Gay marriage

Gay marriage

There are 61392 comments on the Los Angeles Times story from Mar 28, 2013, titled Gay marriage. In it, Los Angeles Times reports that:

The U.S. Supreme Court is considering two controversial cases involving whether same-sex couples have a constitutional right to marry: Proposition 8, California's 2008 ban on gay marriage, and the Defense of Marriage Act, which since 1996 has defined marriage for federal purposes as a union between a man and a woman.

Join the discussion below, or Read more at Los Angeles Times.

Since: Apr 11

Los Angeles, CA

#40960 Apr 6, 2014
SevenTee wrote:
<quoted text>
I am a New Testament Christian.
There is a cure for that.

If you can take Christianity seriously after that...
SevenTee wrote:
The Judeo Christian culture is the culture that believes in Biblical truth and a Biblical world view of absolute Right and Wrong.
The Liberal is a jellyfish that changes with the direction of the wind. That is pretty weak minded and ignorant.
BTW I would be embarassed to admit I got sucked into the pathetic loser Hippie culture
Just Saying
Better to change with new knowledge than to stick to absurd believes despite the facts.

Since: Apr 11

Los Angeles, CA

#40961 Apr 6, 2014
Oooops, absurd beliefs.

Since: Apr 11

Los Angeles, CA

#40962 Apr 6, 2014
SevenTee wrote:
<quoted text>
There are many many passages in the Bible speaking out against homosexuality
There are many many passages in the Bible explaining what Marriage is
...
Rational people shouldn't have to care about that.
Think homosexuality is wrong? Well, that's your problem.
And the biblical idea of marriage?
Again, keep it to yourself.

Since: Apr 11

Los Angeles, CA

#40963 Apr 6, 2014
KiMare wrote:
<quoted text>
His idea? How about nature's?
I like it better than the gay idea of it being solely a contract dictated by the government and lawyers.
SMirk.
Marriage is a legal contract.
Legal contracts don't exist in nature.

Since: Apr 11

Los Angeles, CA

#40964 Apr 6, 2014
KiMare wrote:
<quoted text>
Ah, a combination of gay history and gay science...
Sorry Charlie, age, medical conditions and choice distinguish the rare instance where procreation is not a presumption of marriage.
With ss couples, there is NEVER not just a presumption, but there is never a POSSIBILITY of procreation!!!
Monster, you don't have to be able to procreate in order to marry. Ever. Period.

I don't know why idiots like you think using the caps lock key and multiple exclamation points makes up for your inability to reason.

Since: Apr 11

Los Angeles, CA

#40965 Apr 6, 2014
KiMare wrote:
<quoted text>
It is to society and the child's best interest to provide the closest expression of nature, a mother and a father.
If you are really concerned about the child, that is what you would pursue.
Rose's Law...
Frankie Rizzo

Hayward, CA

#40966 Apr 6, 2014
Xavier Breath wrote:
<quoted text>
Brian.... I don't know who you think you're kidding with your juvenile spin. Prop 8 REMOVED the already established right of gay couples in California to marry. To try to make it look like he was only supporting traditional marriage and NOT removing the rights of gay couples, is not going to pass the smell test of reality.
It also prevented any future right to polygamists in California to marry.

Since: Apr 11

Los Angeles, CA

#40967 Apr 6, 2014
KiMare wrote:
KiMare wrote:
<quoted text>
It is to society and the child's best interest to provide the closest expression of nature, a mother and a father.
Really? Closest expression of nature? They should eat the weak ones? Kill the monster mutations at birth?

Since: Apr 11

Los Angeles, CA

#40968 Apr 6, 2014
Pietro Armando wrote:
<quoted text>
Yes, still husband and wife.
<quoted text>
Just men AND women, modern sexual identity labels are irrelevant.
<quoted text>
What do they do?
<quoted text>
Human societies have done that throughout history. If SSM was such a vital component of society it would have existed cross time, cross place, and sustained itself over time and place.
All past societies are now gone. Perhaps they would have survived if they had gay marriage.

“Busting Kimare's”

Since: Feb 13

Clitty

#40969 Apr 6, 2014
Frankie Rizzo wrote:
<quoted text>
Wow. witty. So I suppose that's your best argument against gay polygamy?
Topix HomeGay/Lesbian

Topix > Gay/Lesbian > Forums & Polls > Gay marriage

Gay marriage

Since: Apr 11

Los Angeles, CA

#40970 Apr 6, 2014
Pietro Armando wrote:
<quoted text>
Delicious over pasta.
<quoted text>
Tell us why men and women aren't interchangeable androgynous beings?
WTF?
Pietro Armando wrote:
<
As to marriage rights, men and women HAVE equal rights,
Using the caps lock key doesn't help make your lie true.
Men and women do not have equal rigths.
A man can marry a woman, but a woman can't marry a woman.
A woman can marry a man, but man can't marry a man.
!=
Pietro Armando wrote:
<
the right to marry, enter into a legally recognized union of husband and wife.
<quoted text>
Because a man is not a woman, thus he physically cannot marry a man like he can marry a woman.
Because a woman is not a man, thus she physically cannot marry a woman like she can marry a man.
So, you admit men and women don't have equal rights?
Pietro Armando wrote:
<
Oh wait, there's no rational argument for same sex gay marriage.
Equal protection.
Only one needed.

Since: Apr 11

Los Angeles, CA

#40971 Apr 6, 2014
Brian_G wrote:
<quoted text>They hounded a Silicon Valley CEO out of business because six years ago he donated to a campaign to make one man and one woman the definition of marriage in his state's Constitution.
Boo hoo.

The guy has more money than some countries.
Brian_G wrote:
Do you still believe they are motivated by love and compassion or how do you explain all the hate, insults, family references and profanity?
I don't give a damn what they are motivated by.
This is a civil rights issue, not a romance novel.
I hate you, so what?
Does that mean people should be denied equal protection under the law?
Think my hatred of you, and people like you will, come up in any of the court cases?
"Your honor, the Equal Protection clause of the 14th Amendment should be ignored because Rose hates Brian."
Dingy sheprick

Harrodsburg, KY

#40972 Apr 6, 2014
Dusty Mangina wrote:
<quoted text>
Were you tumescent when you typed that? Yeah, I thought so. You do so enjoy thinking about erect penises.
And you calls your self a mangina? Get this, when people write about putting peckers in mouths and butts they is really talking abut what makes a gay a gay. I nose some of you gays would like for the normasl to just forget about how diffarant your sex thang is. You can't talk about any thang homeysexual without talking about what you gays dose. So don't git your drawers in an uproar when someone rites the truth about yous.

Judged:

16

16

16

Reply »
Report Abuse Judge it!

Since: Apr 11

Los Angeles, CA

#40973 Apr 6, 2014
KiMare wrote:
<quoted text>
Yeah, variations in skin color are just the same as gender distinctions and orientation...
Didn't say that, monster.
KiMare wrote:
Honey, I suggested a long time ago you let the men discuss this and you ask your dad to explain things to you.
Are you a man?
You have XX chromosomes, right?

Since: Apr 11

Los Angeles, CA

#40974 Apr 6, 2014
Dingy sheprick wrote:
<quoted text> And you calls your self a mangina? Get this, when people write about putting peckers in mouths and butts they is really talking abut what makes a gay a gay.
Actually, most people who do that are straight women.
Your mom has likely swallowed and given guys a back stage pass at least once.
And as far as having sex goes, don't knock it until you've tried it.

“Headed toward the cliff”

Since: Nov 07

Tawas City, Michigan

#40975 Apr 6, 2014
Frankie Rizzo wrote:
<quoted text>
Red herring. I am asking "why?" you are answering "when?" To try to get me to argue that straw man because you have no valid reason why.
You are also arguing that since polygamy is illegal, that is proof that it should be illegal. That's a fallacy son. A circular argument.
Prop 8 was voted in by the people and overturned by a judge. It was rightfully overturned but it doesn't match your insistence that polygamy must be popular to become legal. All polygamy needs is what you had, sympathetic judges. It doesn't necessarily need public approval to be a good and Constitutional law.
Now you're gonna say "polyga-marriage" bla bla bla! I hate Frankie! He advocates legalized mass child rape! Bla bla bla! Young girls raped by the thousands! bla bla bla. SSM GOOD! Polygamy BAD BAD BAD!
YUK!YUK!YUK! Ah good times you are such a loser.
Spare us. Get a real argument.
The "why" is because society is opposed to polygamy being legal.

It's the same "why" that inter-racial marriage was illegal, and the same "why" that same-sex couples were banned from marrying.
Nine Ball

Harrodsburg, KY

#40976 Apr 6, 2014
lides wrote:
It's interesting, isn't it, how there are multiple unregistered trolls posting from Harrodsburg, KY, and that each one seems to suffer from a similar lack of facility with the English language?
Thar ain't but one of me. Old Dusty Mangina done took a name what meens a feller what tucks his thangs down thar between his legs so that he looks like a woman. When I rites to him I uses something like dingy sheprick. I thought that he would relate better to it.

Judged:

16

16

16

Reply »
Report Abuse Judge it!

“Busting Kimare's”

Since: Feb 13

Clitty

#40977 Apr 6, 2014
Dingy sheprick wrote:
<quoted text> And you calls your self a mangina? Get this, when people write about putting peckers in mouths and butts they is really talking abut what makes a gay a gay.
I know, like when my brother does that to his wife. She's SOOOOOOOO gay.

“Headed toward the cliff”

Since: Nov 07

Tawas City, Michigan

#40978 Apr 6, 2014
Frankie Rizzo wrote:
<quoted text>
If we cannot ban SSM because of moral disapproval, we cannot ban polygamy because of moral disapproval .
Then we cannot ban robbery or rape or murder or anything else because of moral disapproval either.

“equality for ALL means ALL”

Since: Jan 07

Fort Lauderdale FL

#40979 Apr 6, 2014
KiMare wrote:
KiMare wrote:
<quoted text>
His idea? How about nature's?
I like it better than the gay idea of it being solely a contract dictated by the government and lawyers.
SMirk.
<quoted text>
Only for gay relationships is there no such thing as 'nature's idea'.
For marriage, it is the social structure that supports a man and woman raising the fruit of their union. That is something your relationship will never experience.
See the difference?
No, because you're side stepping.

Nature has no "idea" about marriage. Period.

I'd say "nice try" but it wasn't.

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.

California Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
News BARACK OBAMA BIRTH CERTIFICATE: Suit contesting... (Jan '09) 1 hr Roger Dat 240,798
News Essential Politics: California Democrats plot T... 4 hr tomin cali 3
News That gas tax hike? Ita s not enough to fix Cali... 21 hr C Kersey 2
News California Democratic chair race angers 'Bernie... 23 hr kuda 8
News California Democrats take aim at Trump, GOP Con... Sun Proud Deplorable 2
News California Democrats open convention with eye o... Sun WEDONTKNOW 4
News California lawmaker pulls bill on Cold War-era ... Sat joe 8
More from around the web