Judge overturns California's ban on s...

Judge overturns California's ban on same-sex marriage

There are 201878 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.

M rules

Covina, CA

#230845 May 28, 2014
And the beat goes on!

So all you lame detractors stand aside a take a seat, you know on that thing you have been using for a brain.
Funny stuff

Roslyn Heights, NY

#230848 May 28, 2014
M rules wrote:
Remember Majority rules
Not in the looney bin.
M rules

Covina, CA

#230849 May 28, 2014
And the beat still goes on!

So all you lame detractors stand aside a take a seat, you know on that thing you have been using for a brain.

“KiMare'a the Monster Mutation”

Since: Nov 10

Location hidden

#230850 May 28, 2014
I simply note that marriage has historically and cross culturally described a relationship between a man and woman, primarily to raise their children.

Neither of these primary characteristics describe a ss couple. Because those characteristics are each significant in their own right, a ss couple will always appear inferior in comparison. Demanding a word that makes their relationship a lie compared to real marriage.

I think that it is a foolish attempt to gain acceptance that will only accomplish the opposite.

SMile.
Sgt Peppers

Gardnerville, NV

#230851 May 28, 2014
Why doesn't the Covina Crackpot & Craven Coward go back to San Dingbat?
Dee Sterling

Covina, CA

#230852 May 28, 2014
See Mees are good for what - texas
America

Covina, CA

#230853 May 28, 2014
May 2014 Utah Senator Hatch: Gay Marriage Will Become Law of the Land, where you have freedom and choices.

“KiMare'a the Monster Mutation”

Since: Nov 10

Location hidden

#230854 May 29, 2014
America wrote:
May 2014 Utah Senator Hatch: Gay Marrage Will Become Law of the Land, where you have freedom and choices.
Ss marrage is inferior to marriage. Always only ever will be.

Smile.

“Vita e' Bella.”

Since: May 12

Location hidden

#230855 May 29, 2014
America wrote:
May 2014 Utah Senator Hatch: Gay Marriage Will Become Law of the Land, where you have freedom and choices.
Does that include lesbian throuples?

lides

“No Headline available”

Since: Jan 08

Defiance, Ohio

#230856 May 29, 2014
Pietro Armando wrote:
Does that include lesbian throuples?
No, it does not.

Polygamy is not legal anywhere in the US.

Do try to keep up.

It might help your understanding of basic concepts if you were to learn to count.
Wondering

Tyngsboro, MA

#230857 May 29, 2014
lides wrote:
<quoted text>
No, it does not.
Polygamy is not legal anywhere in the US.
Do try to keep up.
It might help your understanding of basic concepts if you were to learn to count.
Correct, they are adult citizens being denied their fundamental rights.
The "count" part continues to be irrelevant and hilarious. These rights are extended to individuals. Keep up the stupidity, it becomes you.
Rancho Navarre

Honolulu, HI

#230858 May 29, 2014
The Domestic Violence risk is around twice as high in gay relationships (+/- 40%) as in heterosexual relationships (+/-20%).
People living in this degraded condition don't want anyone to know these facts, because they're trying REALLY HARD to make their bullshit real and acceptable. I'm sorry to be so harsh on this, but I've been to see something I WON'T describe... and i'm NEVER GOING BACK!!! EVERRRRR!!!
-scare you to death, man.
F choice

Covina, CA

#230859 May 29, 2014
What's your problem?

Haven't you ever heard of freedom of choice?

Since: Nov 12

Elk Grove, CA

#230860 May 29, 2014
Rancho Navarre wrote:
The Domestic Violence risk is around twice as high in gay relationships (+/- 40%) as in heterosexual relationships (+/-20%).
People living in this degraded condition don't want anyone to know these facts, because they're trying REALLY HARD to make their bullshit real and acceptable. I'm sorry to be so harsh on this, but I've been to see something I WON'T describe... and i'm NEVER GOING BACK!!! EVERRRRR!!!
-scare you to death, man.
What is your suggestion?

“Vita e' Bella.”

Since: May 12

Location hidden

#230861 May 29, 2014
lides wrote:
<quoted text>
No, it does not.
Polygamy is not legal anywhere in the US.
Do try to keep up.
It might help your understanding of basic concepts if you were to learn to count.
If two lesbians constitute "marriage", why not three? There's no compelling reason, once conjugality is expended as the basis for legal marriage , that monogamy must be retained. After all, "love makes a family", and three lesbians, one of whom is artificially inseminated, can just as easily be a family as two lesbians, one of whom is artificially inseminated.

lides

“No Headline available”

Since: Jan 08

Defiance, Ohio

#230862 May 29, 2014
Pietro Armando wrote:
If two lesbians constitute "marriage", why not three?
I see you are still having difficulty counting or understanding the very meaning of equality Pietro.
Pietro Armando wrote:
There's no compelling reason, once conjugality is expended as the basis for legal marriage , that monogamy must be retained.
Pietro, does any state allow three or more people to legally enter into one marriage?
Pietro Armando wrote:
After all, "love makes a family", and three lesbians, one of whom is artificially inseminated, can just as easily be a family as two lesbians, one of whom is artificially inseminated.
Sorry, kiddo, learn to count, and find a valid argument. Your tiresome arguments of polygamy are irrelevant, lack a rational basis, and merely prove that you have difficulty understanding what equal means.

lides

“No Headline available”

Since: Jan 08

Defiance, Ohio

#230863 May 29, 2014
Rancho Navarre wrote:
The Domestic Violence risk is around twice as high in gay relationships (+/- 40%) as in heterosexual relationships (+/-20%).
Can you remotely begin to back up these "facts"?
I don't think you can.

“Vita e' Bella.”

Since: May 12

Location hidden

#230864 May 29, 2014
lides wrote:
<quoted text>
I see you are still having difficulty counting or understanding the very meaning of equality Pietro.
I see you dodged the question.
Pietro, does any state allow three or more people to legally enter into one marriage?
Another dodge.
Sorry, kiddo, learn to count, and find a valid argument. Your tiresome arguments of polygamy are irrelevant, lack a rational basis, and merely prove that you have difficulty understanding what equal means.
And the hat trick, the trifecta, three peat.....

Why if two lesbians constitute "marriage", why not three?

If conjugality, male female or husband AND wife, is legally expendable as the basis for marriage, why should monogamy be retained?

lides

“No Headline available”

Since: Jan 08

Defiance, Ohio

#230865 May 29, 2014
Pietro Armando wrote:
I see you dodged the question.
No, Pietro, I exposed the depth of your ignorance.
Pietro Armando wrote:
Another dodge.
Nope, just more ignorance on your part.
Pietro Armando wrote:
And the hat trick, the trifecta, three peat.....
Why if two lesbians constitute "marriage", why not three?
If conjugality, male female or husband AND wife, is legally expendable as the basis for marriage, why should monogamy be retained?
Pietro, learn to count. Why your argument is irrelevant has been explained to you countless times (thank heaven it has been explained countless times, because clearly, you lack the ability to count them anyway.

The reality remains that every state has marriage between two people, and no state allows marriage between three or more. Such a change seeks greater, not equal protection of the law; whereas same sex marriage seeks equal protection of the law for two people.

I'm sorry you are too dumb to understand why your argument is inept and irrelevant. It must truly be difficult to go through life with such a mental handicap.
The Normal Majority

Sacramento, CA

#230866 May 29, 2014
Marriage IS NOT a "right"!

In this country "rights" can not be restricted.
If marriage was truly a "right" then the state could not limit marriage on any grounds. If marriage is a "right" then no age or family restrictions can exist as an example.

A woman could marry a young boy or girl! If marriage is a "right" then two children could marry each other.......what a mess that would be.

SO QUIT SAYING MARRIAGE IS A "RIGHT"!!!!!!!!!!

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) 57 min Dr Guru 240,348
News That gas tax hike? Ita s not enough to fix Cali... 2 hr Solarman 1
News John Kasich on Arnold Schwarzenegger endorsing ... 2 hr Solarman 1
News Essential Politics: Looking for a win by the 10... Mon Mitt s Santorum S... 1
News Gay marriage (Mar '13) Mon helmsenator 61,387
News News 11 Mins Ago California moves _ slowly _ to... Mon MountainHouse 8
Democrats likely in danger of losing a majority... Mon MountainHouse 3
More from around the web