Judge overturns California's ban on same-sex marriage

[Big D]

Frankie RIzzo wrote:

<quoted text>
I keep giving you chances to really discuss the issue, but it is impossible. You are too angry and stupid. And you whine that I am off topic. Priceless!

You wont discuss the issue, which is same sex marriage

you will only discuss your slippery slope tactic and your obsession

so as you wont discuss the actual issue, I will laugh at you as I please.

[Jazybird58]

Frankie RIzzo wrote:

<quoted text>
I keep giving you chances to really discuss the issue, but it is impossible. You are too angry and stupid. And you whine that I am off topic. Priceless!

Keep piling on the votes Flunkie

[PisnPot]

Oh ya, another piece of wisdom for today.

[Frankie RIzzo]

Big D wrote:

<quoted text>
You wont discuss the issue, which is same sex marriage
you will only discuss your slippery slope tactic and your obsession
so as you wont discuss the actual issue, I will laugh at you as I please.

You're too stupid and angry to understand that the slippery slope is an issue and how to deal with it and that we should deal with it, and not "laugh at it", or call it off topic or an obsession, not my problem jackass.

You're so stupid that you think you can bully me out of serious discussion on the issue, you won't.

[Frankie RIzzo]

http://www2.law.ucla.edu/volokh/marriage.pdf

If that link is "off topic" or "not the issue" you're lying. Or real stupid.

Sure it's too deep for jazybird, but even dopes like Big D should maybe gain something from it.

Unless you're so smart that you refuse information, since you already know it all.

[PisnPot]

Oh ya, another piece of wisdom for today.

Next piece could be printed in the newspaper, but you'll miss that one because you can't read.

Maybe if you wait until Sunday you can look at the pictures?

Say do you have any extra?

[Frankie RIzzo]

PisnPot wrote:

Oh ya, another piece of wisdom for today.
Next piece could be printed in the newspaper, but you'll miss that one because you can't read.
Maybe if you wait until Sunday you can look at the pictures?
Say do you have any extra?

Your town sucks.

[Jazybird58]

Frankie RIzzo wrote:

http://www2.law.ucla.edu/volok h/marriage.pdf
If that link is "off topic" or "not the issue" you're lying. Or real stupid.
Sure it's too deep for jazybird, but even dopes like Big D should maybe gain something from it.
Unless you're so smart that you refuse information, since you already know it all.

Still missing the target. The thread is about unlawfully removing a state granted right.

Judge overturns California's ban on same-sex marriage

You see at one time Gays and Lesbians could legally marry. Then the voters tried to remove that law. Based on the US Constitution, a judge overturned the new law. The question is did he have the right to do so? What of the other courts that agreed with him? Will SCOTUS uphold his ruling. At that point will other states be required to revise thier laws?

[Jazybird58]

Frankie RIzzo wrote:

<quoted text>
Your town sucks.

Thats nice sugar nipples, please stay on topic.

[Big D]

Frankie RIzzo wrote:

<quoted text>
You're too stupid and angry to understand that the slippery slope is an issue and how to deal with it and that we should deal with it, and not "laugh at it", or call it off topic or an obsession, not my problem jackass.
You're so stupid that you think you can bully me out of serious discussion on the issue, you won't.

Bully you? ROFLMO!

On an internet forum?

give me a break, you have been calling everyone names non-stop, I wish I had a dollar for every time you have called someone a jackass or a dope, over and over and over. Or when someone was trying to have a discussion and you would toss your crap in be it this obsession or another of yours.

Give you a little taste of your own medicine, and you cry like a baby.

I would enjoy having a serious discussion about the coming change with respect to same sex marriage.

But you won’t even discuss that, you only want to talk about something that won’t be affected by the coming decision at all.

[Big D]

Jazybird58 wrote:

<quoted text>Thats nice sugar nipples, please stay on topic.

LOL!!!!!!

[PisnPot]

Watch out the big blow is on.

[Rose_NoHo]

KiMare wrote:

<quoted text>
There is no such thing as ssm. Marriage is a cross cultural constraint on evolutionary mating behavior. Gay couples would only qualify as 'unmarriage'.

There is gay marriage in several states and countries. You have to live in denial. LOLSER.

KiMare wrote:

8000 years of human history has repeatedly affirmed that any minor rise of homosexual couple acceptance is extremely short lived. I'm betting on a repeat.

8000 years of human history has repeatedly affirmed that monster mutations are killed as "freaks" or "witches". Any acceptance of monster mutations is extremely short lived. I'm betting on a repeat.

KiMare wrote:

Man up and quit trying to infringe on benefits and rights of women and children!
Smirk.

That makes no sense. One couple getting married doesn't infringe on the benefits and rights of another.

[Billy goat]

Amen

[Jazybird58]

Big D wrote:

<quoted text>
Bully you? ROFLMO!
On an internet forum?
give me a break, you have been calling everyone names non-stop, I wish I had a dollar for every time you have called someone a jackass or a dope, over and over and over. Or when someone was trying to have a discussion and you would toss your crap in be it this obsession or another of yours.
Give you a little taste of your own medicine, and you cry like a baby.
I would enjoy having a serious discussion about the coming change with respect to same sex marriage.
But you won’t even discuss that, you only want to talk about something that won’t be affected by the coming decision at all.

fRANKIEE is just pissed, we in his head rent free, and he cant handle the pressure. Maybe he needs to get laid. I dunno maybe he is just narcissus. Anyways have a great day

[Pietro Armando]

Jazybird58 wrote:

<quoted text>Still missing the target. The thread is about unlawfully removing a state granted right.
Judge overturns California's ban on same-sex marriage
You see at one time Gays and Lesbians could legally marry. Then the voters tried to remove that law. Based on the US Constitution, a judge overturned the new law. The question is did he have the right to do so? What of the other courts that agreed with him? Will SCOTUS uphold his ruling. At that point will other states be required to revise thier laws?

Gays and lesbians can legally marry in any state in the union. Always had that right, and did, exercise that right, just like anybody else.

[Frankie RIzzo]

Jazybird58 wrote:

<quoted text>fRANKIEE is just pissed, we in his head rent free, and he cant handle the pressure. Maybe he needs to get laid. I dunno maybe he is just narcissus. Anyways have a great day

Great argument Fruitloops! Try harder next time maybe.

You never did say how a load tastes. Guess you're shy.

[Rose_NoHo]

Jazybird58 wrote:

<quoted text> I asked Big D, Rose No-Ho that and myself are many. Judging from the Judgits there are many more. Would you care for more people to tell you the same thing? I can put it up for a vote if you like. Maybe a poll on Topix. Is Frankie Rizzo an asshat?

No need for a poll. The answer is, "Yes!".

[Jazybird58]

Pietro Armando wrote:

<quoted text>
Gays and lesbians can legally marry in any state in the union. Always had that right, and did, exercise that right, just like anybody else.

Only if its the opposite sex. Would you like to be told who you can and can not marry. What is wonderful is this, more and more states are changing the laws. Kinda makes me proud to be an American.

[Pietro Armando]

Jazybird58 wrote:

<quoted text>fRANKIEE is just pissed, we in his head rent free, and he cant handle the pressure. Maybe he needs to get laid. I dunno maybe he is just narcissus. Anyways have a great day

Frankie's not pissed, he just pointing out the hypocricy of some SSM advocates. Perhaps you might try addressing the question posed.