Judge overturns California's ban on same-sex marriage

Aug 4, 2010 | Posted by: Topix | Full story: www.cnn.com

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.

Comments (Page 8,552)

Showing posts 171,021 - 171,040 of199,071
|
Go to last page| Jump to page:
Frankie Rizzo

Union City, CA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#196212
Jun 15, 2013
 

Judged:

8

8

8

Zoro wrote:
<quoted text>POUND SAND
YUK!YUK!YUK! You mad spicecake?
Frankie Rizzo

Union City, CA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#196216
Jun 15, 2013
 

Judged:

8

8

8

Zoro wrote:
<quoted text>For example,
in Judaism, the Halakhah and Haggadah comprise the norms by which individuals of the Jewish
faith are governed.5 Similarly, canon law is a body of law that applies to certain sects ofChristianity.6 These bodies of religious law may play as relevant a role in certain legal actions as
sharia might play in others.
In the United States, these religious laws have no legally binding effect on U.S. citizens because
religious laws cannot be adopted by federal, state, or local governments under the First
Amendment. Rather, individuals who identify with a particular religious group may voluntarily
subject themselves to such religious laws by their association with the community
Cool story Jiz. Post it a few more times maybe that will work. It's all you've got, go with it!

Polygamy deserves the same respect and consideration as same sex marriage despite religion.
Frankie Rizzo

Union City, CA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#196217
Jun 15, 2013
 

Judged:

8

8

8

Zoro wrote:
<quoted text>"I disagree with you so rather than offer a well-reasoned response, I'll just try to insult you! That should do the trick!"
Frankie, you are utterly incapable of insulting me. Clearly you're inclined to make an attempt and, in the process, make yourself look foolish. By all means, continue with that strategy. Only your credibility will suffer for it.
Sure got you riled up good!

Why mad bro?
Frankie Rizzo

Union City, CA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#196218
Jun 15, 2013
 

Judged:

8

8

8

Zoro wrote:
<quoted text>"I disagree with you so rather than offer a well-reasoned response, I'll just try to insult you! That should do the trick!"
Frankie, you are utterly incapable of insulting me. Clearly you're inclined to make an attempt and, in the process, make yourself look foolish. By all means, continue with that strategy. Only your credibility will suffer for it.
I have repeatedly given you well reasoned responses. Even though your idiotic cut and paste posts hardly deserve them. You ignore them as if I didn't post them.

We'll try once again. What harm would a marriage of three women cause you?

Why do you believe polygamy doesn't deserve the same respect and consideration as SSM?

Hold the religion. It's irrelevant.

“Vita e' Bella.”

Since: May 12

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#196220
Jun 15, 2013
 

Judged:

8

8

8

lides wrote:
<quoted text>
Feel free to cite a study or poll. I doubt you would find "many" who disagree. Particularly seeing as public support has been consistently increasing.
http://www.pollingreport.com/civil.htm
<quoted text>
Of course it continues:
"Until the federal government recognises and codifies the same rights for same-sex couples as straight ones, equality is the goal so why get hung up on a word, he asks.
"I'm not going to walk down the aisle to Mendelssohn wearing white in a church and throw a bouquet and do the first dance," adds Soroff, columnist for the Improper Boston.
"I've been to some lovely gay weddings but aping the traditional heterosexual wedding is weird and I don't understand why anyone wants to do that.
"I'm not saying that people who want that shouldn't have it but for me, all that matters is the legal stuff.""
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-22758434
So, in reality, you have found one person with a potential objection to the wording, but not to equal protection of the law.
Do you read the articles that you post to the end, or even the middle for that matter?
Yes, actually I do. The sentiment expressed, and it is not an isolated viewpoint, is that SSCs should have legal protections, but marriage should remain a legally recognized union of husband and wife.

“No Headline available”

Since: Jan 08

Defiance, Ohio

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#196221
Jun 15, 2013
 

Judged:

7

7

7

Pietro Armando wrote:
Yes, actually I do. The sentiment expressed, and it is not an isolated viewpoint, is that SSCs should have legal protections, but marriage should remain a legally recognized union of husband and wife.
The protections exist, legally they are called marriage, and if you think it is actually a good idea to let politicians to create new legislation that duplicates a set of legal protections that already exist, I have a bridge in Brooklyn I would like to sell you.

If your entire problem with this is one of terminology, it's time to grow up.
Fall

Covina, CA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#196222
Jun 15, 2013
 

Judged:

8

8

7

Schools Out.! See ya in the fall.

“Vita e' Bella.”

Since: May 12

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#196223
Jun 15, 2013
 

Judged:

8

8

8

lides wrote:
<quoted text>
The protections exist, legally they are called marriage, and if you think it is actually a good idea to let politicians to create new legislation that duplicates a set of legal protections that already exist, I have a bridge in Brooklyn I would like to sell you.
Yes and legally, at least in 32 states, marriage is a legally recognized union of husband and wife. So if you those EXACT SAME protections, then marry, the EXACT SAME way.
If your entire problem with this is one of terminology, it's time to grow up.
It's not "terminology" but rather form and function. No matter which way you spin it, as same sex union, male or female, is not the same as an opposite sex union. Men and women are different. Biology 101. It's like calling a veggie patty a burger. "Gee Wilkerson, it has the texture like a hamburger, color, and even grill marks, let's call it a burger, that way the vegan activists won't be upset".

“Vita e' Bella.”

Since: May 12

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#196224
Jun 15, 2013
 

Judged:

8

8

8

Zoro wrote:
<quoted text>POUND SAND
Frankie was USN, not USMC

“Vita e' Bella.”

Since: May 12

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#196225
Jun 15, 2013
 

Judged:

8

8

8

Karma is a_______ wrote:
<quoted text>
do fundamentalist polygamists have a substantial first amendment right to marry multiple husbands according to the dictates of their faith?
That would make them polyandrists. Do you know why most women wouldn't want multiple husbands? It can be summed up in one expression. "Oh my aching back". It might help if one husband was a chiropractor. Can u imagine the sports pay per view cable bill? The NFL package alone is a few hundred dollars.

“Vita e' Bella.”

Since: May 12

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#196226
Jun 15, 2013
 

Judged:

8

8

8

Quest wrote:
<quoted text>
And don't forget to mention the majority of lesbians who do not. Most folks don't really worry about what another couple wears (or doesn't) on their wedding day. Weddings are usually designed to suit the likes and dislikes of the couples involved.
C'mon Questy, even you can sense the underlying roles in the wedding dressed/ tuxedoed lesbian couple. "See we're just like a bride and groom getting married". Uhhhhh...huh.
Some women are more comfortable in "traditionally" female clothes. Some are more comfortable on more traditionally male clothes. Some could care less about the whole thing.
And this applies to ALL women, not just lesbians. If you disagree, you aren't living in a rural area. Most of the female farmers around here are, in dress, indistinguishable from their husbands.
Why the heck would a female farmer wear a wedding dress out in the fields?
And, yes, they should all be able to marry the single unrelated adult of their choice.
Choice is the key, isn't it?
In spouses and in clothes.
As long as that unrelated, first cousins included, adult of their choice is of the opposite sex. That way it's still marriage....you know a legally recognized union of husband and wife. Hmmmmm...wait you don't want the husband and wife part, but you like the outfits on wedding day.

“Vita e' Bella.”

Since: May 12

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#196227
Jun 15, 2013
 

Judged:

8

8

8

veryvermilion wrote:
<quoted text>
While there are those gays and lesbians who do not want to see same-sex marriage legalized, I'm certain that most of them believe that the gay and lesbian couples who DO want access to marriage SHOULD have the CHOICE available to enter into a marriage.
Tom Geoghegan from BBC News has a very interesting article on his interviews with a range of people with same-sex attraction who nevertheless oppose redefining marriage. The reasons given are varied, but the telling factor is that they realise what the debate is about: the issue is not same-sex couples; the issue is marriage: what it is, and what its purpose is.

"It's demonstrably not the same as heterosexual marriage - the religious and social significance of a gay wedding ceremony simply isn't the same."

Jonathan Soroff lives in liberal Massachusetts with his male partner, Sam. He doesn't fit the common stereotype of an opponent of gay marriage.

But like half of his friends, he does not believe that couples of the same gender should marry.

"We're not going to procreate as a couple and while the desire to demonstrate commitment might be laudable, the religious traditions that have accommodated same-sex couples have had to do some fairly major contortions," says Soroff.

The point he has made, is that SSCs should have legal protections, but its not marriage. Civil Unions would work.
This issue is about a couple having the RIGHT to make a decision to marry based on their own personal beliefs and values.
It's always been about how we, as a society, define marriage. Even gay folks recognize the importance of maintaining marriage, legally, as a male female union, while granting SSCs legal protections.
Regarding what opponents of same-sex marriage "think", I have these sage words... Opinions are like assholes--everyone has one and most of them stink.
Even judges, who offer, or render opinions?

Since: May 09

Brooklyn, NY

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#196228
Jun 15, 2013
 

Judged:

7

7

7

So, does "marriage" basically mean when straight people are in rut then ?
Frankie Rizzo

Union City, CA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#196229
Jun 15, 2013
 

Judged:

8

8

8

Pietro Armando wrote:
<quoted text>
Frankie was USN, not USMC
That's right. I wanted to be a marine but I couldn't pass the physical. My head wouldn't fit in the jar!
Frankie Rizzo

Union City, CA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#196230
Jun 15, 2013
 

Judged:

8

8

8

GreaterGreece wrote:
So, does "marriage" basically mean when straight people are in rut then ?
No.
Frankie Rizzo

Union City, CA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#196232
Jun 15, 2013
 

Judged:

8

8

8

Pietro Armando wrote:
<quoted text>
That would make them polyandrists. Do you know why most women wouldn't want multiple husbands? It can be summed up in one expression. "Oh my aching back". It might help if one husband was a chiropractor. Can u imagine the sports pay per view cable bill? The NFL package alone is a few hundred dollars.
And the beer and pizza! Marone.
Frankie Rizzo

Union City, CA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#196233
Jun 15, 2013
 

Judged:

8

8

8

lides wrote:
<quoted text>
.....it's time to grow up.
Indeed.
laughing man

UK

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#196234
Jun 15, 2013
 

Judged:

9

9

9

Oh, this is simply horrible. More posts have been obliterated by a "moderator" who only yesterday picked hairs off urinal cakes at Carls Jr.

What kind of a loser is a moderator at such a lowbrow site?

I'm laughing at you, loser.
Frankie Rizzo

Union City, CA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#196235
Jun 15, 2013
 

Judged:

8

8

8

Anyone else ever notice that Big D only posts M-F 7AM-3PM? In other words on the boss's computer and on the boss's time. Fun way to while away the day, must be a government employee. So it's on us! Nice touch.
Frankie Rizzo

Union City, CA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#196236
Jun 15, 2013
 

Judged:

8

8

8

laughing man wrote:
Oh, this is simply horrible. More posts have been obliterated by a "moderator" who only yesterday picked hairs off urinal cakes at Carls Jr.
What kind of a loser is a moderator at such a lowbrow site?
I'm laughing at you, loser.
Jizzy (Zoro). That's the only way he can win an argument.

Tell me when this thread is updated: (Registration is not required)

Add to my Tracker Send me an email

Showing posts 171,021 - 171,040 of199,071
|
Go to last page| Jump to page:
Type in your comments below
Name
(appears on your post)
Comments
Characters left: 4000
Type the numbers you see in the image on the right:

Please note by clicking on "Post Comment" 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.

7 Users are viewing the Palo Alto Forum right now

Search the Palo Alto Forum:
Topic Updated Last By Comments
CA California Proposition 19: the Marijuana Legali... (Oct '10) 39 min Charles710 15,653
Review: Calvary Chapel (Apr '09) 14 hr Matthew Perri 27
CA California seeks to ban free, single-use carryo... (Jun '10) 16 hr Bag itts 4,551
CA CA Proposition 23 - Global Warming (Oct '10) Tue lug heads 7,298
CA Who do you support for Governor in California i... (Oct '10) Apr 13 Just fine 3,746
Naked Teenage Man Arrested For Bizarre Crime Sp... Apr 11 justaguess 18
Jump Rope Apr 10 Anonymous 1
•••
•••

Palo Alto News Video

•••
•••

Palo Alto Jobs

•••
•••
•••

Palo Alto People Search

Addresses and phone numbers for FREE

•••

Personal Finance

Mortgages [ See current mortgage rates ]
•••