Gay marriage

Gay marriage

There are 61389 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.

“CO2 is Gaseous Love”

Since: Dec 08

Home, sweet home.

#8764 Nov 8, 2013
Asking homosexuals to rewrite marriage law is like asking atheists to rewrite your religious services.

lides

“No Headline available”

Since: Jan 08

Defiance, Ohio

#8765 Nov 9, 2013
Brian_G wrote:
The 19th Amendment is limited to the right to vote. It says nothing about gender equality.
Still trying to make that dog hunt, are you?

Brian, are you an idiot?

Does the 14th Amendment state that:
"All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the state wherein they reside. No state shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any state deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws."

There is not need for an equal rights amendment, the 14th Amendment allready covers the issue, you twit.

lides

“No Headline available”

Since: Jan 08

Defiance, Ohio

#8766 Nov 9, 2013
Pietro Armando wrote:
Equal protection applies to the individual, not couples.
Can a person marry absent another individual?

Congratulations, Pietro, you've just made yourself look dumber. I didn't think it was possible for you to do so.

lides

“No Headline available”

Since: Jan 08

Defiance, Ohio

#8767 Nov 9, 2013
Brian_G wrote:
Asking homosexuals to rewrite marriage law is like asking atheists to rewrite your religious services.
Asking for equality under the law is simply asking for what the constitution guarantees.

Have you come up with a way in which allowing same sex marriage infringes upon the rights of anyone who wouldn't enter into such a union, or are you still working on mastering walking and chewing gum at the same time?

Since: Mar 07

Location hidden

#8768 Nov 9, 2013
Brian_G wrote:
Asking homosexuals to rewrite marriage law is like asking atheists to rewrite your religious services.
You silly thing - gay folks aren't "re-writing" marriage laws - straight folks did that when they created all of the laws that specifically targeted gay couples for discrimination.

And the majority of folks pushing for positive change are straight.

Can't you at least START with the facts?
anonymous

Absecon, NJ

#8769 Nov 9, 2013
WeTheSheeple wrote:
<quoted text>
It's your choice to remain single.
Understood! You refuse to answer the question!
anonymous

Absecon, NJ

#8770 Nov 9, 2013
WeTheSheeple wrote:
<quoted text>
It's your choice to remain single.
Oh, yes! It's your choice to be gay!
anonymous

Absecon, NJ

#8771 Nov 9, 2013
WeTheSheeple wrote:
<quoted text>
Yes.
Get that bill introduced in Congress and all 50 state legislatures and I'll support it 100%.
In the meantime I'll continue to support marriage equality in every state.
And I won't! You don't seem to be interested in what is right, just personal ambition. I would not post here if raising the rabble was the formula. I'm only interested in getting things right.

lides

“No Headline available”

Since: Jan 08

Defiance, Ohio

#8772 Nov 9, 2013
WeTheSheeple wrote:
It's your choice to remain single.
From what I've read from anonymous, I am not sure it is entirely a choice. I can't imagine they can get anyone interested in dinner, much less a lifelong relationship. Actually, drinks would probably be pushing it.
anonymous

Absecon, NJ

#8773 Nov 9, 2013
WeTheSheeple wrote:
<quoted text>
Actually we have marriage equality in 15 states; that's 30% of the states, including 3 of the 5 most populous states with more than 1/3rd of all Americans living in a marriage equality state.
Hawaii will make #16 when they pass their bill today.
New Mexico will make #17 when their Supreme Court rules later this month.
Add AK, MT, ID, OR, NV, & AZ when the 9th circuit issues their ruling in early 2014.
That puts us to nearly 1/2 of all states.
But you're right, 1/2 is indeed a fraction.
Understood! It's a fraction now, and it will likely be one again because you don't present a legal argument, just a populist statistic that appeals to ignorant voters who just want to break things. Not interested in that battle.
Mikey

Fullerton, CA

#8774 Nov 9, 2013
anonymous wrote:
<quoted text>
Oh, yes! It's your choice to be gay!
Not a choice.. You choose to be straight?

lides

“No Headline available”

Since: Jan 08

Defiance, Ohio

#8775 Nov 9, 2013
Mikey wrote:
Not a choice.. You choose to be straight?
They choose to willingly be an uninformed imbecile.
Wondering

Tyngsboro, MA

#8776 Nov 9, 2013
lides wrote:
<quoted text>
Asking for equality under the law is simply asking for what the constitution guarantees.
When marriage law applies equally to every resident of any state the constitutional requirement has been met. People in all 50 states are always left with a choice.

lides

“No Headline available”

Since: Jan 08

Defiance, Ohio

#8777 Nov 9, 2013
Wondering wrote:
When marriage law applies equally to every resident of any state the constitutional requirement has been met. People in all 50 states are always left with a choice.
Yes, and bigoted idiots are at a loss to explain why limiting marriage to being between a man and a woman serves a state interest that would render such a restriction constitutional.

I see you have yet to grow up, grow a brain, or grow a rational argument. This is why those who hold an opinion similar to your own are so consistently losing in court.

“KiMare'a the Monster Mutation”

Since: Nov 10

Location hidden

#8778 Nov 9, 2013
lides wrote:
<quoted text>
Still trying to make that dog hunt, are you?
Brian, are you an idiot?
Does the 14th Amendment state that:
"All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the state wherein they reside. No state shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any state deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws."
There is not need for an equal rights amendment, the 14th Amendment allready covers the issue, you twit.
So marriage benefits are a right of every citizen apart from any condition?

“KiMare'a the Monster Mutation”

Since: Nov 10

Location hidden

#8779 Nov 9, 2013
lides wrote:
<quoted text>
Can a person marry absent another individual?
Congratulations, Pietro, you've just made yourself look dumber. I didn't think it was possible for you to do so.
On what basis do couples get special benefits over individuals.

“KiMare'a the Monster Mutation”

Since: Nov 10

Location hidden

#8780 Nov 9, 2013
lides wrote:
<quoted text>
Asking for equality under the law is simply asking for what the constitution guarantees.
Have you come up with a way in which allowing same sex marriage infringes upon the rights of anyone who wouldn't enter into such a union, or are you still working on mastering walking and chewing gum at the same time?
Only by dumbing down marriage to such a degree it opens a host of other issues.

“KiMare'a the Monster Mutation”

Since: Nov 10

Location hidden

#8781 Nov 9, 2013
Quest wrote:
<quoted text>
You silly thing - gay folks aren't "re-writing" marriage laws - straight folks did that when they created all of the laws that specifically targeted gay couples for discrimination.
And the majority of folks pushing for positive change are straight.
Can't you at least START with the facts?
How deceitfully short sighted.

Marriage laws originated to protect and provide for children and their mothers.

DOMA seeks to protect those provisions. Two men don't need those provisions you sissy.
Mikey

Fullerton, CA

#8782 Nov 9, 2013
KiMare wrote:
<quoted text>
How deceitfully short sighted.
Marriage laws originated to protect and provide for children and their mothers.
DOMA seeks to protect those provisions. Two men don't need those provisions you sissy.
Speaking of deceit..DOMA is bigotry into law..NOT protection.

“Headed toward the cliff”

Since: Nov 07

Tawas City, Michigan

#8783 Nov 9, 2013
anonymous wrote:
<quoted text>
Oh, yes! It's your choice to be gay!
Actually it's not.

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 The most powerful California governor will be t... 42 min Raydot 8
News Once slow-moving threat, global warming speeds ... (Dec '08) 1 hr Goofy alert 64,396
Taxing Internet Sales 2 hr ThomasA 3
News BARACK OBAMA BIRTH CERTIFICATE: Suit contesting... (Jan '09) 6 hr Chicagoan by Birth 243,211
News Gavin Newsom is the target as 6 candidates batt... 8 hr Solarman 1
Gov. Jerry Brown wants religious laws for clima... Sun TheThirdAngel144 3
News California is sitting on a surplus, but don't e... Sun Solarman 2
More from around the web