Lesbian couple in gay marriage case p...

Lesbian couple in gay marriage case prepares for Supreme Court decision

There are 1581 comments on the Fox News story from Mar 24, 2013, titled Lesbian couple in gay marriage case prepares for Supreme Court decision. In it, Fox News reports that:

Big change is coming to the lives of the lesbian couple at the center of the fight for same-sex marriage in California no matter how the Supreme Court decides their case.

Join the discussion below, or Read more at Fox News.

thuexevantai

Hanoi, Vietnam

#1569 May 25, 2013
[URL=" http://canthuexetai.com/" ;]Cho thuê xe tải[/URL]+[URL= " http://cautuhanh.com "]Thuê xe cẩu[/URL]+[URL= " http://canthuexedulich.com/" ;]Cho thuê xe du lịch[/URL]-[URL= " http://thoxaydung.vmh.vn/tho-xay-dung.html&qu... ;]Thợ xây dựng[/URL]-[URL= " http://www.cauchuyendung.name.vn/" ;]Cho thuê cẩu chuyên dùng[/URL]-[URL=" http://phadovanchuyen.blogspot.com/" ;]Phá dỡ công trình[/URL]-[URL=" http://thuecau.com/" ;]Thuê Cẩu[/URL]-[URL= " http://thoxaydung.vmh.vn/Xay-Nha-Cap-4.html&q... ;]Xây nhà cấp 4[/URL],[URL=" http://www.thuecau.com/" ;]cho thuê cẩu[/URL],-[URL= " http://cau10tan.blogspot.com/" ;]cho thuê cẩu 10 tấn[/URL]-[URL= " http://truyennuoctainha.blogspot.com/" ;]y tế tại nhà[/URL],[URL=" http://tiemtruyentainha.vmh.vn/" ;]Tiêm truyền tại nhà[/URL]

“Vita e' Bella.”

Since: May 12

Location hidden

#1570 May 25, 2013
Uve wrote:
<quoted text>
At least your allowed have ONE marriage, where I am not.
Actually you do, it just that you don't like the state's definition of it, husband AND wife. You can marry without state recognition. The state didn't invent marriage, its simply recognizing it.
Then you have the audacity to cry discrimination because you can't have more. Only an ignorant greedy pig would equate the two. POS
"Discrimination" is still discrimination. Sooooo.....its only discrimination if it involves a requirement u don't like? Why is number acceptable, but not nature, as in conjugal, as in husband and wife?

“KiMare'a the Monster Mutation”

Since: Nov 10

Location hidden

#1571 May 25, 2013
KiMare wrote:
Marriage describes a unique relationship in society. Every single one of us is a result most often of that relationship, and NEVER a result of a ss relationship.
Ss couples simple are not and will never be the same.
Smile.
Dusty Mangina wrote:
<quoted text>
we get it, for Christ's sake, SS couples can't spawn.
what does that have to do with marriage?
still married here and your opinions regarding the validity of that marriage are still irrelevant.
How's your third nipple?
You sound like Hillary, "Why does it matter?!?"

Idiot.

Smile.

Uve

Since: Nov 12

Location hidden

#1572 May 25, 2013
Pietro Armando wrote:
<quoted text>
Actually you do, it just that you don't like the state's definition of it, husband AND wife. You can marry without state recognition. The state didn't invent marriage, its simply recognizing it.
<quoted text>
"Discrimination" is still discrimination. Sooooo.....its only discrimination if it involves a requirement u don't like? Why is number acceptable, but not nature, as in conjugal, as in husband and wife?
Weak argument and a waste of time..try again You want more than one wife? Go to the middle east.

“Busting Kimare's”

Since: Feb 13

Clitty

#1573 May 25, 2013
KiMare wrote:
KiMare wrote:
Marriage describes a unique relationship in society. Every single one of us is a result most often of that relationship, and NEVER a result of a ss relationship.
Ss couples simple are not and will never be the same.
Smile.
<quoted text>
You sound like Hillary, "Why does it matter?!?"
Idiot.
Smile.
why does the word marriage matter to you? my marriage takes nothing from your marriage. you just want to claim the word. too late, that shop has sailed.

“Vita e' Bella.”

Since: May 12

Location hidden

#1575 May 26, 2013
http://m.sltrib.com/sltrib/mobile3/56282277-2...
Uve wrote:
<quoted text>
Weak argument and a waste of time..try again You want more than one wife? Go to the middle east.
No need to....polygamy exists in the good old U...S...of A.

While the Supreme Court ponders the constitutionality of the Defense of Marriage Act, activists along the political spectrum are voicing their opinions on monogamy's core institution and whom it should include. Most miss the following point: DOMA doesn't just prohibit gay marriage by defining marriage as the union of one man and one woman. It also prohibits plural marriage by limiting it to one and one.

The plural marriage movement is real. An estimated 50,000 to 150,000 polygamous families already live in America, from the well-publicized Muslims and Mormons to the African and Vietnamese immigrants keeping up their cultural ways. From modern feminists looking for a better work/life balance, to family traditionalists, who maintain that any marriage is better than none in the fight against the rising tide of single parents, cohabitation, and divorce.

Over 500,000 others identify as polyamorous, and engage in "ethical non-monogamy" — loving, committed, concurrent, consensual relationships with multiple partners.

The push for non-monogamous marriage reveals some unexpected bedfellows: Everyone from former presidents to the remarried elderly couple next door. Experts say that 30 to 60 percent of married people in the U.S. will commit adultery over the course of their 'exclusive, dyadic relationships,' producing a form of de facto polygamy. Thousands of others will actually marry a second, sometimes even a third person, albeit after a legal divorce from their original spouse.

The rise of no-fault divorce has made "polygamy on the installment plan" more and more common for adults of all ages. Whether it's de facto polygamy in the form of adultery, or serial polygamy with no-fault divorce, we as Americans have already broken the sanctity of the "couple."

“KiMare'a the Monster Mutation”

Since: Nov 10

Location hidden

#1576 May 28, 2013
KiMare wrote:
Marriage describes a unique relationship in society. Every single one of us is a result most often of that relationship, and NEVER a result of a ss relationship.
Ss couples simple are not and will never be the same.
Smile.
<quoted text>
You sound like Hillary, "Why does it matter?!?"
Idiot.
Smile.
Dusty Mangina wrote:
<quoted text>
why does the word marriage matter to you? my marriage takes nothing from your marriage. you just want to claim the word. too late, that shop has sailed.
That ship has sailed? Really.

Reality possess' words, people don't. When reality doesn't, they become a deceptive danger to everyone.

The word 'marriage' matters because it describes the most important and distinctly unique relationship in society.

Uve

Since: Nov 12

Location hidden

#1577 May 28, 2013
KiMare wrote:
KiMare wrote:
Marriage describes a unique relationship in society. Every single one of us is a result most often of that relationship, and NEVER a result of a ss relationship.
Ss couples simple are not and will never be the same.
Smile.
<quoted text>
You sound like Hillary, "Why does it matter?!?"
Idiot.
Smile.
<quoted text>
That ship has sailed? Really.
Reality possess' words, people don't. When reality doesn't, they become a deceptive danger to everyone.
The word 'marriage' matters because it describes the most important and distinctly unique relationship in society.
Not everyone is a result of 'marriage'..Everyone is a result of 'sex'.. and people that are married don't necessarily have children or need to. Your right marriage is a distinctly unique relationship in society, One that you want to deny to SS couples. The next time you (again) belittle someone, at least know the difference between sex and marriage.

“Vita e' Bella.”

Since: May 12

Location hidden

#1578 May 28, 2013
Uve wrote:
Not everyone is a result of 'marriage'..Everyone is a result of 'sex'.. and people that are married don't necessarily have children or need to. Your right marriage is a distinctly unique relationship in society,
Exactly, the unique relationship of husband and wife.
One that you want to deny to SS couples.
That by definition, at least in 32 states, is a physical impossibility. Marriage requires husband AND wife. Eliminate one, and it is no longer marriage, it's design, function, and purpose, have fundamentally changed.

Uve

Since: Nov 12

Location hidden

#1579 May 28, 2013
Pietro Armando wrote:
<quoted text>
Exactly, the unique relationship of husband and wife.
<quoted text>
That by definition, at least in 32 states, is a physical impossibility. Marriage requires husband AND wife. Eliminate one, and it is no longer marriage, it's design, function, and purpose, have fundamentally changed.
Laws are changing get used to it...Nope marriage doesn't require anything it's a contract...Now that polygamy argument doesn't work, back to a singularity? BTW 'design, function, and purpose' still pretty much the same..
Uncle Sam

Beckley, WV

#1580 May 28, 2013
Uve wrote:
<quoted text>
Laws are changing get used to it...Nope marriage doesn't require anything it's a contract...Now that polygamy argument doesn't work, back to a singularity? BTW 'design, function, and purpose' still pretty much the same..
The states need to get out of the marrying business and only recognize civil unions. If a couple want a civil union for state recognized benefits then they should get one. They can later get married by a non-governmental agent that will recognized their union and give the couple any benefits their private organization may afford a married couple.
Orem

Raleigh, NC

#1582 May 28, 2013
NorCal Native wrote:
<quoted text>
You know this won't work, right? What private non-government agent would be allowed to marry a couple and give them special private organization benefits that they picked and choose who got? Still would be DISCRIMINATION!!!
Dykes like you need to be discriminated against.

Whoop Whoop
Uncle Sam

Beckley, WV

#1583 May 28, 2013
NorCal Native wrote:
<quoted text>
You know this won't work, right? What private non-government agent would be allowed to marry a couple and give them special private organization benefits that they picked and choose who got? Still would be DISCRIMINATION!!!
There is freedom of association. Where is the discrimination if people in an organization wish to associate with people of similar interests and follow agreed upon rules?

“You Get My Truth Here!”

Since: May 09

Nonya!

#1584 May 28, 2013
Orem wrote:
<quoted text>
Dykes like you need to be discriminated against.
Whoop Whoop
Well I must say...I'm all for "traditional marriage", but this was cruel and unnecessary...

The facts are 'marriage' has always been a discriminatory practice and for good reason....
Orem

Raleigh, NC

#1586 May 28, 2013
Get That Fool wrote:
<quoted text>
Well I must say...I'm all for "traditional marriage", but this was cruel and unnecessary...
The facts are 'marriage' has always been a discriminatory practice and for good reason....
NorCal Native defends sexual predators.

Whoop Whoop
Orem

Raleigh, NC

#1587 May 28, 2013
NorCal Native wrote:
<quoted text>
You simply can't treat legal marriages differently.....just like you can't treat people of different races or ethnic backgrounds differently either.
ROFLMAO.

You are all for treating races differently

Whoop Whoop
Orem

Raleigh, NC

#1588 May 28, 2013
Uncle Sam wrote:
<quoted text>
There is freedom of association. Where is the discrimination if people in an organization wish to associate with people of similar interests and follow agreed upon rules?
Whoop Whoop

“KiMare'a the Monster Mutation”

Since: Nov 10

Location hidden

#1589 May 28, 2013
Uve wrote:
<quoted text>
Not everyone is a result of 'marriage'..Everyone is a result of 'sex'.. and people that are married don't necessarily have children or need to. Your right marriage is a distinctly unique relationship in society, One that you want to deny to SS couples. The next time you (again) belittle someone, at least know the difference between sex and marriage.
KiMare wrote:
Marriage describes a unique relationship in society. Every single one of us is a result most often of that relationship, and NEVER a result of a ss relationship.
Ss couples simple are not and will never be the same.
Smile.
<quoted text>
You sound like Hillary, "Why does it matter?!?"
Idiot.
Smile.
<quoted text>
That ship has sailed? Really.
Reality possess' words, people don't. When reality doesn't, they become a deceptive danger to everyone.
The word 'marriage' matters because it describes the most important and distinctly unique relationship in society.

Your comprehension is blinded by your denial honey.

I said children are the result of marriage MOST OFTEN. Moreover that is the best setting by far.

Children are NEVER the mutual result of a SS relationship. Hence one of the striking distinctions from marriage.

“You Get My Truth Here!”

Since: May 09

Nonya!

#1590 May 28, 2013
What kind of world is this when a paren can no longer protect their children without scrutiny???

Parents of girl, 14, say they are protecting her

At trial, the prosecutor is likely to try to put on witnesses who can show that the 14-year-old was damaged psychologically by engaging in sex at such a young age, and that she wouldn't have normally done such a thing.

In an earlier interview with CNN affiliate WPEC, Jim and Laurie Smith insisted that the girls' gender has nothing to do with the case. They are concerned about ages.

"Our daughter was 14, and this girl was 18," said Jim Smith.

According to the Smiths, they twice warned Hunt to stop.

"I had another adult, who is a mother, she came to me and said,'Ms. Smith, you need to know this.' She said,'We told Ms. Hunt to leave your daughter alone but they are in a relationship. And, she's 18.'"

Laurie Smith said she was shocked. Her daughter was just too young, she thought.

The 14-year-old began to act out, the Smiths told WPEC.

Then one weekend morning the Smiths went to their daughter's bedroom and discovered she was missing.

cont'd....

“You Get My Truth Here!”

Since: May 09

Nonya!

#1591 May 28, 2013
They panicked, thinking someone took their daughter or that she was hurt. "Her running away was the furthest thing from our mind," said Jim Smith. "We thought ... you hear about kids getting abducted from their homes."

But they later learned that Hunt had picked their daughter up, they told WPEC.

"We had no other alternative but to turn to the law, use it basically as a last resort," Jim Smith said.

Bloggers have called Laurie Smith a gay basher and accused her of being abusive to her daughter. Numerous news reports have asked whether the Smiths went after the teen because of her sexual orientation.

But Smith says her goal is to protect her 14-year-old, and she will not relent.

"I will be an advocate of what she needs," the mother told WPEC. "The stories that people are saying ... I love my daughter.... I'm willing to do whatever to protect her."

"This whole story about you blaming Kate for making your daughter gay ... where did that come from?" a reporter asked the parents.

"I don't know. It didn't come from us. That's not how we feel," Jim Smith answered.

Still, Hunt's supporters say she is being prosecuted because she was in a sexual relationship with someone of the same sex. A Facebook support page the Hunt family set up called "Free Kate" has gathered more than 47,000 names.

Not everyone who is posting online might have the facts of the case. A glance at postings on Facebook and Twitter show that some people are getting the ages of the girls wrong. Others have posted erroneously that Hunt is being prosecuted for numerous other charges.

Regardless, everyone seems upset about the effect a felony child abuse conviction would have on Hunt, if she agreed to the plea deal.

LaBahn told CNN that a felony child abuse conviction would mean that Hunt would have to disclose her felony conviction on employment applications and she could never serve on a jury. She would be prohibited from voting for a period of time, though each state has different time frames for that rule, the attorney said. She may not be able to secure student loans either, he said, and she might not be allowed to adopt or obtain a childcare license.

Graves, Hunt's attorney, had earlier asked that the charges be reduced to a misdemeanor.

"This is a life sentence for behavior that is all too common, whether male, female, gay, straight," Graves said at a Wednesday news conference.

"High school relationships may be fleeting," she said, "but felony convictions are forever."

This is ridiculous. She was warned...she blow all that off and is now crying discrimination. She needs to be punished for her outrageous behavior!

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.

Gay/Lesbian Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
Thank You Mr President 8 min Frankie Rizzo 7
News Gay Cakes Are Not a Constitutional Right 2 hr Frankie Rizzo 822
News What would Jesus say about same-sex marriage? (Jul '15) 4 hr cpeter1313 17,299
News US gay couple sues after getting 'hateful' flye... 4 hr Holy Guacamole 1
The Spectrum Cafe (Dec '07) 5 hr GodSmacked 27,290
News An Immersive Play About Lutherans Battling over... (Sep '16) 7 hr Whoshgow 62
News Gay basher Kathryn Knott forced to fork over a ... 7 hr Holy Guacamole 34
News Reading series teaches students about inclusion 7 hr Holy Guacamole 10
More from around the web