same sexed marriage amongst 2 adults i myself don't see the inclusion of polygamy being a factor.
and i have not exemplified bigotry, please do not make false inferences to my posts.
thank you for your time in this. i may come back later but for now have to leave.
Well excuse my rudeness but it was rude of you to equate polygamists with forced child brides etc.
thisGuy

Stephenville, TX

#144906 Jun 8, 2012
Pam Jordan wrote:
<quoted text>
i don't have an uncle 'tod' so i'm not sure of your reference.
Wow no sense of humour bro
test

Bellevue, WA

#144907 Jun 8, 2012
hi
thisGuy

Stephenville, TX

#144908 Jun 8, 2012
Pam Jordan wrote:
<quoted text>
this seems to be a common reflection of those opposed to gay marriages.
unfortunately it is based on opinion with no factual basis in that it should interfere with another citizens rights t a basic freedom such as marriage.
one blockage to gay marriage could be finding a harm embodied in it but so far none has been found.
LOL "with no factual basis"? Oh PLuueeeezzz. I don't support gay marriage for the same reason I don't support bestiality, polygamy, pedophilia, & god forbidden furries! They are perversions & nothing else. They don't accomplish anything! The way I see it, if you're going to call gay marriage "equal", then you might was well call those who marry kids, animals, objects, & even themselves as "equal" to. It's a slippery slope, many of which I see many sexual deviants here support!

It is a FACT gays cannot reproduce, because it takes a man & a woman to procreate. This is a FACTUAL BASIS of biology!
thisGuy

Stephenville, TX

#144909 Jun 8, 2012
Mona Lott wrote:
<quoted text>Make up whatever lie suits your agenda. It's nothing new.
Don't you mean YOUR agenda. If I'm correct, wasn't it your gay community that propose the idea of gay porn in the classroom lol? The Gay Manifestios are the ones supporting the idea of showing children gay porn in the classroom, not us normal folks. Seems to me the Gay Nazi Party wants our kids exposed to what gays do in the bedroom...LOL.

I take it NAMBLA must be getting desperate to fulfill their evil sexual urges....ROFL
Mona Lott

Hoboken, NJ

#144910 Jun 8, 2012
thisGuy wrote:
<quoted text>
And then what? We'll have to constitute marriage between man & dog as "equal marriage"?....ROFL
And then what... we'll have to deny voting rights to stupid people like you?
Mona Lott

Hoboken, NJ

#144911 Jun 8, 2012
thisGuy wrote:
<quoted text>
Don't you mean YOUR agenda. If I'm correct, wasn't it your gay community that propose the idea of gay porn in the classroom lol? The Gay Manifestios are the ones supporting the idea of showing children gay porn in the classroom, not us normal folks. Seems to me the Gay Nazi Party wants our kids exposed to what gays do in the bedroom...LOL.
I take it NAMBLA must be getting desperate to fulfill their evil sexual urges....ROFL
Nobody is proposing gay porn in the classroom, dipshit. Were you deprived of oxygen at birth? fetal alcohol syndrome?
Mona Lott

Hoboken, NJ

#144912 Jun 8, 2012
thisGuy wrote:
<quoted text>
LOL "with no factual basis"? Oh PLuueeeezzz. I don't support gay marriage for the same reason I don't support bestiality, polygamy, pedophilia, & god forbidden furries! They are perversions & nothing else. They don't accomplish anything! The way I see it, if you're going to call gay marriage "equal", then you might was well call those who marry kids, animals, objects, & even themselves as "equal" to. It's a slippery slope, many of which I see many sexual deviants here support!
It is a FACT gays cannot reproduce, because it takes a man & a woman to procreate. This is a FACTUAL BASIS of biology!
It is also a FACT that reproduction is not a requirement for marriage. Is everyone in your town retarded or just you?

Since: Nov 11

Location hidden

#144913 Jun 8, 2012
Mona Lott wrote:
<quoted text>
It is also a FACT that reproduction is not a requirement for marriage. Is everyone in your town retarded or just you?
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.
RiccardoFire

Sacramento, CA

#144914 Jun 8, 2012
The Great Sly_Clyde wrote:
<quoted text>Not so fast Lucy, Dan admits that at one time he was a Homophobe, just like you. The difference is Dan evolved, changed, whilst you are stuck in the bronze age. Dan now understands that gay people are no different, they just want to be accepted for who they are. Oh they would also very much like to be married. Seee Ya Lucy
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.
RiccardoFire

Sacramento, CA

#144915 Jun 8, 2012
RiccardoFire wrote:
<quoted text>
Well spoken Sedgewick.
You should have driven 30 minutes south to Elk Grove to get that EG stamp to make it look more authentic.
RiccardoFire

Sacramento, CA

#144916 Jun 8, 2012
RnL2008 wrote:
<quoted text>
Right, it's always someone else......you've NEVER done anything wrong, right?
Yes it's wrong to do the same thing dan does, but after a time, it's hard to resist. The point is dan can't argue and always makes threats, you just saw his threat yesterday to have me meet him at a local Home Depot. When he writes.."LOL" he actually seems very angry. I am not the only one that has been threatened and insulted by him. He started it.

Since: Nov 11

Location hidden

#144917 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.
That describes me too. I have great gay friends, both male and female. But I am against gay marriage, and they understand that even if they dont agree. Gays who resent my stance and done know me will assume I am a homophobic Christian citing some fantasmogorical Bible scripture. I am not religious at all, not homophobic, and against gay marriage.
thisGuy

Stephenville, TX

#144918 Jun 8, 2012
Mona Lott wrote:
<quoted text>Nobody is proposing gay porn in the classroom, dipshit. Were you deprived of oxygen at birth? fetal alcohol syndrome?
^Says the lesbian who recruits kids of her own LMAO
thisGuy

Stephenville, TX

#144919 Jun 8, 2012
Mona Lott wrote:
<quoted text>
It is also a FACT that reproduction is not a requirement for marriage. Is everyone in your town retarded or just you?
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

“ reality, what a concept”

Since: Nov 07

this one

#144920 Jun 8, 2012
Frank Rizzo wrote:
Well excuse my rudeness but it was rude of you to equate polygamists with forced child brides etc.
Not rude, just part of the reality. When you look at the cases which have challenged state laws against polygamy as a violation of rights guaranteed under the US Constitution over the last 20 years or so, you'll find that they are all cases which involve child brides and/or forced marriages. It's men behaving very badly, who have been at the forefront, waving the banner of the right to polygamy, get used to it. Although you may finally get a respectable case out of that TV family, unless he's married sisters or something that automatically sets off the creepy meter. You'll also find that these cases all come out of Utah, which not only does not allow official polygamous marriages, it criminalizes the unofficial ones to boot, something almost all other states don't.

There is one reason and one reason only that there will never be a constitutionally recognized right to poly relationships as legal marriage under the US Constitution and it has nothing to do with creepy marriages, hatred of Mormons, Muslims or anyone else who wants such a relationship, the compelling state interest of the state actually being able to regulate marriage and the reality that any limit beyond one marriage per person at a time would be indefensibly arbitrary. Two spouses? Once you answer the question of whether your second wife counts against your first wife's total and vice versa, or if they can have a second spouse too and what, if any, are the rights, protections, benefits, responsibilities and obligations of the parties to these marriages are to be, you get asked the question of why the hell are you discriminating against those of us who want 3, 4, 5, 6...??? If you want a poly relationship, the state shouldn't prohibit it. Issues of underage "brides" and/or "grooms", forced relationships, fraud, etc, aren't problems inherent to poly but to some people who do it and shouldn't be overlooked. But if you want the states to regulate that Gordian knot for you, because you have that "right", forget about it, you're going to have to work that one out for yourselves.
Blake

Lacon, IL

#144921 Jun 8, 2012
Hick in Kansas wrote:
<quoted text>Not rude, just part of the reality. When you look at the cases which have challenged state laws against polygamy as a violation of rights guaranteed under the US Constitution over the last 20 years or so, you'll find that they are all cases which involve child brides and/or forced marriages.
Hick, you really need to go back for that GED.

Supreme Court rulings enforcing the national definition of marriage as solely between man and wife in fact had nothing to do with child brides or forced marriages.

Plural marriage was very common throughout the Americas before your white trash ancestors got here. The same was true in Asia and Africa and even pre-Christian Europe.

“Mona-Little ”

Since: Jun 12

Gardena California

#144923 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
You got it all wrong.

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
Review: HEALTHY PET KITCHEN Aug 26 Princeelias 1
News Political EmpireRIVERSIDE COUNTY: Shellie Milne... Aug 20 Jeff Stone 1
News 'Storage Wars' controversy, Jeff Jarred and his... (Jun '12) Aug 20 fubar 10
Loud Rumbling Noise in Aliso Viejo (Jun '09) Aug 14 Elena in Laguna 46
News Wife of televangelist Benny Hinn files for divorce (Feb '10) Aug 8 discocrisco 20
Hit and run behind 7-Eleven Ave Pico Aug 7 Stiffneck 1
News Earthquake: 3.0 quake strikes near Dana Point Aug 7 buttcrack 3
More from around the web

Personal Finance

San Clemente Mortgages