Judge overturns California's ban on s...

Judge overturns California's ban on same-sex marriage

There are 201888 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.

“KiMare'a the Monster Mutation”

Since: Nov 10

Location hidden

#204265 Jul 23, 2013
veryvermilion wrote:
<quoted text>
Is this an example of a situation where you are being a "reviler" who won't get into the Kingdom of Heaven, according to Paul?
Lol

I expose a gay troll attack and you ignore the attack and call my exposé contentious!

Silly queen.

Remember , I'm a redeemed cynic who remains barbarian. Mocking hypocrisy models the Master.

“Busting Kimare's”

Since: Feb 13

Clitty

#204267 Jul 23, 2013
KiMare wrote:
<quoted text>
Oh please, humor me again. I can't remember your counter of my last post.
Marriage clearly does not define your relationship.
You're not the sharpest knife in the drawer, Greg.

I didn't respond to your last post. But I, and countless others, have responded many, many, many times to the same thing.

I'm done humoring the humorless troll.

Carry on, Pastor.
OhStewOne

Covina, CA

#204268 Jul 23, 2013
Your fans have a message for you:

Oh Tommy Tucker your still a jerk!

I found the one your looking for it's neatly wrapped around your head and neck, tightly.

“Crusading Fundies r hilarious!”

Since: Feb 11

Location hidden

#204269 Jul 23, 2013
KiMare wrote:
<quoted text>
Because he accurately points out a physical fact that exposes the mating behavior defect of homosexuality.
Who'd done that? Oh, that's right. No one.

We gays are capable of mating just fine c*nt. We have been for centuries now. Your labeling our mating a defect is about as accurate as you labeling gravity a defect. It's a statement that gives you pleasure but ultimately is meaningless. Like 99% of what you post. Just some fictitious opinions, nothing more.

When you finally buy a dictionary, here are some words you should look up, since your posts make it obvious you currently don't know how to employ them properly:

"accurately"
"fact"
"exposes"
"mating"
"defect"

Smile. I'm still legally married, and none of your posts, your made up terms, or your denial will change that!! Sucks to be you!!

“Equality First”

Since: Jan 09

Location hidden

#204273 Jul 23, 2013
KiMare wrote:
<quoted text>
I accurately note that the cross cultural social construct of marriage effectively enhances the health and safety of procreation.
And the health and safety of adoption.

And the health and safety of 2 people who have no intention of bearing children.

Marriage as we know it today as a legal contract, same sex and opposite sex, with children or without children, enhances the health and safety of the people who are married. There are many benefits of marriage, and there may be drawbacks to being married, depending upon the individuals involved. The basic question is, "is the legal contract of marriage being carried out equally for all concerned". The answer is, "yes in some places, and no in others". And actually the concept of religious marriage is actually being carried out somewhat equally, as some religion permit it and others do not. A reasonable balance where religion is concerned.

Since: Dec 09

Knoxville, TN

#204279 Jul 23, 2013
KiMare wrote:
<quoted text>
No fallacy, and nothing misconstrued.
I have always acknowledged the distinction between evolutionary mating behavior and marriage. In fact, YOU are the one who feigned ignorance about it. I accurately note that the cross cultural social construct of marriage effectively enhances the health and safety of procreation.
But this false rabbit trail ignores the fact that marriage connects the past and future of humanity. SS couples do neither.
You're like a stuck record... Is every single aspect of your marriage directly related to procreation? Is that the only reason you married your wife? Is that the sole reason that you married?

It's a simple question.

If there were other reasons that you married her, then you must agree that there are other reasons that people get married. Procreation is not the sole reason for marriage. It may be a popular reason for joining with someone, but it's not the "only" reason.

Answer the question...

Since: Dec 09

Knoxville, TN

#204280 Jul 23, 2013
KiMare wrote:
<quoted text>
Lol
I expose a gay troll attack and you ignore the attack and call my exposé contentious!
Silly queen.
Remember , I'm a redeemed cynic who remains barbarian. Mocking hypocrisy models the Master.
So, "The Master" has given you free reign to "mock"? Then Paul must have been wrong.

“KiMare'a the Monster Mutation”

Since: Nov 10

Location hidden

#204282 Jul 23, 2013
Dusty Mangina wrote:
<quoted text>
You're not the sharpest knife in the drawer, Greg.
I didn't respond to your last post. But I, and countless others, have responded many, many, many times to the same thing.
I'm done humoring the humorless troll.
Carry on, Pastor.
Here is an example of a gay troll ad homoan attack exposing hatred and ignorance.

It is clear you had no response directly to my last post. But nor have you ever had a response to the subject of my last post as you claim. You lie.

But that's nothing new is it?

I noticed you still are nowhere near married.

“KiMare'a the Monster Mutation”

Since: Nov 10

Location hidden

#204283 Jul 23, 2013
RalphB wrote:
<quoted text>
And the health and safety of adoption.
And the health and safety of 2 people who have no intention of bearing children.
Marriage as we know it today as a legal contract, same sex and opposite sex, with children or without children, enhances the health and safety of the people who are married. There are many benefits of marriage, and there may be drawbacks to being married, depending upon the individuals involved. The basic question is, "is the legal contract of marriage being carried out equally for all concerned". The answer is, "yes in some places, and no in others". And actually the concept of religious marriage is actually being carried out somewhat equally, as some religion permit it and others do not. A reasonable balance where religion is concerned.
Among many other distortions, you dumb down marriage to a contract (how romantic and inclusive of human nature), ignore the essence of marriage to fallaciously equate a duplicate gendered half to marriage, and try to compare natural families with default families that immediately hinder a child's safety and future.

Moreover the selective censoring if my post completely ignores the point that marriage connects humanities past and future. SS couples do neither. They are a defective mutation of mating behavior.

“KiMare'a the Monster Mutation”

Since: Nov 10

Location hidden

#204284 Jul 23, 2013
veryvermilion wrote:
<quoted text>
You're like a stuck record... Is every single aspect of your marriage directly related to procreation? Is that the only reason you married your wife? Is that the sole reason that you married?
It's a simple question.
If there were other reasons that you married her, then you must agree that there are other reasons that people get married. Procreation is not the sole reason for marriage. It may be a popular reason for joining with someone, but it's not the "only" reason.
Answer the question...
Nothing in my post asserts any such thing.

Go back and read it again. Get someone to help you.

Marriage connects the roots of humanity and the future. SS couples do neither. They are a clear mutation mistake that has no direct connection to past or the future.

“KiMare'a the Monster Mutation”

Since: Nov 10

Location hidden

#204285 Jul 23, 2013
veryvermilion wrote:
<quoted text>
So, "The Master" has given you free reign to "mock"? Then Paul must have been wrong.
Now you are defending Paul against Christ?

“KiMare'a the Monster Mutation”

Since: Nov 10

Location hidden

#204286 Jul 23, 2013
Frankie Rizzo wrote:
<quoted text>
Big D is way out there today with the irrelevant idiotic statements, eh? UFOs and sh!t. Wow.
As usual.

Thanks for your help!
Big D

Modesto, CA

#204287 Jul 23, 2013
KiMare wrote:
<quoted text>
The fact that you associate my post with idiotic statements that have nothing to do with what I actually said only exposes your inability to mount a reasoned response.
Get real big dummy.
You don’t get to talk about facts until you acknowledge the fact that same sex couples are married, legally, and recognized by the state and federal government as equal to any other marriage.

I am real, you are the one that seems totally clueless about facts.
OhStewOne

Covina, CA

#204288 Jul 23, 2013
Your fans have a special message for you:

Oh Tommy Tucker your still a jerk!

I found the one your looking for it's neatly wrapped around your head and neck, tightly
Big D

Modesto, CA

#204290 Jul 23, 2013
veryvermilion wrote:
<quoted text>
You're like a stuck record... Is every single aspect of your marriage directly related to procreation? Is that the only reason you married your wife? Is that the sole reason that you married?
..
I feel sorry for his wife, I would have married mine whether she could have children or not. I cannot even imagine a marriage where the man only thinks of his wife as a baby producing appliance.

“Vita e' Bella.”

Since: May 12

Location hidden

#204294 Jul 23, 2013
Big D wrote:
<quoted text>
You don’t get to talk about facts until you acknowledge the fact that same sex couples are married, legally, and recognized by the state and federal government as equal to any other marriage.
I am real, you are the one that seems totally clueless about facts.
How can they be "equal", when various state marriage laws, including those that deal with annulment, reference the male female sexual union?
heartandmind

Moline, IL

#204295 Jul 23, 2013
KiMare wrote:
<quoted text>
Here we go again...
1. I'm talking about marriage identifying with the very roots of human life. You ignore the incredible significance of that fundamental essence.
2. You dumb down marriage to a piece of paper. I'm talking about the past and future life and life giving fruit of marriage, something ss couples have absolutely NO identification with in any way.
3. Moreover, you foolishly attempt to deny the connection between the very existence of life, including homosexuals and marriage. Marriage is the wise constraint of human culture combined with nature's mating behavior to produce the best and safest place for reproduction.
This separation DEMANDED by couples who have zero potential of mutually procreating human life, placed on the only couples best suited to do so. Not just inappropriate, but idiotic.
...and here you go again, repeating yourself.

these facts remain :
1. same sex marriage is legal in several states.
2. prop 8 case findings and decision made by judge walker stands that prop 8 is unconstitutional, per SCOTUS' rulings.
3. DOMA, section 3, is declared unconstitutional by SCOTUS.
4. your opinion disagrees with the previous facts. then again, your opinion does not drive secular law in these united states. so, again, your opinion doesn't really matter.

i'm hoping someday you can get off the broken record so your posts might become interesting and fresh for a change. at least we can all discuss different points.

“Crusading Fundies r hilarious!”

Since: Feb 11

Location hidden

#204297 Jul 23, 2013
KiMare wrote:
<quoted text>
Lol
I expose a gay troll attack and you ignore the attack and call my exposé contentious!
Silly queen.
Remember , I'm a redeemed cynic who remains barbarian. Mocking hypocrisy models the Master.
Well, someone's hit the bottle early today.

Since: Dec 09

Knoxville, TN

#204298 Jul 23, 2013
KiMare wrote:
<quoted text>
Nothing in my post asserts any such thing.
Go back and read it again. Get someone to help you.
Marriage connects the roots of humanity and the future. SS couples do neither. They are a clear mutation mistake that has no direct connection to past or the future.
So you're now saying that there ARE other reasons that people marry besides children.

And if other reasons exist, then people--including same-gender couples--should be allowed to marry based on those reasons.

You can't say that marriage equals mating/procreation and say that other reasons exist at the same time.

Since: Dec 09

Knoxville, TN

#204299 Jul 23, 2013
KiMare wrote:
<quoted text>
Now you are defending Paul against Christ?
So, you're saying that Christ has encouraged mankind to judge one another and be rude to them--to revile them?

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
News Facebook Revenue, Users Top Estimates as Mobile... Aug 26 Hellary Clitass 3
Trump for President, He will win. watch Aug 25 col sutter 1
san mateo home depot vendor fair! Aug 23 fje0711 1
News Police ID man fatally shot on Highway 101 (Jun '08) Aug 22 AnGe 33
News Baby falls from open 3rd-story window in Foster... Aug 16 Lavanya 1
DA/Public Officials VIOLATES FEDERAL LAWS AETA/... (May '15) Aug 11 UN AGENDA 21 17
News Five Months into the Year and Market Finally Re... Aug 5 LAVON AFFAIR 3

San Mateo Jobs

More from around the web

Personal Finance

San Mateo Mortgages