Judge overturns California's ban on s...

Judge overturns California's ban on same-sex marriage

There are 201878 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.

Since: Nov 12

Camptonville, CA

#206506 Aug 2, 2013
Big D wrote:
<quoted text>
The point is, discrimination based on race, creed, religion, sex, orientation or national origin is plain wrong
Does that include college enrollment?
Blogs

Covina, CA

#206507 Aug 2, 2013
It's all over the web and tweeters blogs too!

Since: Dec 09

Knoxville, TN

#206509 Aug 2, 2013
KiMare wrote:
<quoted text>
Thank you for defending our right to have this conversation among many other things. I really appreciate it!
What ungrateful idiots like vv don't realize is, they would be in far worse places without the price of war.
Aren't you of an age that you might have been eligible to go to Vietnam, either voluntarily or by draft?
Near Death

Covina, CA

#206510 Aug 2, 2013
If the near death experience in Glendora, California Classic Coffee could have gone the other way if; must have been white kids. if they had been black in a hoodie they would have been dead.
Frankie Rizzo

Hayward, CA

#206511 Aug 2, 2013
veryvermilion wrote:
<quoted text>
Aren't you of an age that you might have been eligible to go to Vietnam, either voluntarily or by draft?
You rag on me for going, now you're ragging on KiMare for not going. Will you clowns ever be happy? Oh well. Who cares.
Frankie Rizzo

Hayward, CA

#206512 Aug 2, 2013
RiccardoFire wrote:
<quoted text>Does that include college enrollment?
It's not discrimination when Big D does it.
Poof

Rock Island, IL

#206513 Aug 2, 2013
Frankie Rizzo wrote:
<quoted text>
Straight parents BAD!!!!
Gay parents GOOD!!!
You really are that stupid aren't you Jizzy?
Ask all the Gay parents here, how many of them make thier kids live under a double wide. The question is are you galactically stupid?

God Bless galactically stupid, God Loves you Frank
( He does however wish your parents would have remained celibate.
sheesh

Cameron, NC

#206514 Aug 2, 2013
laughing man wrote:
<quoted text>
Irving’s Laws of homosexual “debate”:
Rule One:
When on the losing side of a debate, which is 100 percent of the time, a homosexual will, within the first three posts, invariably state that an opponent is “in the closet”.
Hey hyena boy, I hope you're willing to eat Irving's law. If you hadn't noticed ol' Gustypants was claiming I'm gay. Now you are. So much fer your law numnutz.
laughing man

Pulaski, TN

#206515 Aug 2, 2013
Poofter wrote:
<quoted text>The question is are you galactically stupid?
He's not the one sliding his member into the diseased shitchute of another male, imbecile.
sheesh

Cameron, NC

#206516 Aug 2, 2013
Gustavo wrote:
<quoted text>
Gee what a great ending to such a heart wrenching story, you pervert. You are one sick puppy dont you feel silly?
No Gustypants, I was being silly, on porpoise. Now don't you feel dumb? I s'pect not as you are dumb and unaware of that little factoid. Carry on with your valuable contributions though.
Hoodies

Covina, CA

#206517 Aug 2, 2013
Another view on this matter; if the kids in the Classic Coffee August 01, 2013 "near death shoot out" had been black they would have been DEAD, but since they were all the right color for Glendora.

California then they were spared the death penalty that Zimmer gave someone in Florida.

Fred Sparling your a GOOF and your family TOO.
Frankie Rizzo

Hayward, CA

#206518 Aug 2, 2013
Jonah1 wrote:

"Did you know that fundamentalist Christians are nasty, deceitful hypocrites?"

Nice! It's not ignorant bigotry when Jonah1 does it.

“Vita e' Bella.”

Since: May 12

Location hidden

#206519 Aug 2, 2013
lides wrote:
<quoted text>
Of course, I've never claimed that. You keep trying to put words in my mouth, but the reality is you are horrible at the practice and come off looking like an angst filled teenager.
A thousand pardons.
What I HAVE said, Pietro, is that state restrictions limiting marriage to being between a man and a woman do not serve a compelling governmental interest, and as such are unconstitutional.
Look Liddie, they do, but its simply not a compelling governmental interest you agree with. I get, you think SSM should be legal nation wide, I of course disagree. This is exchange is rather entertaining, but in the end we both know where we stand on the issue....not if you have a new angle...by all means .....bring it on.
I have invited you time and time again to offer such an interest, which would make denying same sex couples the right to marry constitutional, but you have consistently failed to do so.
Contradiction in that line. You combined "same sex couples" and "the right to marry", which we both know is to enter into a legally recognized union of husband and wife. So how then does a same sex couple marry?

Procreation is “[o]ne of the prime purposes of matrimony.”– Maslow v. Maslow (1952) 117 Cal.App.2d. 237, 241.

“[P]rocreation of offspring could be considered one of the major purposes of marriage.”– Poe v. Gerstein (5th Cir. 1975) 517 F.2d 787, 796.

“[M]arriage exists as a protected legal institution primarily because of societal values associated with the propagation of the human race.”– Singer v. Hara (Wash. App. 1974) 522 P.2d 1187, 1195.

“The institution of marriage as a union of man and woman, uniquely involving the procreation and rearing of children within a family, is as old as the book of Genesis.”– Baker v. Nelson (Minn. 971) 191 N.W.2d 185, 186, appeal dismissed for want of a substantial federal question, 409 U.S. 810 (1972)

“Having children is a primary purpose of marriage.”– Heup v. Heup (Was. 1969) 172 N.W.2d 334, 336

“One of the primary purposes of matrimony is procreation.”– Zoglio v. Zoglio (D.C. App. 1960) 157 A.2d 627, 628

“[P]rocreation of children is one of the important ends of matrimony.”– Stegienko v. Stegienko (Mich. 1940) 295 N.W. 252, 254

“It has been said in many of the cases cited that one of the great purposes of marriage is procreation.”– Gard v. Gard (Mich. 1918 169 N.W.908, 912)

“One of the most important functions of wedlock is the procreation of children.”– Grover v. Zook (Wash. 1906) 87 P.638, 639.
Gustavo

North Hollywood, CA

#206520 Aug 2, 2013
sheesh wrote:
<quoted text>
No Gustypants, I was being silly, on porpoise. Now don't you feel dumb? I s'pect not as you are dumb and unaware of that little factoid. Carry on with your valuable contributions though.
You are a second class act. You were not being silly you were talking from the heart. You can't fool the thread you idiot
Frankie Rizzo

Hayward, CA

#206521 Aug 2, 2013
Poof wrote:
<quoted text>Ask all the Gay parents here, how many of them make thier kids live under a double wide. The question is are you galactically stupid?
God Bless galactically stupid, God Loves you Frank
( He does however wish your parents would have remained celibate.
Ask all straight parents here the same question moron. No one slept under a double wide, you made that up remember?

What a dope!
Frankie Rizzo

Hayward, CA

#206522 Aug 2, 2013
sheesh wrote:
<quoted text>
Hey hyena boy, I hope you're willing to eat Irving's law. If you hadn't noticed ol' Gustypants was claiming I'm gay. Now you are. So much fer your law numnutz.
Jizzy's straight.

:|
sheesh

United States

#206523 Aug 2, 2013
laughing man wrote:
<quoted text>
I'm puzzled,
We've noticed.
Frankie Rizzo

Hayward, CA

#206524 Aug 2, 2013
Gustavo wrote:
<quoted text>
You are a second class act. You were not being silly you were talking from the heart. You can't fool the thread you idiot
Is that you Bruno you silly jackass?

“Vita e' Bella.”

Since: May 12

Location hidden

#206525 Aug 2, 2013
Big D wrote:
<quoted text>
no capes!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v =KNUbPRj9TGMXX
Okay Big D that was funny! Gotta give U your due.
If they stopped issuing them for others that would be fine, either way it should be equal.
So you would be in favor of the state getting out of the marriage business altogether?

As to the "equal" part, what state restrictions are acceptable?
The point is, discrimination based on race, creed, religion, sex, orientation or national origin is plain wrong
and the list has grown, age, genetic disposition, etc.
Blood relatives are also prohibited from marrying, that too can be considerd a form of discrimination. As can prohibiting more than one wife, or husband at a time. So is any "discrimination" acceptable in regards to marriage?
laughing man

Pulaski, TN

#206526 Aug 2, 2013
sheesh wrote:
<quoted text>
We've noticed.
But I know what to keep my wee-wee out of, shitferbrains.

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
Gay/bi skype (Jun '16) 3 hr Cam b fun 237
News Man pleads not guilty in East Palo Alto cockfig... 16 hr un agenda 21 6
Ron Fleishman is the World's Most Underrated Ph... (Sep '15) 23 hr Jenny 240
HELP! Stop Unjust Persecutions of TAXPAYERS ove... Fri un agenda 21 7
Complaints Against Google+ (Jul '14) Apr 25 Ditto 117
News Mysterious door rattling reported in county; ea... (Mar '09) Apr 18 liza 108
Sunnyvale park on December 4th Apr 15 Fake n Real 5

Palo Alto Jobs

More from around the web

Personal Finance

Palo Alto Mortgages