Judge overturns California's ban on s...

Judge overturns California's ban on same-sex marriage

There are 201864 comments on the www.cnn.com story from Aug 4, 2010, titled Judge overturns California's ban on same-sex marriage. In it, www.cnn.com reports that:

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.

Join the discussion below, or Read more at www.cnn.com.

Frankie Rizzo

Union City, CA

#196550 Jun 18, 2013
Zoro wrote:
<quoted text>
B
l
o
w
m
e
Oy vey. Give it up Jizzy you moron.
laughing man

UK

#196551 Jun 18, 2013
Frankie Rizzo wrote:
<quoted text>
Jizzy does it all the time. Makes some statement and then tells you to prove it! Too f*in' FUNNY! He's a moron. That's why I like the silly jackass.
I dunno, I sometimes feel guilty slapping it around. It's like I walked into a mental ward to pick a fight.

They truly are pitiful, aren't they?
Big D

Modesto, CA

#196552 Jun 18, 2013
Zoro wrote:
<quoted text>RaMen
LOL!

Hey they took on the Kansas City school board and won, hats off to them.
laughing man

UK

#196553 Jun 18, 2013
Zero wrote:
<quoted text>
B
l
o
w
m
e
C'mon, thief, was that your best shot? Let's see some of that intellectual firepower you losers claim to have.

I'm laughing at you, Zero.
Frankie Rizzo

Union City, CA

#196554 Jun 18, 2013
Zoro wrote:
<quoted text>It was from your link . Like I said what religion should we use?
Like I said probably 4 or 5 times by now. None. You are the one wishing to violate the first amendment, not I.

Next time you get the urge to ask what religion we should use, please try to remember the first amendment. Please. it's ridiculous you ask that dumb question over and over when I have already answered it.
Zoro

Cambridge, IL

#196555 Jun 18, 2013
Frankie Rizzo wrote:
<quoted text>
Please try and get it through your thick head I am not asking to change a law based on religion.
But you are trying to justify the law against polygamy based on religion.
You love to cite the First Amendment read it. You are attempting to violate it by basing a law on religion.
You would deny a whole group rights because some of them are of a religion you hate.
How does it feel to argue against equality you bigot?
Look all the groups that YOU have listed that wish Polygamy, do so based on their religious beliefes. So you are saying that the laws reguarding polygamy be changed to suit religion. WE as a Nation do not make laws based on religion. What is so hard to understand?
If we change laws based on religion which religion shall we base them on?

The First Amendment says that we will not have a national religion. You as a citizen are free to worship as you see fit. You may follow your religious laws as you see fit. But religious laws do not trump civil laws.
Example. Your religion says that you must pray twice a day. Great do so. Now try and make a civil law that requires me to pray twice a day.

Your religion says polygamy is accepted. Our civil laws sa no, guess what. The correct answer is NO.

Now post a link to the 500,000 people who wish polygamy, that are not based on religious beliefes.

Don't you understand that IF we allow that one simple change in the structure of our base of law making, we will open the door to many many more changes based on religion.

A standard will have been set, what will stop other religions from demanding equal treatment of their beliefs?

Repeal of Roe V Wade
Slavery
Womens rights
Dietary laws
Sodomy laws
Adultery laws
The list can and will grow.
Frankie Rizzo

Union City, CA

#196556 Jun 18, 2013
laughing man wrote:
<quoted text>
I dunno, I sometimes feel guilty slapping it around. It's like I walked into a mental ward to pick a fight.
They truly are pitiful, aren't they?
Jizzy is truly a moron. That's why the silly jackass is fun.

Since: Nov 12

Elk Grove, CA

#196557 Jun 18, 2013
Zoro wrote:
<quoted text>Look all the groups that YOU have listed that wish Polygamy, do so based on their religious beliefes. So you are saying that the laws reguarding polygamy be changed to suit religion. WE as a Nation do not make laws based on religion. What is so hard to understand?
If we change laws based on religion which religion shall we base them on?
The First Amendment says that we will not have a national religion. You as a citizen are free to worship as you see fit. You may follow your religious laws as you see fit. But religious laws do not trump civil laws.
Example. Your religion says that you must pray twice a day. Great do so. Now try and make a civil law that requires me to pray twice a day.
Your religion says polygamy is accepted. Our civil laws sa no, guess what. The correct answer is NO.
Now post a link to the 500,000 people who wish polygamy, that are not based on religious beliefes.
Don't you understand that IF we allow that one simple change in the structure of our base of law making, we will open the door to many many more changes based on religion.
A standard will have been set, what will stop other religions from demanding equal treatment of their beliefs?
Repeal of Roe V Wade
Slavery
Womens rights
Dietary laws
Sodomy laws
Adultery laws
The list can and will grow.
SSM and polygamy both have nothing to do with religion. You and D are only here to push your atheist religion of nothing. How can SSM be about equal rights but other minority groups are left to fend for themselves?
Zoro

Cambridge, IL

#196558 Jun 18, 2013
Big D wrote:
<quoted text>
LOL!
Hey they took on the Kansas City school board and won, hats off to them.
You bet they did.
Question
Is Frankie really that damn stupid? How hard is it to understand that we do not enact laws based on religious beliefes?
Big D

Modesto, CA

#196559 Jun 18, 2013
Zoro wrote:
<quoted text>You bet they did.
Question
Is Frankie really that damn stupid? How hard is it to understand that we do not enact laws based on religious beliefes?
I am cracking up at his comments, did he say we should not use religion to deny rights to others?

Who funded Prop 8 again?

( chuckle )
Big D

Modesto, CA

#196560 Jun 18, 2013
Zoro wrote:
<quoted text>You bet they did.
Question
Is Frankie really that damn stupid? How hard is it to understand that we do not enact laws based on religious beliefes?
I forgot to answer your question

Yes, he is
Frankie Rizzo

Union City, CA

#196561 Jun 18, 2013
laughing man wrote:
<quoted text>
C'mon, thief, was that your best shot? Let's see some of that intellectual firepower you losers claim to have.
I'm laughing at you, Zero.
Me too! Jizzy is lots of fun. I love it when he comes around.

He posts "Blow me" vertically like some 4th grade moron. Too funny!
Frankie Rizzo

Union City, CA

#196562 Jun 18, 2013
Zoro wrote:
<quoted text>Look all the groups that YOU have listed that wish Polygamy, do so based on their religious beliefes. So you are saying that the laws reguarding polygamy be changed to suit religion. WE as a Nation do not make laws based on religion. What is so hard to understand?
If we change laws based on religion which religion shall we base them on?
The First Amendment says that we will not have a national religion. You as a citizen are free to worship as you see fit. You may follow your religious laws as you see fit. But religious laws do not trump civil laws.
Example. Your religion says that you must pray twice a day. Great do so. Now try and make a civil law that requires me to pray twice a day.
Your religion says polygamy is accepted. Our civil laws sa no, guess what. The correct answer is NO.
Now post a link to the 500,000 people who wish polygamy, that are not based on religious beliefes.
Don't you understand that IF we allow that one simple change in the structure of our base of law making, we will open the door to many many more changes based on religion.
A standard will have been set, what will stop other religions from demanding equal treatment of their beliefs?
Repeal of Roe V Wade
Slavery
Womens rights
Dietary laws
Sodomy laws
Adultery laws
The list can and will grow.
There you go again basing rights on religion. Two words for you Jiz. First Amendment.
laughing man

UK

#196563 Jun 18, 2013
Frankie Rizzo wrote:
<quoted text>
Me too! Jizzy is lots of fun. I love it when he comes around.
He posts "Blow me" vertically like some 4th grade moron. Too funny!
What was it one of them said to you about being attention starved?
Ro in San Pedro CA

Long Beach, CA

#196564 Jun 18, 2013
I think is SUCKS, that what the people want doesnt matter!!!! What ever happen to the VOICE of the people. It was voted on and should stand!!! Shame on you JUDGE
Zoro

Cambridge, IL

#196565 Jun 18, 2013
Big D wrote:
<quoted text>
I am cracking up at his comments, did he say we should not use religion to deny rights to others?
Who funded Prop 8 again?
( chuckle )
Ummm lets see,

Religious organizationsThe Roman Catholic Church,[53] as well as a Roman Catholic lay fraternal organization, the Knights of Columbus,[54] firmly supported the measure. The bishops of the California Catholic Conference released a statement supporting the proposition,[55] a position met with mixed reactions among church members, including clergy.[56][57]


Rally for Yes on Prop 8 in FresnoThe Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints[58][59][60](the LDS Church or, informally, the Mormon Church), also publicly supported the proposition. The First Presidency of the church announced its support for Proposition 8 in a letter intended to be read in every congregation in California. In this letter, church members were encouraged to "do all you can to support the proposed constitutional amendment by donating of your means and time."[58] The church produced and broadcast to its congregations a program describing the support of the Proposition, and describing the timeline it proposes for what it describes as grassroots efforts to support the Proposition.[61] Local church leaders set organizational and monetary goals for their membership—sometimes quite specific—to fulfill this call.[62][63] The response of church members to their leadership's appeals to donate money and volunteer time was very supportive,[64] such that Latter-day Saints provided a significant source for financial donations in support of the proposition, both inside and outside the State of California.[65] LDS members contributed over $20 million,[66] about 45% of out-of-state contributions to ProtectMarriage.com came from Utah, over three times more than any other state.[67] ProtectMarriage, the official proponent of Proposition 8, estimates that about half the donations they received came from Mormon sources, and that LDS church members made up somewhere between 80% and 90% of the volunteers for early door-to-door canvassing.[68]

Other religious organizations that supported Proposition 8 include the Union of Orthodox Jewish Congregations of America,[69] Eastern Orthodox Church,[70] a group of Evangelical Christians led by Jim Garlow and Miles McPherson,[71] American Family Association, Focus on the Family[72] and the National Organization for Marriage.[73] Rick Warren, pastor of Saddleback Church, also endorsed the measure.[74]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/California_Propo...
Frankie Rizzo

Union City, CA

#196566 Jun 18, 2013
Big D wrote:
<quoted text>
I forgot to answer your question
Yes, he is
As the faded thread hero to you clowns "Rose_NoHo" would say - Even if that were true, it would be a non-issue.

Even if I was really as Jizzy says "that damn stupid", you'd still be wrong. Cool huh?

We don't base who we give rights to on religion. Please explain that to your mentor Jizzy. He wants to deny all polygamists rights because some of them are of a religion he hates. And you back him up.
Zoro

Cambridge, IL

#196567 Jun 18, 2013
RiccardoFire wrote:
<quoted text>SSM and polygamy both have nothing to do with religion. You and D are only here to push your atheist religion of nothing. How can SSM be about equal rights but other minority groups are left to fend for themselves?
Who are the people that want polygamy? Please show me, post a link. Evrey time Frankie does, it lists religious sects. They are requesting polygamy based on religious principles.

Frankie said that another 500,000 peole where also requesting polygamy and where not doing it based on religion. He has yet to produce the documentation.

Can you?
Frankie Rizzo

Union City, CA

#196568 Jun 18, 2013
Big D wrote:
<quoted text>
I am cracking up at his comments, did he say we should not use religion to deny rights to others?
Who funded Prop 8 again?
( chuckle )
I didn't fund prop 8.(chuckle).

I support marriage equality and you and Jizzy do not.(chuckle).

Chuckle chuckle!
Zoro

Cambridge, IL

#196569 Jun 18, 2013
Frankie Rizzo wrote:
<quoted text>
There you go again basing rights on religion. Two words for you Jiz. First Amendment.
Gawwwd are you thick as a brick. I don't care what your religion is, worship as you see fit or don't, it matters not.

We will not change laws based on religion.

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
Review: Cheap Movers In Redwood City Mon nita singler 1
topix forum misused (May '09) Aug 28 Billy Rawhide 2
massive chinese furniture web-site and relative... Aug 27 jimheeren 1
News Advances Against Chronic Pain (Sep '12) Aug 26 Ambct617 20
News What's Vanessa Diffenbaugh reading? Aug 19 moodylarry 1
RIP Chuck (Charles Perry lll) (Feb '12) Aug 18 D Shot 24
gutter cleaning Aug 16 randall1022 1
More from around the web

Personal Finance

Palo Alto Mortgages