Gay couples ask high court for marria...

Gay couples ask high court for marriage equality

There are 220 comments on the The Daily Democrat story from Feb 22, 2013, titled Gay couples ask high court for marriage equality. In it, The Daily Democrat reports that:

Choosing a broad legal strategy with national implications, gay marriage advocates on Thursday urged the U.S. Supreme Court to strike down California's ban on same-sex nuptials and declare all such state laws unconstitutional.

Join the discussion below, or Read more at The Daily Democrat.

Xavier Breath

Hoboken, NJ

#66 Feb 23, 2013
BS Detector wrote:
<quoted text> Emotion-laden? Seriously? That's simple ridicule!
what is "run in terror?"
BS Detector

La Puente, CA

#67 Feb 23, 2013
Xavier Breath wrote:
<quoted text> what is "run in terror?"
Sarcasm.

Uve

Since: Nov 12

Location hidden

#68 Feb 23, 2013
'Separate is not equal'..sounds pretty straight forward, only an idiot trying to make a bigoted point of view, would deny it.

“Luke laughs at hypocrites!”

Since: Sep 10

Palm Springs, California

#69 Feb 23, 2013
Jerry wrote:
<quoted text>Of course it is completely ludicrous to claim that marriage and something homsexual are the same thing in composition, characteristics, frequency even among homosexuals, and in effects on society.
The government has no rational interest in any legal homosexual relationship. No child is ever born as a direct result, no economically unequal genders are involved, and such relationships don't even form a basis of homosexual society much less of society in general.
Homosexuals have overwhelmingly rejected homosexual 'marriage' is every country that allows it.
And YOU,ALVIN, MAX, JAYCE, RAND, THRUTHSEEKER, CALEB, DAVID MOORE, JERRY, have overwhelmingly rejected using your one identity and think your endless stream of false lies is fooling someone.

And THANKS for ruining my favorite book about Abraham Lincoln, "Team of Rivals" by Doris Kearns Goodwin, where I read that Lincoln was nominated to run for congress in that sh*t hole PEKIN in like 1832 or so. I would have thought PEKIN was a mud hole back then, the way it is now. I mean what else can we expect from a town that allows trash like YOU to live in it? I never HEARD of Pekin till I got familiar with you. Really, all of Illinois is tainted by YOU being in it.

“Headed toward the cliff”

Since: Nov 07

Tawas City, Michigan

#70 Feb 23, 2013
BS Detector wrote:
<quoted text> Not at all. But you make up silly/dishonest crap all the time so why should you be expected to get anything right now?
Again, it's you. Why would I possibly give a damn about what you think, about me or anything else?
And yet you can't stop responding to my post as usual. You're obsessed with me because a) you can't refute any of my arguments, and b) I don't tolerate any of the BS you constantly spew.

Now prove to everyone once again just how much you don't care what I say or think by responding to yet another post of mine.

“Headed toward the cliff”

Since: Nov 07

Tawas City, Michigan

#71 Feb 23, 2013
BS Detector wrote:
<quoted text> I'm the same way. Clearly you don't deserve it and you feel the same about me. See? We CAN agree on something!
<quoted text> Oooo, you called me a bigot! Do you get a stiffy trying to sound butch and righteous? Was I supposed to be impressed or feel chastised?
You're wrong yet again.
Yes, we all agree you're a moron.

You can feel whatever you want.
Xavier Breath

Hoboken, NJ

#72 Feb 23, 2013
BS Detector wrote:
<quoted text> Sarcasm.
...and obviously completely lacking in emotion laden imagery, eh? Get bent.

Since: Mar 09

Location hidden

#73 Feb 23, 2013
Xavier Breath wrote:
<quoted text>Good idea
The same applies to the troll from Illinois but, sadly, many can't resist the temptation.(sigh)

Since: Mar 09

Location hidden

#74 Feb 23, 2013
Xavier Breath wrote:
<quoted text>
Your "agreement" is irrelevant. That's pretty much it.
Couldn't resist, huh? lol

Since: Mar 09

Location hidden

#75 Feb 23, 2013
WeTheSheeple wrote:
<quoted text>
Yes, we all agree you're a moron.
You can feel whatever you want.
... and wash your hands before you handle food.
reality

Girard, OH

#76 Feb 23, 2013
Gays should be allowed to "marry", but only when massed in large groups staged downrange during military exercises.
BS Detector

La Puente, CA

#77 Feb 23, 2013
WeTheSheeple wrote:
<quoted text>
And yet you can't stop responding to my post as usual. You're obsessed with me because a) you can't refute any of my arguments, and b) I don't tolerate any of the BS you constantly spew.
Now prove to everyone once again just how much you don't care what I say or think by responding to yet another post of mine.
Obsessed? With you? HAHAHAH!!!!!!!!!! Have you ever heard the line "...infused with vain and self conceit?" It's from Shakespeare. Richard III, I believe. As I have explained many times before, you are cheap entertainment (emphasis on the cheap), nothing more. Okay, so it may not be nice of me to ridicule the intellectually and emotionally challenged. And your closing gambit, "prove to everyone..." is more of your bullsh!t which I continually ridicule for my own amusement. Why should I deprive myself of the joy of humiliating you for my own amusement at your expense? One might query why you are obsessed with responding to *me* since all I do is ridicule you, expose you as a dishonest fraud, and generally make fun of you and your stupidity.

Ah, but you are allergic to reality, so I invite you to continue your delusion of adequacy and believe I am obsessed with you... for some reason that makes absolutely no sense, of course.

And you wonder why so many people don't like gays. You do your community a huge disservice.
BS Detector

La Puente, CA

#78 Feb 23, 2013
Xavier Breath wrote:
<quoted text>...and obviously completely lacking in emotion laden imagery, eh? Get bent.
Uh... I believe that's your department.

“Headed toward the cliff”

Since: Nov 07

Tawas City, Michigan

#79 Feb 23, 2013
BS Detector wrote:
<quoted text>
Obsessed? With you? HAHAHAH!!!!!!!!!! Have you ever heard the line "...infused with vain and self conceit?" It's from Shakespeare. Richard III, I believe. As I have explained many times before, you are cheap entertainment (emphasis on the cheap), nothing more. Okay, so it may not be nice of me to ridicule the intellectually and emotionally challenged. And your closing gambit, "prove to everyone..." is more of your bullsh!t which I continually ridicule for my own amusement. Why should I deprive myself of the joy of humiliating you for my own amusement at your expense? One might query why you are obsessed with responding to *me* since all I do is ridicule you, expose you as a dishonest fraud, and generally make fun of you and your stupidity.
Ah, but you are allergic to reality, so I invite you to continue your delusion of adequacy and believe I am obsessed with you... for some reason that makes absolutely no sense, of course.
And you wonder why so many people don't like gays. You do your community a huge disservice.
Yep, and your obsession with me continues......
BS Detector

La Puente, CA

#80 Feb 23, 2013
WeTheSheeple wrote:
<quoted text>
Yep, and your obsession with me continues......
Yep, and your lying continues.

Here's a question you're too stupid to answer honestly. Have I ever tried to convince you that you should adopt my position? And since you are demonstrably both stupid and dishonest, I'll even give you the answer. No, I have not.

And when there are so many true anti-gay types out there,n you and the other morons waste time with me simply because I support civil unions and/or domestic partnerships. That, to me, clearly shows your abject stupidity.

“No Headline available”

Since: Jan 08

Defiance, Ohio

#81 Feb 23, 2013
WeTheSheeple wrote:
Actually the core question is- "does sexual orientation rise to the level of a protected class".
Without an elevated level of scrutiny which comes from being declared a protected class, the other state bans will likely remain.
I'm not so sure heightened scrutiny is needed. I've yet to see anyone offer a rational basis for laws barring same sex couples from marrying that would allow those laws to stand under the lowest levels of judicial review. There simply is no legitimate state interest served by denying same sex couples equal protection of the law to marry.
Xavier Breath

Hoboken, NJ

#82 Feb 23, 2013
snyper wrote:
<quoted text>
Couldn't resist, huh? lol
It would have been a sin not to have walked through that door.

“No Headline available”

Since: Jan 08

Defiance, Ohio

#83 Feb 23, 2013
BS Detector wrote:
Yep, and your lying continues.
As does your continued inability to detect BS, as your avatar would have us believe. A more apt avatar would be BS Distributor.
BS Detector wrote:
Here's a question you're too stupid to answer honestly. Have I ever tried to convince you that you should adopt my position? And since you are demonstrably both stupid and dishonest, I'll even give you the answer. No, I have not.
Then why are you still posting?
BS Detector wrote:
And when there are so many true anti-gay types out there,n you and the other morons waste time with me simply because I support civil unions and/or domestic partnerships.
The reality remains that separate is inherently unequal. The court has already addressed that issue.
BS Detector wrote:
That, to me, clearly shows your abject stupidity.
Funny, I find your inability to articulate any reason why same sex couples require a separate institution to secure the same legal rights and protections clearly illustrates your own short-comings.
Xavier Breath

Hoboken, NJ

#84 Feb 23, 2013
BS Detector wrote:
<quoted text> Yep, and your lying continues.
Here's a question you're too stupid to answer honestly. Have I ever tried to convince you that you should adopt my position? And since you are demonstrably both stupid and dishonest, I'll even give you the answer. No, I have not.
And when there are so many true anti-gay types out there,n you and the other morons waste time with me simply because I support civil unions and/or domestic partnerships. That, to me, clearly shows your abject stupidity.
Um.... we waste time with you? What are you doing? Who is stupid?

Since: Jun 11

AOL

#85 Feb 23, 2013
BS Detector wrote:
<quoted text> What claim have I failed to demonstrate? That I haven't seen something?
I can't demean your character if you have shown none.
And again, nothing to support your assertions, just personal abuse.

I quoted the 5th and 14th amendments to the constitution, showing it says "no person" shall be deprived, "all persons" "nor shall any state deprive any person" "nor deny to "any person" the equal protection of the laws. "All persons" means every human. SCOTUS has also used this terminology, repeatedly affirming marriage is a fundamental right of the individual. Not some individuals, but all. They also use "all persons".

Being human is the only requirement for fundamental rights.

You fail to provide any governmental interest sufficient for denial of equal treatment to all persons.

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.

Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
News Street performers merit appeals court ruling - ... (Jun '09) Aug 25 District 1 16
News Lesbian couple in gay marriage case prepares fo... (Mar '13) Aug 23 2015 Shemitah 1,581
News U.S. Supreme Court denies Kevin Cooper's appeal (Nov '09) Aug 22 LisaO 33
News City to Pay $1.1 Million to Homeless for 'Discr... Aug 20 Walkin Boss 1
News Court upholds racial profiling injunction on Ar... Aug 14 Travis 3
News Illegal alien allegedly assaults 14-year-old girl Jul '15 tomin cali 1
News DOJ Blasted for Timing of News Story on Immigra... Jul '15 janetpatriot 3
More from around the web