Judge overturns California's ban on same-sex marriage

Aug 4, 2010 Full story: www.cnn.com 201,185

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.

Full Story

Since: Jun 07

Location hidden

#171547 Dec 16, 2012
Karma is a_______ wrote:
<quoted text>
Duh, as numerous posts have explained before, the impeachment of President Clinton failed, as the required 2/3 vote for guilty was not reached in the Senate.
Why is this so hard for you to understand? It is 1 fu$$ing sentence.

"The House of Representatives shall choose their speaker and other officers; and shall have the sole power of impeachment." US Constitution Article I Sec 2

What part of "SOLE POWER OF IMPEACHMENT" is confusing you?

Since: Jun 07

Location hidden

#171548 Dec 16, 2012
Lililth_Satans_Bore wrote:
after obamas speech i can hear all the far right christardo NRA nuts.... "Martha fire up the truck we gotta go get our assault weapons now!!! before the libs take our rights and we can't protect ourselves from roaving bands of blood thirsty deer!!!!"
You have shown that you really don't understand the purpose behind the 2nd Amendment.

Hint: It had nothing to do with hunting.
cunune

Pittsburgh, PA

#171555 Dec 17, 2012
youtube.com/watch ... Free-Dumb is getting impaired to aonesided decision

“Formerly Frankie Rizzo”

Since: Sep 12

Canarsie, NY

#171556 Dec 17, 2012
akpilot wrote:
<quoted text>
Why is this so hard for you to understand? It is 1 fu$$ing sentence.
"The House of Representatives shall choose their speaker and other officers; and shall have the sole power of impeachment." US Constitution Article I Sec 2
What part of "SOLE POWER OF IMPEACHMENT" is confusing you?
"Big D" is also very confused by that simple sentence. He too insists the Senate "failed" the House's impeachment.

Very curious.
LumberYard

Covina, CA

#171557 Dec 17, 2012
How many trees did you cut down for this one Roncco?
Impeachment Cobblers

Mount Airy, MD

#171560 Dec 17, 2012
Brian_G wrote:
<quoted text>I make my arguments without insults; this is where we differ.
You don't really make any arguments, Brian. You simply slap together some bumper sticker slogans and post them here. When asked to give supporting evidence, actual argument, for them you avoid responding.

Since: Apr 11

Santa Monica, CA

#171561 Dec 17, 2012
Brian_G wrote:
<quoted text>I make my arguments without insults; this is where we differ.
BS. Telling people they don't deserve basic, equal human rights is more insulting than any simple name calling, b!tch.

Since: Apr 11

Santa Monica, CA

#171562 Dec 17, 2012
R Hudson wrote:
<quoted text>
Do not presume to tell me how to think, or what I may feel.
Bigfoot, I'm not doing either. I'm just saying that based on what you say, I figure you are lying about being a Wiccan. It's like your claiming to be a Muslim, then saying in every other post that Muhammad was just another dude.
A fortNight

Covina, CA

#171565 Dec 17, 2012
Another fortnight of bull coming from these out of towners postings again.
Hrdy

Covina, CA

#171569 Dec 17, 2012
Hardy Har Har, mellon brains
Hrdy

Covina, CA

#171571 Dec 17, 2012
For the last two decades the powerful "rich" have passed laws that reduced their tax burden. Because they (Republicans) are a bunch of lazy slobs, and or crooks.

“KiMare'a the Monster Mutation”

Since: Nov 10

Location hidden

#171573 Dec 17, 2012
http://www.sciencedaily.com/
releases/2012/12/121211083212. htm

Different epi-marks protect different sex-specific traits from being masculinized or feminized -- some affect the genitals, others sexual identity, and yet others affect sexual partner preference. However, when these epi-marks are transmitted across generations from fathers to daughters or mothers to sons, they may cause reversed effects, such as the feminization of some traits in sons, such as sexual preference, and similarly a partial masculinization of daughters.

The study solves the evolutionary riddle of homosexuality, finding that "sexually antagonistic" epi-marks, which normally protect parents from natural variation in sex hormone levels during fetal development, sometimes carryover across generations and cause homosexuality in opposite-sex offspring.
Quigley

Covina, CA

#171574 Dec 17, 2012
Still waiting for logic instead of rashed out wacked out republican
Mona Lott

Hoboken, NJ

#171576 Dec 18, 2012
Judge overturns California's ban on same-sex marriage.

And now SCOTUS will hear the case. How can they come to any other conclusion than Prop8 is discriminatory?
Jane Dough

Montpelier, VT

#171577 Dec 18, 2012
Mona Lott wrote:
Judge overturns California's ban on same-sex marriage.
And now SCOTUS will hear the case. How can they come to any other conclusion than Prop8 is discriminatory?
I can't wait for reality to happen...
you won't like it...
Big D

Modesto, CA

#171578 Dec 18, 2012
Mona Lott wrote:
Judge overturns California's ban on same-sex marriage.
And now SCOTUS will hear the case. How can they come to any other conclusion than Prop8 is discriminatory?
I donít think they can, the supporters of the prop did not have a leg to stand on In court

I think the real question is, will they came back with the narrow division that will overturn it in California, or the broad decision that will have consequences nation wide

I give it 60/40 with a 60% Chance for the narrow result, and 40% for the broader one.

I would prefer the broader decision but will not be disappointed for the narrow.

“what are you talking about you”

Since: Mar 11

schlappington, by god

#171579 Dec 18, 2012
Quigley wrote:
Still waiting for logic instead of rashed out wacked out republican
*nod*
&li st=PL4AE0C04E00215A84&inde x=1
frig my lifes!

“Formerly Frankie Rizzo”

Since: Sep 12

Canarsie, NY

#171581 Dec 18, 2012
Big D wrote:
<quoted text>
I donít think they can, the supporters of the prop did not have a leg to stand on In court
I think the real question is, will they came back with the narrow division that will overturn it in California, or the broad decision that will have consequences nation wide
I give it 60/40 with a 60% Chance for the narrow result, and 40% for the broader one.
I would prefer the broader decision but will not be disappointed for the narrow.
I would prefer the broad too!

“Formerly Frankie Rizzo”

Since: Sep 12

Canarsie, NY

#171582 Dec 18, 2012
Cooterbob wrote:
<quoted text>
*nod*
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v =3Ephh9J5BWQXX&list=PL4AE0 C04E00215A84&index=1
frig my lifes!
Funny!
Big D

Modesto, CA

#171583 Dec 18, 2012
Mike DiRucci wrote:
<quoted text>
I would prefer the broad too!
LOL

From a Squid I can only take that one way

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
Florida clerks won't give gays marriage licenses 6 min Harold 7
US removes Gambia from trade agreement 8 min Harold 3
The gay cafe for GLBT, friends and family (Oct '09) 18 min Rosco 68,583
Colo. gay discrimination alleged over wedding cake (Jun '13) 20 min jesusHchrist 6,013
Studies Show Voters Can Be Swayed on Gay Marria... 30 min Rainbow Kid 34
ACLU sues to allow gay club in Indiana school 36 min XXX 28
Next gay marriage fight: religious exemptions 40 min NorCal Native 5,128
Anti-gay Tenn. billboard stirs religion debate 49 min Mikey 2,997
US Moves Toward Dropping Lifetime Ban on Gay Bl... 6 hr NorCal Native 22
More from around the web