Judge overturns California's ban on s...

Judge overturns California's ban on same-sex marriage

There are 201480 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: Jul 13

Rancho Palos Verdes, CA

#217729 Sep 22, 2013
Melanie wrote:
<quoted text>
Thank God Kimare's wife can't conceive
Haha, you guys are so cold!!

Since: Jul 13

Rancho Palos Verdes, CA

#217730 Sep 22, 2013
Don't get mad at gay people. Get mad at straight people making gay babies.
GOP frogs

La Puente, CA

#217731 Sep 22, 2013
If no bill is passed, many, but not all, government operations will come to a halt.
Melanie

Los Angeles, CA

#217732 Sep 22, 2013
douchebaggery wrote:
Don't get mad at gay people. Get mad at straight people making gay babies.
That's kinda cold as well....Clever but cold.......

“KiMare'a the Monster Mutation”

Since: Nov 10

Location hidden

#217733 Sep 22, 2013
douchebaggery wrote:
<quoted text>
I am not denying why marriage exists. Things have changed since primitive times; marriage is much more complicated than that now. Please revisit my earlier posts as I went over this with another.
Male dolphins share most of their lives with males. They meet with female dolphins to mate, but continue their lives with their male companion. That resembles a "true" homosexual relation doesn't it?
As for your request for an example, I cannot remember what type of deer or similar animal it is, but the females engage in homosexual behavior. The reason behind it may not have an axiom as of yet. I thought I could slip in that logical fallacy without detection. I was asserting my interpretation of their behavior.
I looked up Cinderella Effect and do not understand your link to this argument. It appears this is regarding abuse. Please elaborate.
I think you make a good point about the sexual identity in the wrong body. Although I don't completely agree with your views, I feel it is worthwhile to mention the aforementioned point. Up until recently, homosexuality was under the misnomer of psychological disorder.
"You seem to know enough to be dangerous. I'd suggest you do some research apart from gay sites"
I engage in debates, because I like to discuss and test beliefs and logic. I do not feel strongly about gay marriages either way. I thought my conversation would be the most interesting with you, but ad hominem attacks aren't going to achieve anything. Let's keep it on topic. I am enjoying our discussion this far.
I wasn't trying to be mean, you seem to have a partial amount of knowledge that you use to make conclusions. That is simply dangerous.

1. At the most, you are describing bi-sexual behavior, not homosexuality. However, brief contact with the opposite gender for mating is common among animals. Another example on the other gender would be Orca whales. The females stimulate each other before the male,'slam bam thank you maam' intercourse.

However, using animals to justify human behavior is risky. Often anal intercourse among animals is simply an expression of dominance. Humping dogs also eat sh/t and lick butts...

2. I brought up the Cinderella Effect because you mentioned two males raising the young.

"In evolutionary psychology, the Cinderella effect is the alleged higher incidence of different forms of child-abuse and mistreatment by stepparents than by biological parents. It takes its name from the fairy tale character Cinderella. Evolutionary psychologists describe the effect as a remnant of an adaptive reproductive strategy among primates where males frequently kill the offspring of other males in order to bring their mothers into estrus, and give the male a chance to fertilize her himself."

3. I have lived through the evolution of a number of theories about homosexuality. A domineering mother and absent father was before a psychological disorder. Genetics were more recent. A number of other ideas before that. You may want to look up the current idea,'homosexuality and epi-genetics'.

Again, I am sorry for sounding harsh, I am used to being assaulted for having divergent views.

“KiMare'a the Monster Mutation”

Since: Nov 10

Location hidden

#217734 Sep 22, 2013
veryvermilion wrote:
<quoted text>
I've seen photos of you and your wife. I can pretty much guess her age. She is far past the age of safely having children--IF she's even capable of having a child. My guess is that she's postmenopausal.
See, women are born with a finite ability to produce eggs. After being fertile for about 40 years, egg production begins to deteriorate and become irregular. Eventually it ceases altogether.
Your wife is barren because she is now infertile. The only way that she could become pregnant is if she were to have in vitro fertilization. And I KNOW you wouldn't want to go through that process, since it is "unnatural". And no society has ever supported in vitro fertilization from start to finish.
You cannot engage in MATING behavior because your actions would be futile. And MATING is defined as having intercourse for the sole purpose of having children.
She cannot get pregnant. All you would be doing is having sexual intercourse.
Your marriage is a "mutually sterile, pointlessly opposite gendered half of marriage".
I don't know why this is so hard for you to accept.
You should dump her and move on to a fertile woman--begin a new family.
That's what "marriage" is to you isn't it? Haven't you repeatedly insisted that it is a "cross cultural constraint on evolutionary mating behavior"? Haven't you clearly explained to us time and again that the purpose of marriage is to tie a man to a woman for the purposes of raising and providing for a family?
You've raised your children. You have no more responsibilities to provide for your children. Move on and get a new wife post haste!
I have to admit, I do enjoy using your definitions against you. It gives me great pleasure to make a fool of you--not that you haven't done an AMAZING job of that yourself.
Her sister was a mother at 47.

The rest of your post is a rehash of things I've already addressed.

In the end, ss couples are never ever more than a mutually sterile, pointlessly duplicate gendered half of marriage. Your assault on me is only a futile attempt to avoid the reality of that deficit.
Melanie

Los Angeles, CA

#217735 Sep 22, 2013
Kimare is shooting blanks at his age as we'll..I've seen your picture's you are
at least 55-60....We know you couldn't
have kids.This isn't a bible
story,where you have a baby at 105 you
know.......

“KiMare'a the Monster Mutation”

Since: Nov 10

Location hidden

#217736 Sep 22, 2013
douchebaggery wrote:
<quoted text>
If I may digress for a second and explain to you my true opinion on homosexuals, I do not like them. Gay men do make me feel uncomfortable, but I do not use my personal feelings to limit their freedoms. If they want to marry, it does not affect my life in a significant way. What they do is their personal affair and I will not tell them otherwise, simply because I do not care enough what they do. Likewise, I won't tell a straight couple what to do as I don't care either.
Now that racism has become so taboo, people discriminate people on their sexual orientation and sex. Seems like society always has to have an inferior class like equality is unfathomable.
Now, I am being transparent, let's make this discussion more interesting. My question is--so what if they cannot reproduce, why not let them marry?
Many conservative minded people will fear that this affects the historical/holy nature of marriage. Then, why not let be "domestic partners" which will give them benefits of marriage without affecting the above?
Why does the prospect of homosexual unions irk people so much?
Why are the affairs of homosexuals so important to many despite the lack of direct effect on other people's live?
Looking forward to your response.
I don't hate or dislike homosexuals. I do hate denial. It is devastating to individuals and society. I am a genetic chimera and a hermaphrodite. Being honest about my condition has been essential for my well-being.

Words describe reality. I'm sure you'd agree that accuracy is critical for our benefit. Calling arsenic 'sugar' would be foolish.

Put succinctly, ss couples do not equate to marriage at any level. But if I start at the most basic essence of marriage, it is a cross cultural constraint on evolutionary mating behavior. Ss couples are a failure of mating behavior. They fail to equate from the very start. I can and have listed the distinctions that follow at any point of measurement.

Where this comes into my line of fire, is the impact on marriage and children of imposing an imposter relationship. My professional career and personal interest was/is focused on marriage and family.

I do understand that GLBT's deserve rights and relationships. I have always encouraged their pursuit of their own identity and rights. The only qualification is, I believe that GLBT is a sexual disorder. That creates a problem with a variety of issues such as anal sex; harmful, unhealthy and demeaning.

I think the demand that people deny an obvious disorder and the historical results of where that leads have created the backlash.

Since: Jul 13

Rancho Palos Verdes, CA

#217737 Sep 22, 2013
KiMare wrote:
<quoted text>
I wasn't trying to be mean, you seem to have a partial amount of knowledge that you use to make conclusions. That is simply dangerous.
1. At the most, you are describing bi-sexual behavior, not homosexuality. However, brief contact with the opposite gender for mating is common among animals. Another example on the other gender would be Orca whales. The females stimulate each other before the male,'slam bam thank you maam' intercourse.
However, using animals to justify human behavior is risky. Often anal intercourse among animals is simply an expression of dominance. Humping dogs also eat sh/t and lick butts...
2. I brought up the Cinderella Effect because you mentioned two males raising the young.
"In evolutionary psychology, the Cinderella effect is the alleged higher incidence of different forms of child-abuse and mistreatment by stepparents than by biological parents. It takes its name from the fairy tale character Cinderella. Evolutionary psychologists describe the effect as a remnant of an adaptive reproductive strategy among primates where males frequently kill the offspring of other males in order to bring their mothers into estrus, and give the male a chance to fertilize her himself."
3. I have lived through the evolution of a number of theories about homosexuality. A domineering mother and absent father was before a psychological disorder. Genetics were more recent. A number of other ideas before that. You may want to look up the current idea,'homosexuality and epi-genetics'.
Again, I am sorry for sounding harsh, I am used to being assaulted for having divergent views.
No worries. Thank you for apologizing. I understand your reason, people were pretty harsh to you on this thread; I have read the remarks. I did not take it personally, just wanted to continue or discussion. Your posts have no politically correct inhibitions, so I thought you would be fun to talk to.

Again, I do not feel strongly about this subject, so I may not be the most informed or educated in this matter. I think you know more than I do in regards to this topic. Yes, you are right, the animals' behavior I was using would be best described as bisexual. I was trying to get away with another fallacy, since I do not know enough about this topic, ha... I know now that I can't get away with these with you.

Are you saying that adopted children of homosexual parents will be subjected to the cinderella effect?
Frankie Rizzo

Hayward, CA

#217738 Sep 22, 2013
Melanie wrote:
<quoted text>
Ya there is......
How about an old rude creep to talks about women like pieces of meat and
couldn't get a woman if it was dressed like a man....
Well if you want to talk about your daddy like that, we don't want to hear it. Be nice.
Melanie

Los Angeles, CA

#217739 Sep 22, 2013
KiMare wrote:
<quoted text>I don't hate or dislike homosexuals. I do hate denial. It is devastating to individuals and society. I am a genetic chimera and a hermaphrodite. Being honest about my condition has been essential for my well-being.

Words describe reality. I'm sure you'd agree that accuracy is critical for our benefit. Calling arsenic 'sugar' would be foolish.

Put succinctly, ss couples do not equate to marriage at any level. But if I start at the most basic essence of marriage, it is a cross cultural constraint on evolutionary mating behavior. Ss couples are a failure of mating behavior. They fail to equate from the very start. I can and have listed the distinctions that follow at any point of measurement.

Where this comes into my line of fire, is the impact on marriage and children of imposing an imposter relationship. My professional career and personal interest was/is focused on marriage and family.

I do understand that GLBT's deserve rights and relationships. I have always encouraged their pursuit of their own identity and rights. The only qualification is, I believe that GLBT is a sexual disorder. That creates a problem with a variety of issues such as anal sex; harmful, unhealthy and demeaning.

I think the demand that people deny an obvious disorder and the historical results of where that leads have created the backlash.
LOL more like a "Himerphrodite" Ha Ha
this forum is hilarious!!! This clown is
So full of shit,his eyes are brown!
Melanie

Los Angeles, CA

#217740 Sep 22, 2013
Frankie Rizzo wrote:
<quoted text>Well if you want to talk about your daddy like that, we don't want to hear it. Be nice.
Nice .........Like you?? And who is we?
The Audience to the Frankie show? This
has to be a bunch of out of work actors,
or just a bunch of old men reminiscing
about your Vietnam era escapades with
"broads" or Anal sex......Prop 8 is now
history, don't you have anything better to do then talk crap??? About my daddy
Cad Vaffanculo old fart!

“Vita e' Bella.”

Since: May 12

Location hidden

#217741 Sep 22, 2013
Mikey wrote:
<quoted text>
Not Hypocritical...3 does not equal 2! To label polygamy as 'marriage equality' is an oxymoron.
So is "same sex marriage". Two men or two women does not "equal" a man AND a woman. Are two left shoes, or two right shoes "equal" to a pair of shoes-a left AND a right?
I can't think of anything more UN-equal
Exactly.....same sex marriage is UN-equal.
. You want polygamy? then fight for it on your own
Why? SSMers are doing the fighting for it already.
or go to the middle east (Please),
No need to, immigrants from the Middle East are coming here, and going to Europe. In fact, in the UK, they recognize polygamous marriages for welfare purposes.
don't try and tag it along with gay marriage,
But polygamists, namely Kody Brown and his wives, have gone on record in support of SSM. It would be polite to return the support.
they are not even remotely the same
Hmmmmmm.......one, SSM seeks to change the nature, male female, of the marital relationship but retain the number, whereas plural marriage seeks to maintain the nature, but not the number. So which one represents more of a signitificant alteration of marriage in American marital jurisprudence.
. POS
?....... Wait I know this one....that's code for Pizza with olives, and sausage.

Judged:

10

10

10

Reply »
Report Abuse Judge it!

Since: Jul 13

Rancho Palos Verdes, CA

#217742 Sep 22, 2013
KiMare wrote:
<quoted text>
I don't hate or dislike homosexuals. I do hate denial. It is devastating to individuals and society. I am a genetic chimera and a hermaphrodite. Being honest about my condition has been essential for my well-being.
Words describe reality. I'm sure you'd agree that accuracy is critical for our benefit. Calling arsenic 'sugar' would be foolish.
Put succinctly, ss couples do not equate to marriage at any level. But if I start at the most basic essence of marriage, it is a cross cultural constraint on evolutionary mating behavior. Ss couples are a failure of mating behavior. They fail to equate from the very start. I can and have listed the distinctions that follow at any point of measurement.
Where this comes into my line of fire, is the impact on marriage and children of imposing an imposter relationship. My professional career and personal interest was/is focused on marriage and family.
I do understand that GLBT's deserve rights and relationships. I have always encouraged their pursuit of their own identity and rights. The only qualification is, I believe that GLBT is a sexual disorder. That creates a problem with a variety of issues such as anal sex; harmful, unhealthy and demeaning.
I think the demand that people deny an obvious disorder and the historical results of where that leads have created the backlash.
Now I am understanding. Your concern is on the kids that come from homosexual parents, correct? I feel that concern is valid. I was raised by a single mother. I mean, I turned out successful, but I had to make a lot of mistakes to get here. Knowing that, I cannot condone women who want to have kids without a father, as I understand the hardships that the child will go through. Putting this back into context, a child of homosexual parents will be confused and most likely bullied in school. Statistics show that fatherless children are more likely to engage in criminal behavior. I don't know if there are any statistics for homosexual parents, but I feel that there will be all sorts of risks for that child. I may be wrong, but I feel that children are already being adopted by homosexual parents despite the marriage status. What would banning ss marriage achieve in this respect?

So, you called it a disorder--what are you suggesting is the reason for this? Psychological? Nurture? Genetics?

I have never really thought this far into this subject. This is getting better!

Since: Dec 09

Knoxville, TN

#217743 Sep 22, 2013
KiMare wrote:
<quoted text>
Her sister was a mother at 47.
The rest of your post is a rehash of things I've already addressed.
In the end, ss couples are never ever more than a mutually sterile, pointlessly duplicate gendered half of marriage. Your assault on me is only a futile attempt to avoid the reality of that deficit.
As I said, I've seen photos of your wife. She's a bit longer in the tooth that 47. If she's only 47, then she's had a hard life. And being married to the likes of you, I can cut her some slack for looking to be in her 60s.

“KiMare'a the Monster Mutation”

Since: Nov 10

Location hidden

#217744 Sep 22, 2013
douchebaggery wrote:
<quoted text>
No worries. Thank you for apologizing. I understand your reason, people were pretty harsh to you on this thread; I have read the remarks. I did not take it personally, just wanted to continue or discussion. Your posts have no politically correct inhibitions, so I thought you would be fun to talk to.
Again, I do not feel strongly about this subject, so I may not be the most informed or educated in this matter. I think you know more than I do in regards to this topic. Yes, you are right, the animals' behavior I was using would be best described as bisexual. I was trying to get away with another fallacy, since I do not know enough about this topic, ha... I know now that I can't get away with these with you.
Are you saying that adopted children of homosexual parents will be subjected to the cinderella effect?
Default family situations (adoptive, foster, step and single parent) all have negative impact on children. Ss couples would at the least equal those negative affects. At the worst, the inherent negative self-identity of sexual disorders would only increase the negative affect. Add to that the missing parental gender with ss couples.

Now you may want to think about how that relates to studies that claim otherwise...

“Vita e' Bella.”

Since: May 12

Location hidden

#217745 Sep 22, 2013
douchebaggery wrote:
<quoted text>
Let me use similar logic to ask you a question: if human reproduction is purely sexual, why do we need marriage? It is not a necessary aspect for reproduction; sex alone can reproduce. We have marriage because society is complex. Marriage has legal, financial, and other benefits, not just reproduction.
Yes it does.....but at its core is the sexual union of a man and a woman.

“KiMare'a the Monster Mutation”

Since: Nov 10

Location hidden

#217746 Sep 22, 2013
douchebaggery wrote:
<quoted text>
No worries. Thank you for apologizing. I understand your reason, people were pretty harsh to you on this thread; I have read the remarks. I did not take it personally, just wanted to continue or discussion. Your posts have no politically correct inhibitions, so I thought you would be fun to talk to.
Again, I do not feel strongly about this subject, so I may not be the most informed or educated in this matter. I think you know more than I do in regards to this topic. Yes, you are right, the animals' behavior I was using would be best described as bisexual. I was trying to get away with another fallacy, since I do not know enough about this topic, ha... I know now that I can't get away with these with you.
Are you saying that adopted children of homosexual parents will be subjected to the cinderella effect?
I just realized that the case in the Bible of King Solomon judging between two women claiming the same baby would be an example.

I Kings 3:16-28
Melanie

Los Angeles, CA

#217747 Sep 22, 2013
veryvermilion wrote:
<quoted text>As I said, I've seen photos of your wife. She's a bit longer in the tooth that 47. If she's only 47, then she's had a hard life. And being married to the likes of you, I can cut her some slack for looking to be in her 60s.
See........Even VV agrees Kimare's wife's eggs are raisins...Does Kimare think
He's Moses as well? Multiple personalities maybe? No.....?

“KiMare'a the Monster Mutation”

Since: Nov 10

Location hidden

#217748 Sep 22, 2013
Melanie wrote:
<quoted text>
LOL more like a "Himerphrodite" Ha Ha
this forum is hilarious!!! This clown is
So full of shit,his eyes are brown!
LOL,

It is much better than that! Literally a lesbian trapped in a straight man. AND I have three nipples too!

Talk about a monster mutation...

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
News 'Undocumented' but inspiring (Nov '12) 22 hr BillFart 214
Facebook vs Twitter (Dec '17) Jun 21 Perfect Analogy 194
Ron Fleishman is the World's Most Colorful Digi... (Aug '17) Jun 20 Very Fine 229
Ron Fleishman is the World's Most Underrated Ph... (Sep '15) Jun 20 Not Fine 507
News Mountain View school to be named after undocume... Jun 18 ONLYONETERM 13
Review: Bushnell & Assoc - Ronald G Bushnell CPA (Feb '11) Jun 15 AQ CPR 4
Complaints Against Google+ (Jul '14) Jun 11 Corporate Empire 122

Palo Alto Jobs

Personal Finance

Palo Alto Mortgages