Judge overturns California's ban on same-sex marriage

Aug 4, 2010 Full story: www.cnn.com 200,930

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
Frankie Rizzo

Union City, CA

#188807 Apr 16, 2013
Pietro Armando wrote:
http://m.vice.com/en_ca/read/a fter-gay-marriage-why-not-poly gamy
Actually, yeah—why are polyamorous marriages between consenting adults illegal?
“Kurtz was right for the most part,” Anita Wagner Illig, a polyamorous-relationships advocate who runs the Practical Polyamory website, told me in an email.“Legalizing same-sex marriage creates a legal precedent where there can be no valid legal premise for denying marriage to more than two people who wish to marry each other… We just disagree as to whether it’s a bad thing.”
Laws against multiple marriages in the US were originally enacted in response to 19th-century Mormon polygamy, and since then, having a bunch of wives has been associated with extreme Mormons like Tom Green and David Kingston who force women to marry them, have sex with young girls, and even engage in incest—horrific, despicable acts by any moral standard. That’s a tough stigma for poly people to overcome, though polyamory has become more and more accepted at large over the past decade.
If TV is a barometer for society’s obsessions, we’re thinking a lot more about group marriage—HBO’s Big Love depicted fundamentalist Mormon polygamy in nuanced, dramatic fashion, and TLC’s Sister Wives portrayed a Mormon polygamous family as being not all that different from “normal” homes. A long story in Newsweek in 2009 focused on nonreligious poly families and was very sympathetic. More recently, ABC’s Wife Swap featured a poly family and Scientific American called “consensual nonmonogamy”(which includes swingers and people in open relationships, not just polyamorists) the “new sexual revolution.” It’s important to note that there are only an estimated 500,000 poly relationships in the US, which is a tiny minority when compared to the 9 million or so gay people in the country, but if you want, you can see this mainstreaming of polyamory as running parallel to the wider acceptance of homosexuality that preceded the current civil rights battle.
Many gay marriage advocates dislike that comparison—they don’t want the public to draw comparisons between gay relationships and “weird” potentially abusive multiwife setups. Back in 2006, Andrew Sullivan wrote,“Legalizing [polygamy] is a bad idea for a society in general for all the usual reasons (abuse of women, the dangers of leaving a pool of unmarried straight men in the population at large, etc.),” an odd mirroring of all those conservatives who’ve talked about how “bad for society” gay marriage would be.
When poly becomes legal, the numbers of people who want to be in a poly marriage will be so small that those bigots and haters against it like Big D, Jizzy and X-Box will probably never have to be offended by the sight of a happy poly family.
Frankie Rizzo

Union City, CA

#188808 Apr 16, 2013
Big D wrote:
<quoted text>
I am being inclusive, adding marriage to space aliens and romantically attached sheep herders to your cause.
The law is exclusive, the law outlawing Polygamy is not Prop 8, but was already in in effect. It isn’t my choice or my decision that overturning Prop 8 will not affect polygamy at all, that is the law that has been in place for decades now.
To overturn the law you need to be out getting signatures ( something you have already said you won’t do ) or working within the legal system to have that overturned.
Don’t ask me to do anything that you are not willing to do and blame me for that. That is crap, you know it and so do I.
Imagine if someone used your unfunny stupid space alien schtick against same sex marriage. You would scream bloody murder.

Why do you think it's so brilliant when you use it against other forms of marriage that you don't approve of?
Big D

Modesto, CA

#188809 Apr 16, 2013
Pietro Armando wrote:
<quoted text>
Oh please enlighten us Big D, what are those other space alien sexes called? Unanusians? Androgynites?
<quoted text>
Ohhhhhh.....Big D made a funny. Still have that inflatable sheep hidden out in your tool shed, along with a copy of PlayEwe magazine, I see. Let's hope the missus doesn't find out.
Oh I don’t believe in them, but there are those that do, and their rights are being infringed too :)

I have not contacted any sheep herders yet, but I assume they will be open to joining you Poly folks.

( Kidding aside, I am occasionally asked to go to a classroom and talk about amateur astronomy, after my little talk and presentation of different kinds of telescopes it is question and answer time, every time with young folks I get the same question… do you believe in UFO’s, so I toss a rocket engine part in the air and ask if any of them knows what that was… they say no of course, and so I reply of course there are things flying that we don’t know what they are… yet.. which is all a UFO is.

This is immediately followed with the question “do I believe there is intelligent life elsewhere”? which I immediately say Yes I do, with the number of stars and the frequency we are finding planets it is almost a foregone conclusion that there is intelligent life somewhere else in the universe… however, I have seen no convincing evidence whatsoever that any of them have ever been here.)
Big D

Modesto, CA

#188810 Apr 16, 2013
Frankie Rizzo wrote:
<quoted text>
When poly becomes legal, the numbers of people who want to be in a poly marriage will be so small that those bigots and haters against it like Big D, Jizzy and X-Box will probably never have to be offended by the sight of a happy poly family.
wrong again, I would vote in favor of Poly, but don’t expect it to actually come up in a serious way in the near future.

I am curious, have you ever been right about anything... ever?
Frankie Rizzo

Union City, CA

#188811 Apr 16, 2013
woodtick57 wrote:
<quoted text>hey Petey! S'up?
I thought you got off the multiple wife bandwagon?(had pictures in my head of your wife reading over your shoulder and boxing your ears off.."I'm not wife enough for you?!?" she screams while reaching for the bread roller...
have you had time to tally up the number of laws that would need to be changed to make polygamy equal with two two person marriage? I've still got my old TI-81 calculator if you need to use it...
Is it your position that denying equal protection is OK if granting it would be too complicated?
Frankie Rizzo

Union City, CA

#188812 Apr 16, 2013
Frankie Rizzo

Union City, CA

#188813 Apr 16, 2013
Big D wrote:
<quoted text>
wrong again, I would vote in favor of Poly, but don’t expect it to actually come up in a serious way in the near future.
I am curious, have you ever been right about anything... ever?
Sure Big D, you would vote for poly despite the fact that you ridicule it with silly space alien and marry your goat schtick every chance you get.

We believe you.
Big D

Modesto, CA

#188814 Apr 16, 2013
Frankie Rizzo wrote:
<quoted text>
Imagine if someone used your unfunny stupid space alien schtick against same sex marriage. You would scream bloody murder.
Why do you think it's so brilliant when you use it against other forms of marriage that you don't approve of?
Nope I would just laugh

I am not against other forms of marriage, you are

Since: Mar 11

St. Croix valley

#188815 Apr 16, 2013
Frankie Rizzo wrote:
<quoted text>
Is it your position that denying equal protection is OK if granting it would be too complicated?
i'm not sure it would be equal protection. are people naturally attracted to more than one person? no, no they are not.

this is a religious choice in almost every single case. they can perform whatever rite they wish in their tax subsidized house of worship...

Since: Mar 11

St. Croix valley

#188816 Apr 16, 2013
Big D wrote:
<quoted text>
wrong again, I would vote in favor of Poly, but don’t expect it to actually come up in a serious way in the near future.
I am curious, have you ever been right about anything... ever?
i haven't seen it.

think he'll be able to put up a copy of even one correct post he's made? i'd put up a few bucks against...

Since: Mar 11

St. Croix valley

#188817 Apr 16, 2013
Big D wrote:
<quoted text>
Oh I don’t believe in them, but there are those that do, and their rights are being infringed too :)
I have not contacted any sheep herders yet, but I assume they will be open to joining you Poly folks.
( Kidding aside, I am occasionally asked to go to a classroom and talk about amateur astronomy, after my little talk and presentation of different kinds of telescopes it is question and answer time, every time with young folks I get the same question… do you believe in UFO’s, so I toss a rocket engine part in the air and ask if any of them knows what that was… they say no of course, and so I reply of course there are things flying that we don’t know what they are… yet.. which is all a UFO is.
This is immediately followed with the question “do I believe there is intelligent life elsewhere”? which I immediately say Yes I do, with the number of stars and the frequency we are finding planets it is almost a foregone conclusion that there is intelligent life somewhere else in the universe… however, I have seen no convincing evidence whatsoever that any of them have ever been here.)
what are your thoughts on the possibility of us being the most technologically advanced beings around?

most people i talk to seem to have it set n their minds that other life would have to be more advanced than us.

if we orbit a third generations star, and it took that long for the heavier elements to be cooked up in previous stars that they could be accreted in such levels on our planet for us to mine and use, perhaps we are the first, or one of the first, to develop on a planet able to support such technological developement?(assuming it would take those heavier elements to make the trappings of a technologically advanced civilization...the exception of Douglas Adams' huvaloos granted..)
Frankie Rizzo

Union City, CA

#188818 Apr 16, 2013
Big D wrote:
<quoted text>
Nope I would just laugh
I am not against other forms of marriage, you are
Oy vey. The old tired and stupid Big D "Frankie's a liar" Straw man AGAIN?

It was stupid the first 50 times, it's not getting any smarter.
Frankie Rizzo

Union City, CA

#188819 Apr 16, 2013
woodtick57 wrote:
<quoted text>i'm not sure it would be equal protection. are people naturally attracted to more than one person? no, no they are not.
this is a religious choice in almost every single case. they can perform whatever rite they wish in their tax subsidized house of worship...
So now you speak for polyamorists and your message is that they don't exist?

Same sex marriage advocates can also perform any rite they wish.

What harm would a marriage of three consenting adult men cause you bigot?
Frankie Rizzo

Union City, CA

#188820 Apr 16, 2013
woodtick57 wrote:
<quoted text>what are your thoughts on the possibility of us being the most technologically advanced beings around?
most people i talk to seem to have it set n their minds that other life would have to be more advanced than us.
if we orbit a third generations star, and it took that long for the heavier elements to be cooked up in previous stars that they could be accreted in such levels on our planet for us to mine and use, perhaps we are the first, or one of the first, to develop on a planet able to support such technological developement?(assuming it would take those heavier elements to make the trappings of a technologically advanced civilization...the exception of Douglas Adams' huvaloos granted..)
If they have traveled here to Earth, they are more technologically advanced that we are.
Frankie Rizzo

Union City, CA

#188821 Apr 16, 2013
Warning! Ticks have been spotted on this thread. Please practice tick safety!
Frankie Rizzo

Union City, CA

#188822 Apr 16, 2013
woodtick57 wrote:
<quoted text>i haven't seen it.
think he'll be able to put up a copy of even one correct post he's made? i'd put up a few bucks against...
I haven't seen one "correct post" from you tick guy.

What's a "correct post" anyway? One against marriage equality?
FullTilt

Covina, CA

#188823 Apr 16, 2013
Full Tilt, sounds more like the methods used to run the city of Glendora, California ever since Chris Jeffers and his hoodlum friends took over.

But back to the good news, another CROOK has been exposed living and running a illegal enterprise in Glendora, California.

Enterprise is the same word used by Glendora's local government officials? Wonder if long time resident and fugitive Raymond Bitar helped frame the financial RICO business plan?
heartandmind

Moline, IL

#188825 Apr 16, 2013
KiMare wrote:
<quoted text>
He had no legitimate basis to rule otherwise regarding gays using the Olympic name. That was proven by the SCOTUS decision.
Please tell me where I have lied or distorted any of the core issues. Even if it were true, it does not excuse the behavior for anyone. Again, why is that necessary for any legitimate cause.
History shows that often decisions violate common sense and just decisions. Nothing changes the fact that ss couples do not equate to marriage at any level. Even a SCOTUS decision cannot change that.
Smile.
he didn't make a ruling since he was an attorney in the case. try doing a little research about the guy before you make a statement.

you distort in virtually every posting you make. when you treat someone poorly or with a snide comment, as you do here regularly, expect the same in return. you get what you give. i learned that early in life - and my kids already have done so as well (the youngest being in elementary school).

you comment "Nothing changes the fact that ss couples do not equate to marriage at any level." is merely your opinion. you're entitled to it. however, it does not drive the law nor does it drive what the judges have found and will further support in SCOTUS' findings. most likely, i suspect you'll continue to hold that opinion for as long as you live. fine. i get that. but understand that your opinion won't influence any same sex couple away from getting married if that's what they want to do and can. it'll just be you filled with those negative feelings and the repercussions thereof. everyone else will go on with their lives.

good luck.
Cat Purrs

London, UK

#188826 Apr 16, 2013
R1 works for Topix
Frankie Rizzo

Union City, CA

#188827 Apr 16, 2013
Cat Purrs wrote:
R1 works for Topix
Don't tell Bill or Jizzy! It will break their hearts. And send them into a tail spin of angst.

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.

Palo Alto Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
US stocks start lower 1 hr Go Blue Forever 17
Topix is Against the First Amendment 3 hr William Knight 9
CA Jury reaches verdict in Oakland BART shooting t... (Jul '10) 4 hr Downtown News 2,264
CA California Proposition 19: the Marijuana Legali... (Oct '10) 5 hr Just saying 15,988
Not all legal immigrants allowed to work 9 hr dirtbag1958 1
CA California seeks to ban free, single-use carryo... (Jun '10) 11 hr just a post 5,064
Camden, TN. Topix Moderator (Aug '13) Sat ladybee 16
•••

Palo Alto News Video

•••
•••

Palo Alto Jobs

•••
Enter and win $5000
•••
•••
•••

Palo Alto People Search

Addresses and phone numbers for FREE

•••

Palo Alto News, Events & Info

Click for news, events and info in Palo Alto
•••

Personal Finance

Mortgages [ See current mortgage rates ]
•••