Judge overturns California's ban on same-sex marriage

Aug 4, 2010 Full story: www.cnn.com 201,188

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.

Full Story

“Busting Kimare's”

Since: Feb 13

Clitty

#190900 May 4, 2013
KiMare wrote:
<quoted text>
So, what did your family and friends say?
Smile.
I asked, they all agree that you are nucking futz.

You're welcome.
Elastic

Covina, CA

#190901 May 4, 2013
Frankie Rissios

Do your back ordered "DEPENDS" have elastic hip hugging band?
Frankie Rizzo

Union City, CA

#190902 May 4, 2013
Elastic wrote:
Frankie Rissios
Do your back ordered "DEPENDS" have elastic hip hugging band?
Even if that were true, it would be a non-issue.
Frankie Rizzo

Union City, CA

#190903 May 4, 2013
Spill Over wrote:
Frankie Rissio, your back order of "DEPENDS" have arrived.
Even if that were true, it would be a non-issue.
Frankie Rizzo

Union City, CA

#190904 May 4, 2013
Dusty Mangina wrote:
<quoted text>
I asked, they all agree that you are nucking futz.
You're welcome.
Even if that were true, it would be a non-issue.

Since: Dec 09

Knoxville, TN

#190907 May 4, 2013
Pietro Armando wrote:
During the oral arguments about Proposition 8, Justice Anthony Kennedy referred to children being raised by same-sex couples. Since I was one of those children—from ages 2-19, I was raised by a lesbian mother with the help of her partner—I was curious to see what he would say.
I also eagerly anticipated what he would say because I had taken great professional and social risk to file an amicus brief with Doug Mainwaring (who is gay and opposes gay marriage), in which we explained that children deeply feel the loss of a father or mother, no matter how much we love our gay parents or how much they love us. Children feel the loss keenly because they are powerless to stop the decision to deprive them of a father or mother, and the absence of a male or female parent will likely be irreversible for them.
Over the last year I’ve been in frequent contact with adults who were raised by parents in same-sex partnerships. They are terrified of speaking publicly about their feelings, so several have asked me (since I am already out of the closet, so to speak) to give voice to their concerns.
I cannot speak for all children of same-sex couples, but I speak for quite a few of them, especially those who have been brushed aside in the so-called “social science research” on same-sex parenting.
Those who contacted me all professed gratitude and love for the people who raised them, which is why it is so difficult for them to express their reservations about same-sex parenting publicly.
Still, they described emotional hardships that came from lacking a mom or a dad. To give a few examples: they feel disconnected from the gender cues of people around them, feel intermittent anger at their “parents” for having deprived them of one biological parent (or, in some cases, both biological parents), wish they had had a role model of the opposite sex, and feel shame or guilt for resenting their loving parents for forcing them into a lifelong situation lacking a parent of one sex.
I have heard of the supposed “consensus” on the soundness of same-sex parenting from pediatricians and psychologists, but that consensus is frankly bogus.
Pediatricians are supposed to make sure kids don’t get ringworm or skip out on vaccinations—nobody I know doubts that same-sex couples are able to tend to such basic childcare needs.
Psychologists come from the same field that used to have a “consensus” that homosexuality was a mental disorder. Neither field is equipped to answer the deeper existential dilemmas of legally removing fatherhood or motherhood as a human principle, which is what total “marriage equality” would entail.
I support same-sex civil unions and foster care, but I have always resisted the idea that government should encourage same-sex couples to imagine that their partnerships are indistinguishable from actual marriages. Such a self-definition for gays would be based on a lie, and anything based on a lie will backfire.
The richest and most successful same-sex couple still cannot provide a child something that the poorest and most struggling spouses can provide: a mom and a dad. Having spent forty years immersed in the gay community, I have seen how that reality triggers anger and vicious recrimination from same-sex couples, who are often tempted to bad-mouth so-called “dysfunctional” or “trashy” straight couples in order to say,“We deserve to have kids more than they do!”
If people like the author of this piece want to voice an opposition to gay adoptions and gay parents, then they should feel free to do so.

However, let's not confuse the issue of marriage with child rearing.

The truth is that if society stopped "shaming" gays in general, then kids of same-sex parents would not experience it either. Also, kids of divorce are often left without male/female role models, and yet we continue to allow divorce to take place.

Rock Hudson

Wooster, OH

#190908 May 4, 2013
Big D wrote:
<quoted text>
I am glad you mentioned that, Same sex marriage would not be advancing without the support of heterosexuals.
I think there are more heterosexual supporters of same sex marriage, then there are homosexual... think about that.
More voters in the US today support same sex marrage than oppose it
You are not alone
Sure it would. Your side has infiltrated the corridors of power, and a chosen few have steered the agenda. How many times can you ignore the facts? I've been having fun with a new toy, my magnetic bumper sticker. It reads, simply "Say 'no' to gay marriage". Results? Not surprising, 19 thumbs up, from passing motorists. And 1 idiot, who flipped me off as he/she/it passed me by, then got stuck in the lane as i passed them, flipping them off, and then they passed me again, this time, flipping me off, AND trying to cut me off. Laughable. They thought I'd veer out of the way, but when I laid on the air horn, they almost ran into a ditch. So, let's count that up, shall we? 19 against SSM, 1 for it, and , oh......about 900 or 2300, or something like that...that didn't care, 1 way or the other. You keep spewing out the same old horseshit about how many people support SM, but it isn't true, and we all know it. It's all propaganda.
Rug top

Covina, CA

#190909 May 4, 2013
Suggesting that Donald (hairless) Trump -- who infamously questioned President Obama's birthplace.
Rock Hudson

Wooster, OH

#190910 May 4, 2013
veryvermilion wrote:
<quoted text>
Marram, you realize that Kimare's term, "epi-marker mistake" is not a real term, don't you?
He believes that he can fool people into thinking that homosexuality is a mistake.
He loves making up scientific-sounding words. But, he's pretty lousy at it; even for a washed-up pastor.
I've done it once, now I shall do it again.....(sigh)
Science, not opinion, as shown by these links...

http://now.msn.com/epigenetics-study-may-expl...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Epigenetics

http://www.bionews.org.uk/page_227315.asp

Sigh......again.
If you wish to dispute the validity of science, perhaps you should first know of what you speak...
Rock Hudson

Wooster, OH

#190911 May 4, 2013
Big D wrote:
<quoted text>
And the name is what they fear... they are frightened half to death.. by a word.
The name does not belong to them, many religions and non-religious use the same word, that word is not their personal property, and from a recognition perspective, it is a legal term.
Our laws are applied equally ( or are supposed to be ) regardless of Race, Creed, Color, Sex, Religion, Orientation or National Origin.
You need to learn the definition of words, before you try to use them.
Rock Hudson

Wooster, OH

#190912 May 4, 2013
Earl wrote:
<quoted text>
So it's not okay to attack someone for being gay, but it is okay to attack someone's religion?
Yep, that's how it works, now... Religion is getting shown to the door, as inconvenient to the cause celebre..
Rock Hudson

Wooster, OH

#190913 May 4, 2013
veryvermilion wrote:
<quoted text>
You're obviously broken, and yet no one praises you. What's up with that?
Son, you're the one that's broken. You have issues with proper placement of your equipment.
Rock Hudson

Wooster, OH

#190914 May 4, 2013
Pietro Armando wrote:
<quoted text>
"Filled"? Exactly how do you define "filled" in this regard?
I believe that he uses all 5 of his fingers, and calls that "filled"...
Rock Hudson

Wooster, OH

#190915 May 4, 2013
veryvermilion wrote:
<quoted text>
The world our ancestors lived in when the Constitution as drafted is much different than the world we live in today.
I happen to believe that the Constitution is a living document that is dynamic. It is open to interpretation depending on the time and culture of our country.
I'm hardly alone in my beliefs.
You try to look at the Constitution through the eyes of the founding fathers. You can't do that with a 21st century mindset.
The fact of the matter is that much of this country's recent focus has been on equality. For decades we have focused on racial equality, gender equality, and equality for the disabled.
We now recognize inequality when we see it.
It's ridiculous to go through a long and arduous process in order to provide equal rights to other minorities. Why should minorities wait until the majority decides their fate?
You may think that activist judges are out of control. But as I've pointed out, who cares what you THINK.
You are one of a bit over 300,000,000 people living in this country. It's not your playpen.
If you don't like the way the country is being managed, by all means get out!
In the meantime the rest of us will work the system to get the rights that we believe we deserve NOW. We aren't going to wait decades for the rest of you to play catch-up.
the Constitution wasn't drafted, so that social trends could invalidate the inconvenient parts. It was written to stand for the duration of this country. The Constitution isn't alive, it doesn't have any opinions. Duh... We don't have to try, we use our eyes, at all, and see that it is being shredded, as inconvenient to certain groups, and we see them destroying it, and our protections and critical processes. 21st century, or not. Ridiculous, eh? Why waste time, doing it by the book, when the book can be discarded, right? We don't think that they are out of control, we know that power has been misused. No lack of control there, just the wrong use of that control, to destroy the country that we were born into, and you say that WE may leave it, if WE don't like what is happening? Screw you, go and soil up your own pigpen, leave our alone. You may have the right to soil your own spaces, but you have no right to defile common territory.
Rock Hudson

Wooster, OH

#190916 May 4, 2013
Dusty Mangina wrote:
<quoted text>
The public doesn't "think" like you do. The majority will continue to support equality , particularly since more and more people in the public eye are coming out. Our cause is now the public's cause and you have been left in the dust. Don't believe me? Just ask Kimare. Zhe knows that the battle, and the war, are over.
The public doesn't care. This is easily proven, and is often pointed out, by me. Propaganda is all your side has, idiot. We know this.
Rock Hudson

Wooster, OH

#190917 May 4, 2013
Stocking wrote:
<quoted text>
Ok, but people are more than their bodies (machine parts). An aircraft does not have feelings.
A genetic mutation or a sexuality differentiation does not make a person less valid, and I don't agree that anyone ought to think so. True, those who are not procreating are not serving that aspect of the species; but then who's to say it isn't part of nature's design to limit itself. Besides, gay couples can have children in various ways if they choose.
I don't have a haunting, I was wondering if you did! Like I said before if you're happy calling yourself a monster then that's Ok. I would wonder about Anybody who called themselves by a derogatory term.
No, reality doesn't need the law to exist, but the law is part of reality. The reality is if the law says marriage includes SS then it does. Marriage is a legal document and definition not an entity unto itself.
We've never said that it invalidates a person, just said that SSC's are not equal to heterosexual couples, and ought not to have the same laws supporting it, as if they WERE equal. Reality is that the SSM'ers are seeking to gain legal validation of their broken relationships, as if they WERE the same as the regular couples. And, as per "having" their own children, some are using laboratory processes to "have" these children. More unnatural behavior, to lay claim to "equality".
Frankie Rizzo

Union City, CA

#190918 May 4, 2013
Dusty Mangina wrote:
<quoted text>
I asked, they all agree that you are nucking futz.
You're welcome.
You are a creep. Your only existence here down to your name and picture is because you are obsessed with another poster. VERY CREEPY.

Cyber-stalking is not good son, stop it. If you weren't in the club you'd be long gone already as you should be.

Hope that helps.
Rock Hudson

Wooster, OH

#190919 May 4, 2013
Frankie Rizzo wrote:
<quoted text>
Imaginary Playmate Bless America
"While the storm clouds gather far across the sea,
Let us swear allegiance to a land that's free,
Let us all be grateful for a land so fair,
As we raise our voices in a solemn prayer. "
Imaginary playmate Bless America,
Land that I love.
Stand beside her, and guide her
Thru the night with a light from above.
From the mountains, to the prairies,
To the oceans, white with foam
Imaginary playmate bless America, My home sweet home.
If memory serves, didn't D claim to have been in the military? I wonder if he substituted "imaginary playmate" at the end of his swearing-in ceremony, or if he kept silent... Seems to me that he swore an oath that he didn't believe in..
Rock Hudson

Wooster, OH

#190920 May 4, 2013
Piccered wrote:
Frankie Pizzio
Haven't you had enough, people on this site just don't like you anymore.
Yes, we do. Speak for yourself...
Rock Hudson

Wooster, OH

#190921 May 4, 2013
Frankie Rizzo wrote:
<quoted text>
They need a Pakistani Big D to fight for truth justice and the Pakistani way!
I can see him wearing a turban, decreeing officials edicts about not noticing his imperiousness...

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.

San Mateo Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
Beam me up Scottie 3 min guest 12
The news for anything how to get more,, Oct 16 Allx 1
EZChip Bullish Calls Cut Back After Sales Miss:... Oct 13 lovelyjasher 1
Please oppose re-zoning of Edgewater Place Shop... Oct 11 Foster City Citizen 1
Disney on Ice is back in San Jose! Discount on ... Sep 24 multisportmom 1
Suspects in San Mateo auto dealerships thefts a... Sep 23 STTs 1
Neil Young files for divorce from Pegi Young Aug '14 Lightning Linda 3

Beach Hazards Statement for San Mateo County was issued at October 20 at 5:34AM PDT

San Mateo News Video

San Mateo Dating
Find my Match

San Mateo Jobs

San Mateo People Search

Addresses and phone numbers for FREE

San Mateo News, Events & Info

Click for news, events and info in San Mateo

Personal Finance

Mortgages [ See current mortgage rates ]