Judge overturns California's ban on same-sex marriage

RiccardoFire wrote:

<quoted text> "their" as in male couples. in the UK male couples were much less likely to dissolve their relationship than were female couples: By the end of 2010, 1.6 % of male civil partnerships had ended in dissolution compared to 3.3 % of female partnerships. Women who want out of their heterosexual marriages file for divorce much sooner than do men who want out of their heterosexual marriages.
A recent US study: Their research found that on average the annual divorce rate for same-sex couples is similar to, though slightly lower than, the rate for different-sex couples. About 1.1 percent of same-sex couples in legal unions end their relationship, they found, while about 2 percent of married different-sex couples divorce.
Why do you lie so much?

how could i be lying??

you just confirmed what my claim was, that gays have LOWERR divorce rates....so far.

I didnt differentiate between gay and lesbian couples...

other countries are a good place to start when looking to see how an issue might play out here in america.

universal health care is another good example....

try to calm down, were more or less on the same side of this issue??? right??

you want GAYS to be able to marry??

I want gays to be able to be married...

cheers!!

RiccardoFire wrote:

<quoted text>Remember you are replying to a person that on the pot topic admitted he smokes 2 ounces of pot a week.

what does that have to do with prop hate??

come on riccardo, it just makes you look small and frustrated when you attack me personally(beyond calling me a leftist)

we agree on this subject.... gays should be free to marry if they please.

you EVEN TRIED medical marijuana once, but didnt like it.

now you are pushing your beifes on the subject......none of which are based on scientic study...

everyubody know there is TONS of worthless conrarian agiprop out there....

circulated by big pharma....

to discredit any good MMJ does...

read the "emporor wears no clothes" by jack herer.

he is former reich winger like you.....so mabey you can see eye to eye.......ok he is dead, but his book lives on.

this subject(MMJ) mirrors gay rights, in that both have come a long way in the lst 25 years and receieved widespread approval by the masses.....

we can see that in recent polling.....almost half of american think pot should be legal(including you)

and two thirds of them are for AT least some sort of federal decriminaliztion.

were on the SAME SIDE fool!!

you just dont like my OTHER politics...

and you are also understandable frustrated that romney blew it so badly....

Xavier Breath wrote:

<quoted text>
Medically validated dangers of anal sex? Demeaning, unhealthy?
ahahahahah
ahhaahhaahha
ahahahahhahaha
Then don't do it, prude face. YOU don't get to make that decision for anyone else.

I dont think she realizes how pervasive anal sex is these days....

chicks love it!!

especially the younger ones!!

Xavier Breath wrote:

<quoted text>
Oh puh-leez. Quit trying to act like you know anything about science. The FACT that there has been a stable gay population across time and all cultures PROVES that homosexuality is normal. Homosexuality is found in EVERY species of animals (that reproduce sexually).
The government isn't "forcing" any view on you. You are free to be the country's biggest dumbass. No one can force you to accept the facts, but no one is going to excuse you for being a liar.

boy does she excersise that right often...

most of anyone here, even more than reichardo...

Tea Partiers boycott 'too liberal' Fox News because that will show 'em..

endocannabanoid system wrote:

<quoted text>
on the social front....
clinton left us with some BAD luggage.
DADT and DOMA??
both of which the clinton's have both recanted on.
it was a shameful thing to do those things to gays, just to appease the middle and the center right.
now that the younger folks obviously have better attitudes than their parents and Grandparents??
we can undo the damage of that social lurch to the right.
it makes sense though, that was the LAST decade of the OLD century.
and there was bound to be one more victorian style uprising(started in 1980) before a new dawn in society.
....which is totally what it looks like now.

I agree, that lurch was in the wrong direction and Clinton should never have signed that. One of several things I blame him for.

Bush was a disaster, Obama has only been marginally better than Clinton, hope something better comes along

Big D wrote:

<quoted text>
I agree, that lurch was in the wrong direction and Clinton should never have signed that. One of several things I blame him for.
Bush was a disaster, Obama has only been marginally better than Clinton, hope something better comes along

well having ALL of them(inc hillary) reject DOma and Dadt is certainly a start, right??

gays certainly have a long way to go, before they are not only granted full citizenship rights....

but feel fully 'tolerated" by the rest of society...

im sure there will ALWAYS be a small slice of bigots, being overly vocal about something that was settled years ago.....

just look at them right now???

conducting all out social wars, to discredit their party from EVER getting back to the whitehouse...

im hoping for a santorum nomination next time....

so they can fully see how little america wants that old archaic social agenda pushed on them..

endocannabanoid system wrote:

<quoted text>
how could i be lying??
you just confirmed what my claim was, that gays have LOWERR divorce rates....so far.
I didnt differentiate between gay and lesbian couples...

Define Gay? Is it just a term for men?

endocannabanoid system wrote:

<quoted text>
what does that have to do with prop hate??
come on riccardo, it just makes you look small and frustrated when you attack me personally(beyond calling me a leftist)
we agree on this subject.... gays should be free to marry if they please.
you EVEN TRIED medical marijuana once, but didnt like it.
now you are pushing your beifes on the subject......none of which are based on scientic study...

Hemp oil is good for you. Not smoking 2 ounces of pot a week.

Brian_G, I am still waiting for an articulate response to this from you.

sheesh void of hate wrote:

<quoted text>
Gender apartheid is segregation of the sexes. Complete segregation. Homosexuals make up somewhere between 2 & 10% of the population depending upon what figures you cite. Just because two gay men get married doesn't mean they'll exclude women from their lives.
Of course everyone was born from male/female union (even if it is just through AI). So that is a non-starter. That still isn't a rational argument against same sex marriage. It is just your opinion. And I really don't see what you mean by it being anti-gay. That seems like quite a stretch IMHO. Perhaps you would like to explain how it is anti-gay.
I can take flying lessons and become a pilot. I do happen to have the qualifications to perform surgery. That was through a lengthy education and licensing process. The analogy still doesn't apply to homosexuals in general. Loads of heterosexuals don't really qualify as suitable marriage partners. At least not in my opinion, which should have no bearing on their ability to get married.

endocannabanoid system wrote:

<quoted text>
well having ALL of them(inc hillary) reject DOma and Dadt is certainly a start, right??
gays certainly have a long way to go, before they are not only granted full citizenship rights....
but feel fully 'tolerated" by the rest of society...
im sure there will ALWAYS be a small slice of bigots, being overly vocal about something that was settled years ago.....
just look at them right now???
conducting all out social wars, to discredit their party from EVER getting back to the whitehouse...
im hoping for a santorum nomination next time....
so they can fully see how little america wants that old archaic social agenda pushed on them..

Tolerated... who was it that said "Toleration is that wimpy thing we do when we cannot bring ourselves to accept reality" or something like that. I think it is funny how we hold that word on a pedestal, it is actually a wimpy compromise.

I don’t happen to be gay, but I don’t tolerate gays, I accept them as the fellow Americans they are.

Santorum, that is a real possibility, although the entire party is trying to shift to the center right now, I don’t think they will be able to totally shut down the far right wing unless they run someone like that. Romney was not a hard right winger, although he certainly tried to sound like one.

You may be right, they may actually run a far right nut job, he ( or she ) will go down in flames of course, and then the republican party can finally split the far right off ( as they so desperately need to do ) if they do, they will pick up some independents, and a few moderate democrats and maybe we can finally have and election where we have an actual choice between 2 viable candidates.

It wont happen before 2016, so if Hillary still wants to be president, she would win it in a walk.

There will always be bigots, I cannot claim to be perfect myself, but it is something I fight in myself all the time.

I just try and remain true to my patriotism, this country is the land of the free, where justice wears a blindfold, blind to Race, Creed, Color, Sex, Religion, Orientation or National Origin. Where justice is more important than tradition, where our people regardless of our differences are held to the same rule of law.

KiMare wrote:

<quoted text>
And yet, Christians are on the right side of science in agreeing that marriage is distinct from ss couples.
Ironic isn't it.
Smirk.

well, hmm. not exactly. many christian churches and denominations and other faiths are accepting homosexuals as clergy. many are also performing same sex marriages.

i know, this is about as disturbing to the "conservative" sects as allowing women to become preachers and pastors back in the 70s was. but they all continue.

and you might take note of the pre research study regarding faith in america. take particular attention to the numbers of the more conservative denominations that are falling at a greater pace than that of more "liberal" denominations (read : those that are on opposing sides of the same sex marriage debate).

good luck kimar. you'll be needing it.

KiMare wrote:

<quoted text>
Bull shit. Liberals demand other people's money and disperse it for votes.
Christians are on the front lines of meeting needs in every community across the country.
Reality's a bitch isn't it.
Smile.

no, really, no bullshit.

the reality is that the tea partiers and republicans don't want their money going to help the needy. they want the money in their pockets. otherwise there wouldn't be the debate about the budget and taxation.

yea, gee, that reality thing, when it bites ya on the arse, must really hurt. never had it happen to me so why don't you tell us how it feels there chumly?

RiccardoFire wrote:

<quoted text>Hemp oil is good for you. Not smoking 2 ounces of pot a week.

I only stated that i have permission from the state to smoke that much...

that would BE alot to smoke....

so at least now we can establish that riccardo fire of northern california finally admits canabis is "MEDICAL"

what a huge sea change in your politics...

i can see just how liberal you are compared to all the other posters here...

like for instance, wed both be pissed if the jehovahs witnesses bothered us at home.

Big D wrote:

<quoted text>
Tolerated... who was it that said "Toleration is that wimpy thing we do when we cannot bring ourselves to accept reality" or something like that. I think it is funny how we hold that word on a pedestal, it is actually a wimpy compromise.
I don’t happen to be gay, but I don’t tolerate gays, I accept them as the fellow Americans they are.
Santorum, that is a real possibility, although the entire party is trying to shift to the center right now, I don’t think they will be able to totally shut down the far right wing unless they run someone like that. Romney was not a hard right winger, although he certainly tried to sound like one.
You may be right, they may actually run a far right nut job, he ( or she ) will go down in flames of course, and then the republican party can finally split the far right off ( as they so desperately need to do ) if they do, they will pick up some independents, and a few moderate democrats and maybe we can finally have and election where we have an actual choice between 2 viable candidates.
It wont happen before 2016, so if Hillary still wants to be president, she would win it in a walk.
There will always be bigots, I cannot claim to be perfect myself, but it is something I fight in myself all the time.
I just try and remain true to my patriotism, this country is the land of the free, where justice wears a blindfold, blind to Race, Creed, Color, Sex, Religion, Orientation or National Origin. Where justice is more important than tradition, where our people regardless of our differences are held to the same rule of law.

what I meant by "tolerated' was that those who are NOW bigoted might someday "tolerate" gays and LESBIANS so they join the rest of the humn race in ACCEPTING homosexuality as a normal choice...

right now, all i see is compeat disarray and civil war in the rethuglican party.

you must have seen some clips from CPAC.....although they WANT to sem mre moderate??? they JUST arnt.

the far right has truly hijacked their party....

and i say to them, here is another shovel, keep digging.

ive never seen a political situaltion like this before...

where the press is talking about polls that support the next democratic candidate, JUST WALKING in the general.....
but it may be a reality if the lunatics keep control overe there.

she even beat christie in a NJ poll for president..

it is truly time for a woman to lead this nation...

and politically, she is like the defacto VP, because biden isnt a serious contender(she beat him 61% to 12% in a poll released in december)

because SHE won almost half the vote in the 08' primaries, another thing that hadnt happened for a long time.

looks like it might be president CLINTON until 25'?

then the torch will be passed, to a candidate born in the 1960's or 70's.

heartandmind wrote:

<quoted text>
no, really, no bullshit.
the reality is that the tea partiers and republicans don't want their money going to help the needy. they want the money in their pockets. otherwise there wouldn't be the debate about the budget and taxation.
yea, gee, that reality thing, when it bites ya on the arse, must really hurt. never had it happen to me so why don't you tell us how it feels there chumly?

KI and reality have never met.

endocannabanoid system wrote:

<quoted text>

like for instance, wed both be pissed if the jehovahs witnesses bothered us at home.

Answer the door naked, they dont come back, in fact they will make an effort to stay far away from your house.

endocannabanoid system wrote:

<quoted text>
KI and reality have never met.

LOL.

sheesh void of hate wrote:

Brian_G, I am still waiting for an articulate response to this from you.
<quoted text>

don't expect one. the only thing you'll get from ol' bi-bi baby is bumpersticker comments. that's all he's capable of thinking in terms of. short, knee-jerky emotion laden one sentence blurbs. no substantiation. no real logic behind anything. ignoring and deflecting direct questions.

next thing ya know, he'll re-introduce sex with corpses in this thread. he goes in cycles. i think he's about due for that one pretty soon.

endocannabanoid system wrote:

<quoted text>
what I meant by "tolerated' was that those who are NOW bigoted might someday "tolerate" gays and LESBIANS so they join the rest of the humn race in ACCEPTING homosexuality as a normal choice...
right now, all i see is compeat disarray and civil war in the rethuglican party.
you must have seen some clips from CPAC.....although they WANT to sem mre moderate??? they JUST arnt.
the far right has truly hijacked their party....
and i say to them, here is another shovel, keep digging.
ive never seen a political situaltion like this before...
where the press is talking about polls that support the next democratic candidate, JUST WALKING in the general.....
but it may be a reality if the lunatics keep control overe there.
she even beat christie in a NJ poll for president..
it is truly time for a woman to lead this nation...
and politically, she is like the defacto VP, because biden isnt a serious contender(she beat him 61% to 12% in a poll released in december)
because SHE won almost half the vote in the 08' primaries, another thing that hadnt happened for a long time.
looks like it might be president CLINTON until 25'?
then the torch will be passed, to a candidate born in the 1960's or 70's.

Oh I do know what you mean about tolerated, and I agree.

As I said, if she wants it, it is hers and she will win it in a walk. Her popularity now is higher than before, and the Secretary of State is a MUCH more important job than the VP

I don’t think Biden would have a chance against her.

I don’t see any republican, no matter how moderate with a ghost of a chance against her, and the far right.... it will be a joke and a total meltdown of the republican party if they run a Santorum or anyone like him.

The problem republican have ( that they have still not faced ) is that no candidate can be nominated without sounding like a right wing nut job, and no candidate that sounded like a right wing nut job during the primaries can win in the general election.

Not in this political climate

I don’t think they can adapt in time.