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.

Randy Hudson Wooster Ohio

Wooster, OH

#228533 Jan 27, 2014
Reverend Alan wrote:
<quoted text>
No normal person could jump on that inconsistent bandwagon! It is the same bigotry with which alcohol prohibition was launched, because a few abused alcohol the government should prevent everyone from using it. Nothing good came from prohibition and all those drunks it was designed to stop getting drunk has all the alcohol they wanted. Was it worth it? NO! Did the authoritarians in government learn form this? NO! They went on to create the War on Drugs.
Here is why homosexuality needs to be banned:
Youth Pastor Brent Girouex Gets Probation For Molesting Young Men:
Girouex claimed he could cure the young men of their same-sex attractions by having sexual relations with them. Eight victims have come forward so far.
Republican politician Andrew Buhr was charged with two counts of first degree sodomy with a 13-year old boy he read Bible verses to after Sunday School.
Republican County Councilman Keola Childs pleaded guilty to molesting a male child he met at his church. He pleaded guilty only to keep his family out of the liberal media's spotlight.
Here is why Christianity needs to be banned:
Republican activist Marty Glickman (a.k.a. "Republican Marty"), was taken into custody at a local church by Florida police on four counts of unlawful sexual activity with an underage girl and one count of delivering the drug LSD.
Republican Senate candidate, and active member of his church, John Hathaway was accused of having sex with his 12-year old baby sitter and withdrew his candidacy after the allegations were reported in the media.
Republican talk show host Jon Matthews pleaded guilty to exposing his genitals to an 11 year old girl.
*Republican anti-gay activist Earl "Butch" Kimmerling was sentenced to 40 years in prison for molesting an 8-year old girl after he attempted to stop a gay couple from adopting her.
Republican election board official Kevin Coan, an active member of his church, was sentenced to two years probation for soliciting sex over the internet from a 14-year old girl.
Republican politician Keith Westmoreland was arrested on seven felony counts of lewd and lascivious exhibition to girls under the age of 16 (i.e. exposing himself to children).
Republican activist John Butler was charged with criminal sexual assault on a teenage girl who was in his Bible study group.
Republican candidate Richard Gardner admitted to molesting his two daughters before dropping them off for Sunday School.
Republican Councilman and former Marine Jack W. Gardner was convicted of molesting a 13-year old girl.
Authoritarians are very confused and want to punish everyone for the acts of a few.
Yes, but old "Man Breath" doesn't address non sequiturs and double standards. He only cackles on about how he believes that he is the only one in here with some sort of education. It's his signature drivel. Then, when pressed, he claims that the same logic used against the SSM crowd (moral outrage) was invalid (when used against them), but stands as perfectly plausible when being used against Polygamists, who have more standing in society than SSM ever had... Historically or naturally... Herds are an outrage, but a sterile union can fly.... Then, Old Big Dope jumps in and crows about how he thinks he can have a priest arrested for being on school grounds, but a homo (with no official educational, or scholastic, agenda {except for maybe making kids aware that they may not be normal, but it is ok...}) may have free rein with the kids, who never had any business being made aware (as early as the age of 6, and even sometimes against the wishes of the parents) that they have to decide if they are gay, or not. Sounds pretty fuqked up to me, but this crowd thinks that "we have just made everything right as rain"... And many wonder why we have high crime rates, national morale is at an all time low, and the call for gun control is at a fever pitch.
Randy Hudson Wooster Ohio

Wooster, OH

#228534 Jan 27, 2014
Jake wrote:
<quoted text>
No rights were violated. Gays went above and beyond to force legislation to give in to their lifestyle or else!! It's too bad we have a government that fell apart to presure. Gays have torn down the rights of the American people who made a constitution for the good. SSM is bad for the people. Gays only care about themselves and are un patriotic and greedy
Special interest lobbying is responsible for the whole mess even becoming our new national agenda. It's destroyed our entire working form of government. Replacing it with the corporate masters, who were never granted a place in our government. In fact, we were warned about letting bankers and lawyers run our government. Now look at us. Blown all to hell...
Randy Hudson Wooster Ohio

Wooster, OH

#228535 Jan 27, 2014
So....there's that.....
Shaky Jake

Covina, CA

#228536 Jan 27, 2014
Still in the mood for not listening to anymore o you worthless toads grips.

#22834

“KiMare'a the Monster Mutation”

Since: Nov 10

Location hidden

#228537 Jan 27, 2014
Randy Hudson Wooster Ohio wrote:
<quoted text>
Special interest lobbying is responsible for the whole mess even becoming our new national agenda. It's destroyed our entire working form of government. Replacing it with the corporate masters, who were never granted a place in our government. In fact, we were warned about letting bankers and lawyers run our government. Now look at us. Blown all to hell...
Greed run a muck.

Since: Nov 13

Location hidden

#228538 Jan 27, 2014
KiMare wrote:
<quoted text>
....
Gays are not denied marriage for the 'sole reason that they are gay'.
....
Uh, NO - that IS the reason. You are hopelessly dense?
Xavier Breath

Brooklyn, NY

#228539 Jan 27, 2014
Reverend Alan wrote:
Frankie: The reason polygamy is illegal is moral disapproval, and that is not a valid reason. That's my argument.
Now X Breath will rebut my argument with "you didn't go to school..." or "You are a drug addict" or similar stupid non response.
<quoted text>
Non-responsive and irrelevant. You just proved that what Frankie said about you is true. Frankie said your moral disapproval is not valid. There are no valid arguments against polygamy. Your deeply held delusions are irrelevant.
Maybe YOU don't think they are valid reasons, but a Canadian Court did.

http://www.courts.gov.bc.ca/jdb-txt/SC/11/15/...

Polygamy Linked to Harms

[228] As Dr. Witte summarized, for over 2500 years the Western legal tradition has defined marriage as the union of one man and one woman who have the fitness, capacity and freedom to marry each other. While it has never been seriously claimed that monogamous marriage is a uniformly positive experience for everyone, in general and in most cases, monogamous marriage is said to bring essential private goods to the couple and their children, and important public goods to society and the state.

[229] As Dr. Witte further summarized, for more than 1750 years the Western legal tradition has also declared polygamy to be an offence. The denunciation of the practice has been based on natural, philosophical, political, sociological, psychological and scientific arguments. Polygamy, it has consistently been argued, is associated with harm: harm against women, against children, against men and against society. Dr. Witte reviewed some of these harms, as follows.

[230] The harms against women include: exploitation; commodification; social isolation; the inevitable favouritism of some women and deprecation of others within the household; discrimination; and, impoverishment.

[231] The harms against children include: the negative impacts on their development caused by discord, violence and exploitation in the marital home; competition between mothers and siblings for the limited attention of the father; diminishment of the democratic citizenship capabilities of children as a result of being raised by mothers deprived of their basic rights; impoverishment; and, violation of their fundamental dignity.

[232] The harms against men include: the unequal distribution of spouses and related ostracism of younger men forced to compete for a scarcer supply of women; the creation of a false appetite for patriarchy; inflammation of male lust; and deprivation of the essential bond of mutuality that is unique to the marital institution.

[233] Finally, the harms to society that flow from polygamy include: threats to the social order and a greater need for social supports as women lacking education and opportunity to enhance themselves, as well as their children, find themselves impoverished upon divorce or the death of their husbands; harms to good citizenship; threats to political stability; and the undermining of human dignity and equality.

“KiMare'a the Monster Mutation”

Since: Nov 10

Location hidden

#228540 Jan 27, 2014
Six_Of_One wrote:
<quoted text>
Uh, NO - that IS the reason. You are hopelessly dense?
Is that why you censored the post?

Smile.
Xavier Breath

Brooklyn, NY

#228541 Jan 27, 2014
Randy Hudson Wooster Ohio wrote:
<quoted text>
Yes, but old "Man Breath" doesn't address non sequiturs and double standards. He only cackles on about how he believes that he is the only one in here with some sort of education. It's his signature drivel. Then, when pressed, he claims that the same logic used against the SSM crowd (moral outrage) was invalid (when used against them), but stands as perfectly plausible when being used against Polygamists,
I did not say that. I agreed that moral disapproval is not a valid reason.

But it's not the only reason. Polygamy isn't going to become legal because the "moral disapproval" argument is no longer valid in light of SCOTUS rulings. There would have to be a trial, testimony would be heard, from both sides. Perhaps you should familiarize yourself with the anti-polygamy legal case BEFORE it gets to court, or it will pretty much be the same as this case: http://www.courts.gov.bc.ca/jdb-txt/SC/11/15/...
Xavier Breath

Brooklyn, NY

#228542 Jan 27, 2014
Randy Hudson Wooster Ohio wrote:
<quoted text>
Then, Old Big Dope jumps in and crows about how he thinks he can have a priest arrested for being on school grounds, but a homo (with no official educational, or scholastic, agenda {except for maybe making kids aware that they may not be normal, but it is ok...}) may have free rein with the kids, who never had any business being made aware (as early as the age of 6, and even sometimes against the wishes of the parents) that they have to decide if they are gay, or not. Sounds pretty fuqked up to me,.
Sounds like a pile of horseshit to me. Sexuality emerges during puberty. That's not exactly a state secret. Why would anyone demand a 6 yr old self identify?
Lack of

Covina, CA

#228543 Jan 27, 2014
This is such a boring subject or topic, because only the true idiots post their deranged felling.

Or lack of

Since: Nov 13

Location hidden

#228544 Jan 27, 2014
KiMare wrote:
<quoted text>
You lie again.
Gays are not denied marriage for the 'sole reason that they are gay'.
Can you not post and be honest? Is your defense so weak it must be cloaked in distortion and deceit???
Sad.
Here's your fantastically unbrilliant post in its entirety. Telling me I 'censored it' is a weak attempt to suggest that somehow I took your words out of context. In reality, as anyone can see, I meerly edited out the parts not worth responding to.
It is as crisp and non-spamming as possible. So, wisebut, once again ....
KiMare wrote:
<quoted text>
...
Gays are not denied marriage for the 'sole reason that they are gay'.
...
Uh, NO - that IS the reason. You are hopelessly dense?

And for the record, to expect others to repost the entirety of your posts when there is only a single part of it they wish to respond to is assinine - repost your own propaganda.
Lack of

Covina, CA

#228547 Jan 27, 2014
This is such a boring subject or topic, because only the true idiots post their deranged felling.

Or lack of #228544
Cali Girl 14

Idyllwild, CA

#228551 Jan 27, 2014
Lack of wrote:
This is such a boring subject or topic, because only the true idiots post their deranged felling.

Or lack of #228544
Lack of spelling feeling#228545
d pantz

San Antonio, TX

#228552 Jan 27, 2014
This is a fake issue. A bunch of secularists who are just like zealots trying to tell everybody what to believe and do. How about tax equality and fair insurance policy for all...including single people who are gay, straight, African American, honky, Asian, Hispanic, Antarctican, whatever.... just all humans?? Why? Why!!!!? Don't tell me I don't understand the law... that's what the post is supposed to be about... how the law discriminates much larger groups that are largely ignored due to junk issues like ssm.
d pantz

San Antonio, TX

#228553 Jan 27, 2014
Reverend Alan wrote:
<quoted text>
Go tell it to Comrade Sheepie he loves this kind of petty bickering.
go fall in a sewer..
d pantz

San Antonio, TX

#228554 Jan 27, 2014
Xavier Breath wrote:
<quoted text>
Sounds like a pile of horseshit to me. Sexuality emerges during puberty. That's not exactly a state secret. Why would anyone demand a 6 yr old self identify?
yeah its f**king creepy. Just let them be kids for crying out loud. I can think of another group that wants children to embrace sex.. pedophiles...wtf?
d pantz

San Antonio, TX

#228555 Jan 27, 2014
Cali Girl 14 wrote:
<quoted text>
Lack of spelling feeling#228545
how trife to point out simple typos. You lack substance.
d pantz

San Antonio, TX

#228556 Jan 27, 2014
Six_Of_One wrote:
<quoted text>
Here's your fantastically unbrilliant post in its entirety. Telling me I 'censored it' is a weak attempt to suggest that somehow I took your words out of context. In reality, as anyone can see, I meerly edited out the parts not worth responding to.
It is as crisp and non-spamming as possible. So, wisebut, once again ....
<quoted text>
Uh, NO - that IS the reason. You are hopelessly dense?
And for the record, to expect others to repost the entirety of your posts when there is only a single part of it they wish to respond to is assinine - repost your own propaganda.
how about this: in a country where there is supposed to be no law respecting establishment of religion , no marriage should reward tax benifits and any private company or business providing public service who does is guilty of discrimination....
d pantz

San Antonio, TX

#228557 Jan 27, 2014
Sorry any private entity that rewards married people over other people. Correction.

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.

Torrance Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
News A girl waves a Mexican flag during rallies in L... (Mar '06) 6 hr Pyrite Smith 4,505
Mobile home parks in Gardena area Thu New 2 Town 1
crimes Wed Bryan Gudino 1
News The 25 Most Dangerous Cities in the U.S. Are Mo... (Nov '10) Jul 28 Samuel-7g-Jackson 20,089
News Inglewood police investigating apparent murder-... Jul 27 GVR 1
Loud Jet Noise In Redondo Beach at night.. (Aug '09) Jul 27 Mister Spaceman 33
News Harbor-UCLA Medical Center cited for safety vio... (Oct '11) Jul 26 Raj 4
More from around the web

Personal Finance

Torrance Mortgages