Gay marriage

Gay marriage

There are 61395 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.

“From a distance...”

Since: Apr 08

Planet Earth

#45513 May 8, 2014
Brian_G wrote:
The Second Section of the 14th Amendment explicitly recognizes male/female differences.
No it doesn't. It sets for the formula for determining apportionment of Congressional representatives based on male voters over the age of 21 in each state with a penalty for exclusion of any such people from voting. The male limitation was superseded by the 19th amendment and the age limitation was superseded by the 26th amendment.

Why do you lie, Brian?
Brian_G wrote:
If you thought it would replace the Equal Rights Amendment, which failed ratification, fool on you.
SCOTUS ruled sex is a quasi-suspect class under the equal protection clause of the 14th amendment nonetheless, so as usual it's YOU, Brian, who are misinformed.
Brian_G wrote:
The 14th Amendment was one of the Reconstruction Amendments written to repair the evil of slavery. It gives every citizen, gay or straight, equal rights before the law. It doesn't give anyone special rights to rewrite marriage law for everyone.
Actually in this case you're correct. The ability to have laws rewritten or overturned is a potential remedy that can be granted to citizens exercising their 1st amendment right to petition government to redress their grievances.

“"Not all who wander are lost."”

Since: Mar 10

[email protected]

#45514 May 8, 2014
Brian_G wrote:
The Second Section of the 14th Amendment explicitly recognizes male/female differences. If you thought it would replace the Equal Rights Amendment, which failed ratification, fool on you. The 14th Amendment was one of the Reconstruction Amendments written to repair the evil of slavery. It gives every citizen, gay or straight, equal rights before the law. It doesn't give anyone special rights to rewrite marriage law for everyone.
Inasmuch as only males citizens were allowed to vote, I don't see where it addresses what "marriage law" is.

Section 2. Representatives shall be apportioned among the several States according to their respective numbers, counting the whole number of persons in each State, excluding Indians not taxed. But when the right to vote at any election for the choice of electors for President and Vice President of the United States, Representatives in Congress, the Executive and Judicial officers of a State, or the members of the Legislature thereof, is denied to any of the male inhabitants of such State, being twenty-one years of age, and citizens of the United States, or in any way abridged, except for participation in rebellion, or other crime, the basis of representation therein shall be reduced in the proportion which the number of such male citizens shall bear to the whole number of male citizens twenty-one years of age in such State.

But the main agenda of the Fourteenth Amendment was to ensure that state cannot deprive its citizens of their rights guaranteed under the United States Constitution. In other words, a state cannot pass a federally unconstitutional law.
1 post removed

“I Luv Carbon Dioxide”

Since: Dec 08

Home, sweet home.

#45516 May 8, 2014
NorCal Native wrote:
Sorry to inform you of this but the 2nd section of the 14th Amendment does NO such thing!!!
Section 2. Representatives shall be apportioned among the several States according to their respective numbers, counting the whole number of persons in each State, excluding Indians not taxed. But when the right to vote at any election for the choice of electors for President and Vice President of the United States, Representatives in Congress, the Executive and Judicial officers of a State, or the members of the Legislature thereof, is denied to any of the male inhabitants of such State, being twenty-one years of age, and citizens of the United States, or in any way abridged, except for participation in rebellion, or other crime, the basis of representation therein shall be reduced in the proportion which the number of such male citizens shall bear to the whole number of male citizens twenty-one years of age in such State.[URL deleted] Outside of mentioning the age of males to vote.......where does it mention gender at all?
Our Constitution explicitly recognizes rights for males but not for females; the polar opposite of sex equality. This Amendment finds male and female rights so unequal, it doesn't deign to mention female, just reserves rights for males.

There is no gender equality or marriage equality right in the US Constitution; when polygamy was criminalized during the 19th century, that put a nail in the coffin of sex segregating marriage based on sexual orientation; else bisexuality justifies polygamy.

Judged:

14

13

13

Reply »
Report Abuse Judge it!
Xavier Breath

Hoboken, NJ

#45517 May 8, 2014
SevenTee wrote:
<quoted text>
If you think a gay marriage sicko believes in the differences between men and women you are delusional.
These pathetic perverts are so twisted and sick they actually think man on man is natural and perfectly acceptable.
And closet cases that spend their time ruminating about man on man sex and think they're fooling anyone are delusional.

Judged:

11

10

10

Reply »
Report Abuse Judge it!

“Busting Kimare's”

Since: Feb 13

Clitty

#45518 May 8, 2014
SevenTee wrote:
<quoted text>
If you think a gay marriage sicko believes in the differences between men and women you are delusional.
These pathetic perverts are so twisted and sick they actually think man on man is natural and perfectly acceptable.
Would you think a gay man having sex with your sister is natural and acceptable, or would you actually want more for her?

“Busting Kimare's”

Since: Feb 13

Clitty

#45519 May 8, 2014
SevenTee wrote:
<quoted text>
If you think a gay marriage sicko believes in the differences between men and women you are delusional.
These pathetic perverts are so twisted and sick they actually think man on man is natural and perfectly acceptable.
What's it to you? Seriously!?! Are gay men forcing to watch, or did you accidentally stumble upon that gay site?

Unless you're payin' the bills, what two men do in the privacy of their own bedroom is none of your damned business.

“"Not all who wander are lost."”

Since: Mar 10

[email protected]

#45520 May 8, 2014
Brian_G wrote:
<quoted text>Our Constitution explicitly recognizes rights for males but not for females; the polar opposite of sex equality. This Amendment finds male and female rights so unequal, it doesn't deign to mention female, just reserves rights for males.
There is no gender equality or marriage equality right in the US Constitution; when polygamy was criminalized during the 19th century, that put a nail in the coffin of sex segregating marriage based on sexual orientation; else bisexuality justifies polygamy.
Um, Brian, there are a few more amendments.

“Busting Kimare's”

Since: Feb 13

Clitty

#45521 May 8, 2014
Brian_G wrote:
<quoted text>Our Constitution explicitly recognizes rights for males but not for females; the polar opposite of sex equality. This Amendment finds male and female rights so unequal, it doesn't deign to mention female, just reserves rights for males.
There is no gender equality or marriage equality right in the US Constitution; when polygamy was criminalized during the 19th century, that put a nail in the coffin of sex segregating marriage based on sexual orientation; else bisexuality justifies polygamy.
Keep reading until the end of the amendments.

Since: Apr 11

Panorama City, CA

#45522 May 8, 2014
Christsharia Law wrote:
<quoted text>
Look Rose, tell us, just how big is your d!ck anyway? Just be honest and the trolls will leave you alone
For those who don't know "Christsharia Law" is all of those trolls. For some reason, he didn't realize that if he called me a man (I'm a woman), that it would be stupid to try to insult me by saying I'm well hung.
And he never posts about the subject, just a couple of posters he's obsessed with. I'm one of them. He follows me from forum to forum, changing his name and proxy, never posting about the subject, just asking how big my imaginary member is. LOLSER!

Since: Apr 11

Panorama City, CA

#45523 May 8, 2014
Bruno wrote:
<quoted text>
You are getting your info from the "Living Life as Homo 101 book" and you are a tranny
Provide some evidence I'm a tranny or grab your raisin size nuts and run away!

Since: Apr 11

Panorama City, CA

#45524 May 8, 2014
KiMare wrote:
<quoted text>
Well, Dick, I didn't assert that all homosexuals engage in anal sex. In fact, Dick, I didn't exempt any orientation. I simply used a primary expression of gay sex that equates to natural sex, and noted that it requires the violation of purpose and function requiring the intervention of condoms, enemas and lub to even begin to be safe.
So Dick, all of this still leaves ss marrage as inferior to the union of both genders that normally result in fruit. Sorry Dick.
Monster mutations are inferior to normal humans.
Sorry KiMare.

Since: Apr 11

Panorama City, CA

#45525 May 8, 2014
anonymous wrote:
<quoted text>
So.....you mention off-topic things to demonize your enemies and then make claims about my politics that aren't accurate.
Da gubbermint unfairly pays wages
Zzzz...

Since: Apr 11

Panorama City, CA

#45526 May 8, 2014
KiMare wrote:
<quoted text>
No Dick, what it comes down to is a ridiculous demand to impose an impostor relationship on marriage.
And you have only deceit and distortions Dick.
Smirk.
KiMare what it comes down to is a ridiculous demand you, a monster, be considered a normal human.

Since: Apr 11

Panorama City, CA

#45527 May 8, 2014
Brian_G wrote:
Ask the baker, photographer and florist what the government took from them; sex segregationist marriage means neighbor suing neighbor.
Denying people equal rights means means neighbor suing neighbor.
And, you stupid b!tch, gay marriage isn't "sex segregationist marriage". Segregation is imposed. Nobody will have to marry someone of the same sex if they don't want to.
Frankie Rizzo

Hayward, CA

#45528 May 8, 2014
Dusty Mangina wrote:
<quoted text>
So Frankie walks into a bar and orders two wives. The bartender tells him "look Mack, polygamy isn't legal here". Frankie then launches into a lengthy diatribe about marriage equality and polygamy. The bartender pulls out a pistol, puts it to his own temple and pulls the trigger.
YUK!YUK!YUK!YUK! Ah, Good times!
Good one! Was the bartender gay?

Judged:

12

12

12

Reply »
Report Abuse Judge it!

“Busting Kimare's”

Since: Feb 13

Clitty

#45529 May 8, 2014
Frankie Rizzo wrote:
<quoted text>
Good one! Was the bartender gay?
Not relevant.
Frankie Rizzo

Hayward, CA

#45530 May 8, 2014
Terra Firma wrote:
<quoted text>
The article didn't say taxpayers picking up the tab for a veteran's funeral, Brian. Are you complaining that veterans are given certain death related benefits like burial cemeteries or sections of cemeteries reserved for veterans?
<quoted text>
Who are you to presume to know what the deceased wife of someone else wanted, Brian? Maybe this is what the deceased really wanted and but wasn't able to undertake the lawsuit necessary to fight for it.
<quoted text>
Again, not your place or the state's to decide.
<quoted text>
Because the marriage law of Idaho contains an unconstitutional restriction that prevents recognition of the out of state marriage of the deceased.
<quoted text>
Obama doesn't determine what the constitution requires, Brian. The judicial branch does.
Yeah that's part of the package. Like when I finally die due to my service connected disabilities, much sooner than I should have, they'll bury me for free! That's a comfort. Ah good times! One less thing to worry about (as if I would).

But even if you live to a ripe old age, they'll bury you if you got an honorable discharge. Hence my whole fam-damily is in a VA cemetery. Makes it easy to visit once in a while.

Judged:

12

12

12

Reply »
Report Abuse Judge it!
Frankie Rizzo

Hayward, CA

#45531 May 8, 2014
Dusty Mangina wrote:
<quoted text>
Not relevant.
Oh. I was just asking because gays seem to be the most adamantly against marriage equality for polygamists of anybody else. So I figured the bartender shot himself because he didn't want to hear "polygamy" even mentioned.

Kind of ruined your joke I guess. Now I really don't get it! But I'll throw you a ha ha. Just for trying so hard.

Judged:

13

12

12

Reply »
Report Abuse Judge it!
Frankie Rizzo

Hayward, CA

#45532 May 8, 2014
Rose_NoHo wrote:
<quoted text>
Denying people equal rights means means neighbor suing neighbor.
And, you stupid b!tch, gay marriage isn't "sex segregationist marriage". Segregation is imposed. Nobody will have to marry someone of the same sex if they don't want to.
That's what I tell the rainbow peanut gallery about poly marriage. But they don't listen either! What are we gonna do with 'em Rose_BlowHole?

Judged:

16

16

16

Reply »
Report Abuse Judge it!

Since: Apr 11

Panorama City, CA

#45533 May 8, 2014
Brian_G wrote:
<quoted text>Does somebody feel offended when we write about taxpayers picking up the tab for her funeral? Why shouldn't we care about the deceased, already resting as she requested. Maybe there weren't meant rest side by side for eternity. They aren't married under the laws of Idaho.
Obama never claimed states don't have the right to define marriage as they please.

Your god can lick my c11t.

The 14th Amendment says all persons, even crap like you, should get equal protection.

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.

US Politics Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
News Donald Trump, pictured, was labelled 'divisive,... 1 hr John McCharlie 42
News Longtime GOP Texas Gov. Perry wins another term (Nov '10) 1 hr Defiant1 23,434
News The President has failed us (Jun '12) 1 hr NotSoDivineMsM 381,660
News Barack Obama, our next President (Nov '08) 1 hr Sue 1,375,295
News BARACK OBAMA BIRTH CERTIFICATE: Suit contesting... (Jan '09) 1 hr Topo 213,243
News West Virginia Mayor: The Clintons Are 'Simply N... 1 hr Pro-Coal 2
News Elephants perform for final time at Ringling Bros. 1 hr An NFL Fan 40
Election 'Fox News Sunday' to Host Kentucky Senate Debate (Oct '10) 2 hr Injudgement 222,983
News Violence follows California Trump rally, about ... 2 hr RustyS 510
News North Carolina's rush to bigotry 2 hr Time again 2,774
More from around the web