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
173,461 - 173,480 of 200,361 Comments Last updated 1 hr ago

Since: Dec 09

Knoxville, TN

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#199383
Jul 1, 2013
 

Judged:

5

5

5

KiMare wrote:
<quoted text>
Sad, even scary angry denial.
I seriously think you need help.
Said the pot to the kettle...
laughing man

UK

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#199384
Jul 1, 2013
 

Judged:

5

5

5

very vegetative wrote:
<quoted text>
Nothing that you can say here or anywhere will make a difference in the fact that same-sex marriage is here and is spreading throughout the country.
Lower IQ's are spreading like wildfire too, Brucie. Reckon there's a correlation?

“Vita e' Bella.”

Since: May 12

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#199385
Jul 1, 2013
 

Judged:

5

5

5

Frankie Rizzo wrote:
<quoted text>
No doubt. Even though Jonah1 is a male and therefore a "husband" he sure acts like a wife!
Nag...nag...naaaag...:)
Operation Greylord

Tampa, FL

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#199386
Jul 1, 2013
 

Judged:

5

5

5

skg wrote:
<quoted text>
Don't you understand you cant vote on unconstitutional issues. That is the whole point. Look into the issue.
..........is this a honest judge ........or is he like Mark Ciavarella , mike monahan , mike nifong , mike raphan, Martin Manton , jay bybee , Avigdor Spechler , The FUSION CENTER Thugs , the kosher nostra and the MOMBACH JONATHAN POLLARD FIFTH COLUMN of AIPAC..........See THE LAW IN THESE PARTS and FIVE BROKEN CAMERAS , Goldstone Report and BY WAY OF DECEPTION AT THE AIPAC-FUSION CENTERS OF BILDERBERG.

“KiMare'a the Monster Mutation”

Since: Nov 10

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#199387
Jul 1, 2013
 

Judged:

5

5

5

veryvermilion wrote:
<quoted text>
Who gives a damn that straight people can make children? Procreation promises are not a requirement for marriage between heterosexual couples. Why do you keep bringing up this issue as though it matters?
Furthermore, as has been pointed out to you numerous times, gay couples can and do adopt children. Consider that before you get on here again and try to point out the childlessness of gay couples.
Nothing that you can say here or anywhere will make a difference in the fact that same-sex marriage is here and is spreading throughout the country.
I can't wait for the day when people such as yourself will be forced to sit down and STFU about this issue. It will happen. Hopefully you, a self-described near-senile, jack-ass, will hang on until that day.
So if I just don't say it, the reality will change? Do you understand what you are saying???

If it doesn't matter, why do you want me to 'STFU'?

“Vita e' Bella.”

Since: May 12

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#199388
Jul 1, 2013
 

Judged:

5

5

5

veryvermilion wrote:
<quoted text>
Who gives a damn that straight people can make children?
Quite a few people actually otherwise this debate wouldn't be necessary. Also, men and women make babies, the orientation is irrelevant in that.
Procreation promises are not a requirement for marriage between heterosexual couples. Why do you keep bringing up this issue as though it matters?
Hellloooooooo.....earth to Big Red.....marriage laws are based on the union of husband and wife, including their sexual union. Although not a "requirement", as somehow now it would need to be in order to rationalize SSM, husbands and wives are expected to consummate their marriage if desired and physically capable, and engage in "marital relations". It matters because its crucial as to how marriage is defined. SSMers have to dismiss it, or marginalize it in order to promote their cause.
Furthermore, as has been pointed out to you numerous times, gay couples can and do adopt children. Consider that before you get on here again and try to point out the childlessness of gay couples.
Single people can adopt children, adult siblings can adopt children......your point?
Nothing that you can say here or anywhere will make a difference in the fact that same-sex marriage is here and is spreading throughout the country.
No doubt it's here. As to it's spread, who knows, maybe the Supreme Court unwittingly galvanized SSM opponents to redouble their efforts.
I can't wait for the day when people such as yourself will be forced to sit down and STFU about this issue. It will happen. Hopefully you, a self-described near-senile, jack-ass, will hang on until that day.
That could be after polygamy is legal, and the state decides to get out of the marriage business all together. If the state no longer recognizes marriage, is it still a right?

“Busting Kimare's”

Since: Feb 13

Clitty

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#199389
Jul 1, 2013
 

Judged:

5

5

5

KiMare wrote:
<quoted text>
So if I just don't say it, the reality will change? Do you understand what you are saying???
If it doesn't matter, why do you want me to 'STFU'?
There's my point all along; you don't matter. You're opinions bear no relevance to my marriage.

Thanks for finally admitting it. however.

Troll on, Greg.

“Crusading Fundies r hilarious!”

Since: Feb 11

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#199390
Jul 1, 2013
 

Judged:

5

5

5

KiMare wrote:
<quoted text>
It's wrong to state facts because they annoy you???
Guess you missed the part where I spoke of "intent". No worries, you've demonstrated that you have the comprehension ability of a hamster, so no one surprised by this. Tell me, do you also hang out at the street corner of your congregation and yell, "You're FAT" to everyone overweight person that walks by? One can only imaging you do.
KiMare wrote:
<quoted text>
You mean like, the SCOTUS ruling still hasn't changed the distinctions between your relationship and marriage?
SCOTUS doesn't address the imaginary "distinctions" that religious bigots create in their heads. Those imaginary "distinctions" aren't recognized by anyone else.
KiMare wrote:
<quoted text>
Anyone with eyes can see something is wrong! Especially the children.
Children are included among those that don't recognize your imaginary "distinctions". But don't let that stop you from using "the children" as your argument. Nothing establishes your desperation more than that tired move!!!

“Vita e' Bella.”

Since: May 12

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#199391
Jul 1, 2013
 

Judged:

5

5

5

veryvermilion wrote:
<quoted text>
Stop being daft and accept the ruling of the justices. They clearly said that in those states that allowed same-sex marriage, gay and lesbian partners were being treated as "second-class citizens".
Did all the Justices say that? Did they mandate SSM nationwide? If they were that concerned about G & L's being treated as "second class citizens", why not make SSM the law of the land?
Referring to them ass "second-class citizens" was the ONLY difference they made between a union of a man and wife and a union of man/man, woman/woman.
But we both know that's not the only difference.
In marriages where both genders are present, both are referred to as "spouses", just as in a marriage composed of a man and woman.
True, but more often than not, "spouses" is simply another way of referencing husband and wife.
However, you can call both men "husbands" or both women "wives", if that pleases you.
Or "Party A", and "Party B".
You obviously detest this ruling.
I disagree with the ruling, not "detest", significant difference.
You obviously have no respect for same-gender partners who are married.
You deduce this by my disagreement to redefining marriage?
That puts you firmly on the wrong side of this issue and on the wrong side of the way history will see this decision.
History can, and does, turn out in ways participants in a movement never expected. Any number of things could happen. Marriage Redefinition opponents could change the course of the current movement. Polygamists could be a wild card. The state may decide to delegalize marriage. Society may even look back and say this was a bad move. So I guess that all depends on what one considers "the wrong side of history".
You probably didn't wake up this morning with the understanding that future generations will see you and your kind the same way we see past segregationists and racial bigots.
Future generations might also say, "what were we thinking?", "didn't we learn anything from 'no fault' divorce"?
Don't assume future generations will view SSM in a positive light.
Look at what's happening to Paula Deen. 40 years ago she could have said the "N-word" as much as she wanted without suffering any kind of fallout. Today, she admitted to once using the word and her business world is falling apart around her.
If she were black, and rapped the "N word", no one would think twice. Can we apply the "n word" reasoning to other ethnic slurs? "Wop", "Dago", and "Guinea", should be referred to as the "w word", "d word", and "g word" respectively, by that logic.
That's how quickly things can change.
As I've said to Kimare, "Either get on board, or get out of the way."
We unravel our foundational social institutions at our own peril.

Ya know for someone who seems to see "heterosexist" everywhere, u seem to want to heterosexuality homosexuality. Perhaps you're hoping for the reverse.

“Crusading Fundies r hilarious!”

Since: Feb 11

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#199392
Jul 1, 2013
 

Judged:

6

6

6

KiMare wrote:
<quoted text>
You are the only one claiming anything is or is not mandated I simply note natures results. Marriage results in children, SS relationships never do.
Honestly, your stupidity gets worse everyday.

Nature has nothing to do with marriage. Marriage is a man made institution that applies only to humans. It has ZIP, SQUAT, NADA to do with nature.

Marriage doesn't result in children you stupid, stupid person. Procreation results in children. Children are created all the time without marriage. Marriage is an institution, it does not create children.

SS relationships don't have to produce children. They never will.

Now hurry back and try and spin your fundie twirl from a different direction!! Nothing demonstrates further what an idiot you are!!

Smile!
KiMare wrote:
<quoted text>
Oh, and there is nothing you can do about it.
There is absolutely nothing that I need to do about it, since everything you stated was either untrue or irrelevant.

Smirk! Smile!! Chomp on it!!

“Vita e' Bella.”

Since: May 12

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#199393
Jul 1, 2013
 

Judged:

5

5

5

Jonah1 wrote:
<quoted text>
Um, that pronouncement was based on currently recognized law.
Ummmmmmm.....I think some modifications had to be made there. "Gee what do we pronounce?.....we can't say husband and wife...how about 'spouses for life', or 'husband and husband', or just plain 'you are married'?
Um, no, no such acknowledgement was made. We filled out the same paperwork as everyone else, and were declared by the state to have a marriage. No distinction was made. The state doesn't concern itself with the pettiness of people like you dear.
No distinction at all? That seems to contradict the pronouncement. Plus was their a space on the form for "bride and groom", or just two names?
I'm called a husband and spouse. So is my husband. Would it help if I got out some crayons and drew some pictures for you Pietro?
That'd be swell Joh-née, perhaps you explain how that how consummation thing works too, that is for two husbands. Do u have to switch off for it to count?

Since: Dec 09

Knoxville, TN

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#199394
Jul 1, 2013
 

Judged:

6

6

6

KiMare wrote:
<quoted text>
So if I just don't say it, the reality will change? Do you understand what you are saying???
If it doesn't matter, why do you want me to 'STFU'?
I just want you guys to STFU and leave us alone.

The life that we lead is not, has never been, and will never be ANY of your business.

You attack our orientation. You attack our relationships. You attack our sexual behavior.

And it's NEVER-ENDING!

Don't get me wrong; we're not going to stop pursuing our rights just because you make it difficult and uncomfortable.

But it would be REALLY nice if you guys would just focus on your own, personal lives and mind your own business.

That's what I mean by STFU.

“Crusading Fundies r hilarious!”

Since: Feb 11

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#199395
Jul 1, 2013
 

Judged:

5

5

5

KiMare wrote:
<quoted text>
Interesting.
You deny reality, but claim the ability to judge for God.
No dearie, I merely pointed out his words. Proverbs 6:16-19. He detests your behavior. Sorry you don't like that. Take it up with him.

“Crusading Fundies r hilarious!”

Since: Feb 11

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#199396
Jul 1, 2013
 

Judged:

5

5

5

KiMare wrote:
<quoted text>
Sad, even scary angry denial.
I seriously think you need help.
Still unable to address specifics. How sad.

Oh, don't forget to smile bitch!
Frankie Rizzo

Union City, CA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#199397
Jul 1, 2013
 

Judged:

5

5

5

veryvermilion wrote:
<quoted text>
Who gives a damn that straight people can make children?
The human race.
Frankie Rizzo

Union City, CA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#199398
Jul 1, 2013
 

Judged:

5

5

5

Dusty Mangina wrote:
<quoted text>
There's my point all along; you don't matter.
We know.
Ronald

Long Beach, CA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#199399
Jul 1, 2013
 

Judged:

5

5

5

Regular readers of this thread know that no other poster has any greater love for my homosexual friends, the cute little lesbians, my fellow dog and kitty lovers, and yes, even for the Homosexual and non-Homosexual Africans.

Now, I am happy to report that, according to a news article linked to by Drudge, Big Government has begun the process of using hard earned taxpayer money which will result in the importation of Homosexual and lesbian "spouses" from Haiti, Sub Saharan Africa, from those parts of the world that are predominately non-Christian Moslem, and elsewhere.

The Honey of my choice, Bowser, has joined with me to appeal to our fellow dog and kitty lovers to join in fraternal solidarity to intensify our ongoing efforts to bring about an era of true equality under the "law", in accordance with our rights under the Constitution. Let us ensure German Shepard and Australian Sheepdog lovers are no longer denied their right to enjoy the joys of matrimony with their Honeys' merely because of the artificial social construct of national borders.

Source: http://tinyurl.com/muxrjvf

Ronald
Frankie Rizzo

Union City, CA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#199400
Jul 1, 2013
 

Judged:

5

5

5

Pietro Armando wrote:
<quoted text>
...Can we apply the "n word" reasoning to other ethnic slurs? "Wop", "Dago", and "Guinea", should be referred to as the "w word", "d word", and "g word" respectively, by that logic.
<quoted text>
I can't count how many times the wonderful people of tolerance and diversity on this thread have called me "greaseball".
Rose Feratu

Hoboken, NJ

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#199401
Jul 1, 2013
 

Judged:

7

7

7

RiccardoFire wrote:
<quoted text>Too bad they are not for islamic lovers like you. Why don't you move there and push your gay agenda? Funny how you liberals love Islam as long as you live far from it. Shame on you!
Islamic lover? Huh? This is why your kind lose in Court. You make shit up to bitch about and then whine when you lose. I love FREEDOM OF RELIGION. It's one of our founding principles. If you don't like freedom, YOU MOVE.
Rose Feratu

Hoboken, NJ

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#199402
Jul 1, 2013
 

Judged:

7

7

7

Pietro Armando wrote:
<quoted text>
Ummmmmmm.....I think some modifications had to be made there. "Gee what do we pronounce?.....we can't say husband and wife...how about 'spouses for life', or 'husband and husband', or just plain 'you are married'?
<quoted text>
No distinction at all? That seems to contradict the pronouncement. Plus was their a space on the form for "bride and groom", or just two names?
<quoted text>
That'd be swell Joh-née, perhaps you explain how that how consummation thing works too, that is for two husbands. Do u have to switch off for it to count?
This ain't rocket science, you dipshit. Party A and Party B. Is that too complicated for you?

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 ]
•••