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
173,361 - 173,380 of 200,347 Comments Last updated 3 hrs ago
Honey

Covina, CA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#199269
Jun 30, 2013
 

Judged:

7

7

7

Get over it HONEY, the magic of your has worn off, your old news.
Bowser

Long Beach, CA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#199270
Jun 30, 2013
 

Judged:

7

7

7

KiMare wrote:
<quoted text>
I never said or indicated any such idea about 'better', I said they were different, and that ss couples cannot be married. You know that, yet you diabolically distort the issue, and then talk about God.
I have repeatedly ask you to prove the facts I stated as untrue. All you have given is your opinion. Then you make the claim that speaking the truth is wrong, as if your denial is good.
In conclusion you justify debauchery by the claim of numbers. Do you know how many acts of evil are involved far more people?
Pure reprobate.
In Internet slang, a troll is a person who sows discord on the Internet by trying to start arguments and upset people. They may do this by posting deliberately inflammatory, extraneous, or off-topic messages in an online community, such as a forum, chat room, or blog, with the intent of provoking readers into an emotional response or of otherwise disrupting normal on-topic discussion.

“Vita e' Bella.”

Since: May 12

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#199271
Jun 30, 2013
 

Judged:

8

8

8

veryvermilion wrote:
<quoted text>
I guess you're right... Same-sex couples are not the same as opposite-sex couples. But having a different composition of genders doesn't make one better than the other. And you know that.
It's kind of like a Granny Smith and a Golden Delicious aren't the same. They're both apples, though.
I know some straight couples who make my skin crawl. Same with gay couples. And then there are straight couples who seem to be pretty nice and decent people. Same with gay couples.
I guess what it really comes down to is whether or not the individuals and the couples are good people.
That's really all that matters.
That you continue to try to convince people that straight couples are always better than gay couples says SO MUCH about you.
You may believe you're a good and decent person. And I'm sure you've done some decent things in your life. Fostering kids is a decent thing.
But denouncing gays as defects; stirring up anti-homosexual sentiment; lying about "cures"--those kinds of things make you an unkind person.
You spit in the face of God's creation. Your words here and on other forums hurt people--people who may never leave a comment--people who only read what you have written.
You don't care about those people.
You get to live with yourself for your actions. You get to live with the knowledge that you intentionally hurt others.
Do you think that's what Christ called you to do?
In any event, the truth won out. It continues to win out.
There were an estimated 1.5 million people in attendance at the San Francisco Gay Pride Parade this year. A similar number showed up at New York's Pride event. Even little Knoxville's PrideFest had about 15,000. That's kind of a miracle if you ask me. God wouldn't support these events if He weren't fully behind it.
That last line.....pun intended?:)
Frankie Rizzo

Union City, CA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#199272
Jun 30, 2013
 

Judged:

8

8

8

Bowser wrote:
<quoted text>
In Internet slang, a troll is a person who sows discord on the Internet by trying to start arguments and upset people. They may do this by posting deliberately inflammatory, extraneous, or off-topic messages in an online community, such as a forum, chat room, or blog, with the intent of provoking readers into an emotional response or of otherwise disrupting normal on-topic discussion.
In internet slang, SPAM is multiple copies of the same message sent to a discussion forum in order to disrupt normal on-topic discussion.

Since: Jun 07

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#199273
Jun 30, 2013
 

Judged:

8

8

8

veryvermilion wrote:
<quoted text>

Same-sex couples will go to apply for a marriage license. They will be denied. These couples will appeal any state's decision to try to enforce DOMA. They will go before a federal court. That's how states will be overturned--one by one.
You really are confused about what happened aren't you?

The DOMA decision only effected federal law, it has nothing to do with State Law, in fact the decision reenforced the power of the State in regards to marriage law.

Nothing in the DOMA decision requires a state to honor another states marriage license if said license runs counter to the current laws of said state.

Stop acting like you have any idea how the law works, you are just making yourself look ignorant.
laughing man

UK

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#199274
Jun 30, 2013
 

Judged:

9

9

9

veryvermilion wrote:
<quoted text>
Yes, only brilliant people base their opinions on movie scripts. That would make you, what, a genius?
Why, YES, brucie, it WAS only a movie.

You get a brown star!

“Vita e' Bella.”

Since: May 12

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#199275
Jun 30, 2013
 

Judged:

9

9

9

Quest wrote:
Polygamy is the straw man the anti-gay folks pretend to argue for, when they can't think of a logical argument against gay COUPLES marrying, in the same way that straight COUPLES already marry.
I asked you, why can't the child's biological mother and father marry?

Also, you said.
For instance, can you prove that the tens of thousands of great children being raised by gay parents are better off if their parents can't legally marry?
I simply employed your reasoning to another situation related to legal marriage, and how it's defined. Please explain how children being raised by SSCs, of which only one individual is the child's biological parent, should have their personal intimate relationship called marriage by the state, so as to benefit the child, but a child raised by his/her biological mother AND father as part of a polygamous union, should not have his/her parent's personal intimate relationship called marriage.

Make up your mind, or stop using that reason for SSM.
They pretend that two, and three for and five, are the same, but, illogically, only in a same sex marriage context.
Or they point out the hypocrisy of the SSM movement as it relates to redefining marriage. That somehow, rejecting the nature, conjugal as in husband and wife, of the marital relationship, trumps, number, as in polygamous or,plural marriage, which is a valid form of marriage throughout time and place.
I have never heard you demand that straight couples argue for or against polygamy as a litmus test for their marriage rights.
For the umpteenth time, the couple is either of the opposite sex, or same sex. An opposite couple could be of "mixed orientation", for example a bi woman marries a straight man.

I don't demand, anything. It's up to SSMers to explain why the concept of legal marriage as a monogamous union should be discarded in favor of one that only includes same sex relationships, and no other. If you don't want the poly people crashing The Big Fat Gay Wedding, don't advocate marriage be redefined. Otherwise, let the chips fall where they may. Kody and the Sister Wives thank you for your support. The Darger Family too.
Bowser

Long Beach, CA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#199276
Jun 30, 2013
 

Judged:

7

7

7

Frankie Rizzo wrote:
<quoted text>
In internet slang, SPAM is multiple copies of the same message sent to a discussion forum in order to disrupt normal on-topic discussion.
In Internet slang, a troll is a person who sows discord on the Internet by trying to start arguments and upset people. They may do this by posting deliberately inflammatory, extraneous, or off-topic messages in an online community, such as a forum, chat room, or blog, with the intent of provoking readers into an emotional response or of otherwise disrupting normal on-topic discussion.

*smirk*
Marie

Hesperia, CA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#199277
Jun 30, 2013
 

Judged:

7

7

7

When is the Marie is driving to Redlands, California?

Since: Dec 09

Knoxville, TN

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#199278
Jun 30, 2013
 

Judged:

7

7

7

RiccardoFire wrote:
<quoted text>You Lie, anal sex is not Natural, it's filthy, it's risky. Stop comparing people to giraffes and even animals. Just because some straight people engage in it doesn't mean it's natural. How do you know how many people are doing anal sex every day? You got your marriage, now don't promote your filth!
Tell you what... You keep your nose out of my ass and I'll keep my nose out of your vag. Deal?
Frankie Rizzo

Union City, CA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#199279
Jun 30, 2013
 

Judged:

8

8

8

Marie wrote:
When is the Marie is driving to Redlands, California?
Did the Melissa ever get there?

Since: Nov 12

Elk Grove, CA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#199280
Jun 30, 2013
 

Judged:

9

8

8

veryvermilion wrote:
<quoted text>
Tell you what... You keep your nose out of my ass and I'll keep my nose out of your vag. Deal?
Why are you squirming out of what you posted? You justify anal sex because a giraffe does it. Here is a better deal, try to back up the garbage you post. Deal?

Since: Dec 09

Knoxville, TN

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#199281
Jun 30, 2013
 

Judged:

7

7

7

akpilot wrote:
<quoted text>
You really are confused about what happened aren't you?
The DOMA decision only effected federal law, it has nothing to do with State Law, in fact the decision reenforced the power of the State in regards to marriage law.
Nothing in the DOMA decision requires a state to honor another states marriage license if said license runs counter to the current laws of said state.
Stop acting like you have any idea how the law works, you are just making yourself look ignorant.
Isn't it interesting that you are schooling me on law when you INSISTED that same-sex couples don't have the right to have their marriages validated by federal law?

I guess it's fair to say that you were a tad off the mark on how the Constitution would be interpreted by the justices.

I'm willing to bet that the following phrases will utilized to push states to legalize same-sex marriage:

--"DOMA’s demonstrated purpose is to ensure that if any State decides to recognize same-sex marriages, those unions will be treated as second-class marriages for purposes of federal law"

and

--"makes it even more difficult for the children to understand the integrity and closeness of their own family and its concord with other families in their community and in their daily lives"

The justices clearly believe that same-sex couples are being treated like second-class citizens. And they clearly believe that DOMA laws negatively impact the children of same-sex couples.

Since I was right about how this would turn out, I think I'll keep my opinions about how I understand the law and you can keep yours.

“Busting Kimare's”

Since: Feb 13

Clitty

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#199282
Jun 30, 2013
 

Judged:

9

9

9

KiMare wrote:
<quoted text>

I could go on..
you do go on. On and on and on and on and on...

Since: Jun 07

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#199283
Jun 30, 2013
 

Judged:

9

9

9

veryvermilion wrote:
<quoted text>
Isn't it interesting that you are schooling me on law when you INSISTED that same-sex couples don't have the right to have their marriages validated by federal law?
YOu are dumb as a rock. I never "insisted" any such thing you moron. In fact I made the case MANY times that section 3 of DOMA was unconstitutional as the Federal Government lacked enumeration of such power.

So no, it really isn't interesting at all that I am "schooling" you, it happens quite often as you are ignorant as f$$$ on the issue.
veryvermilion wrote:
<quoted text>
I guess it's fair to say that you were a tad off the mark on how the Constitution would be interpreted by the justices.
I wasn't off at all you tool, I was dead on.
veryvermilion wrote:
<quoted text>
I'm willing to bet that the following phrases will utilized to push states to legalize same-sex marriage:
--"DOMA’s demonstrated purpose is to ensure that if any State decides to recognize same-sex marriages, those unions will be treated as second-class marriages for purposes of federal law"
and
--"makes it even more difficult for the children to understand the integrity and closeness of their own family and its concord with other families in their community and in their daily lives"
The justices clearly believe that same-sex couples are being treated like second-class citizens. And they clearly believe that DOMA laws negatively impact the children of same-sex couples.
Since I was right about how this would turn out, I think I'll keep my opinions about how I understand the law and you can keep yours.
While you may have been "right", you are still confused as to the implications. You seem to think that this ruling effects how States enact marriage law, it does nothing of the kind.

And you were only "right" because it was the outcome you desired, you still have no clue as to how the justices arrived at said decision. That is painfully obvious by your determination that now ALL states will be required to accept same sex marriages.

Since: Dec 09

Knoxville, TN

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#199284
Jun 30, 2013
 

Judged:

7

7

7

KiMare wrote:
<quoted text>
I never said or indicated any such idea about 'better', I said they were different, and that ss couples cannot be married. You know that, yet you diabolically distort the issue, and then talk about God.
I have repeatedly ask you to prove the facts I stated as untrue. All you have given is your opinion. Then you make the claim that speaking the truth is wrong, as if your denial is good.
In conclusion you justify debauchery by the claim of numbers. Do you know how many acts of evil are involved far more people?
Pure reprobate.
Obviously you believe that opposite-sex couples are better. You believe they make better parents. You believe that same-sex couples are "defective". You say too-may-toe and then say too-mah-toe, but you're really saying the same thing; namely that opposite-sex couples are superior.

I've proven numerous times that your "facts" are untrue. I just don't have the interest or energy to do it again.

And with regards to your final comment, the way I see it, you've justified your own rot by claiming over and over that marriage can only be defined as a cross-cultural constraint on evolutionary mating behavior. Anything else just doesn't cut the mustard for you.

You don't own--never will own--the definition of marriage. Marriage is what happens when two people decide to marry. Marriage means many different things to different people.

Finally, I think a perfect example of reprobate would be the millions upon millions of so-called Christians who have attacked gays and lesbians (physical and verbally) over the centuries in the name of God.

You insist that we change orientation or become celibate. You demand that only YOU can define marriage--claiming it should be only available to heterosexuals.

Every time a gay person wants to move a little closer to happiness and personal fulfillment, there you are, trying to knock us back "in our place".

I'll submit again... This is not Christianity. This is not what Christ commanded you to do. It isn't how He commanded you to interact with society.

Call our gatherings "debauchery". I don't give a damn what you call it. It was a wonderful day. And millions of gays and straights reveled in Pride Celebrations around the globe.

Just as when blacks began to finally taste freedom and women began to taste equality, gays and lesbians are enjoying both.

Not a bad time to be living in...
Just sayin

Norwalk, CA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#199291
Jun 30, 2013
 

Judged:

7

7

7

I'm not sure that any of us has the "right" to marry or why would we need a license to do so? As I understand it; marriage is a "privilege" granted by the state and thus requires a marriage license. On the other hand; we have the right to fall in love with anyone we choose. We can devote ourselves and spend our life with anyone (of age of course) and this is our "right"...no license required. Maybe I've over simplified it but that is my simple understanding of the difference between rights and privileges.
laughing man

UK

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#199293
Jun 30, 2013
 

Judged:

9

8

8

veryvermilion wrote:
<quoted text>
Call our gatherings "debauchery". I don't give a damn what you call it. It was a wonderful day. And millions of gays and straights reveled in Pride Celebrations around the globe.
"millions", Caligula? Did you pull those figures out of your brain crack? Or did the activist Media invent it?
Frankie Rizzo

Union City, CA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#199296
Jun 30, 2013
 

Judged:

9

9

9

Dusty Mangina wrote:
<quoted text>
you do go on. On and on and on and on and on...
No, VV gets that prize.
Mikey

Chatsworth, CA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#199297
Jun 30, 2013
 

Judged:

7

7

7

Frankie Rizzo wrote:
<quoted text>
Let's cut through your little temper tantrum and get to the bottom line- I support marriage equality and you do not.
P.S. Love your bigotry against a form of marriage you hate- "..it's all about greed." Nice!
Thank you too.

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

Add to my Tracker Send me an email

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.

•••
•••

Palo Alto News Video

•••
Palo Alto Dating

more search filters

less search filters

•••

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 ]
•••