Judge overturns California's ban on same-sex marriage

Aug 4, 2010 Full story: www.cnn.com 201,187

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.

Full Story
Frankie Rizzo

Union City, CA

#188896 Apr 16, 2013
woodtick57 wrote:
<quoted text>but sibling cannot get married now, regardless of their gender, so htat argument makes no sense.
if hte details of hte polygamous marriage are nto worked out, how can you say it would be equal? three wives getting the same survivor benefits for SS? not equal to my marriage...
"It's not equal to my marriage. "See how you are? No better than those against SSM.

Polygamy deserves the same respect and consideration that same sex marriage does.

Women receiving their husband's social security is so 20th century! Most women if not all work these days and get their own SS.

And two husbands can share their deceased wife's SS.

You are falling back on your dumb "it's too complicated" reason to deny equality. Heard it. It's bogus. Try again.
Frankie Rizzo

Union City, CA

#188897 Apr 16, 2013
heartandmind wrote:
<quoted text>
ok. so you stated your opinion. keep in mind, everyone has the same right as you to form their own opinion.
and i'm far from angry. strangers on the internet do not have that capacity to control my emotions. you just don't like being called out on your slipperly slope arguments as big d is doing.
Yes. You are angry. And why? Because I am making you see that you are using the same arguments against a form of marriage you don't you agree with as those against SSM use.

The slippery slope is real. But insignificant and not a reason to deny equal rights. Any arguments that it is not real are dumb.
Funkers

Covina, CA

#188898 Apr 16, 2013
The article, "How to Make a Bomb in the Kitchen of Your Mom," by "the AQ Chef" instructed would-be bombers to glue shrapnel to the inside of a pressure cooker and then fill in the cooker with the inflammable material.

“Vita e' Bella.”

Since: May 12

Location hidden

#188899 Apr 16, 2013
Big D wrote:
<quoted text>
You know me, I donít care about historically, historically Christians were murdered for sport and entertainment, historically protestants were burned at the stake for their beliefs, historically women were not allowed a vote and so on and so forth.
Big D.....its rather simple actually. Historically there are two sexes, historically humans reproduce sexually, historically both sexes are needed for that to happen, historically human societies have understood all of that....that's why marriage throughout time and place.... Boy girl.
Just because something used to be true, doesnít make it a good thing.
So sex between men and women no longer makes babies? There are no longer two sexes?
There are those that argued that slavery was a building block of society, numerous times through history in many civilizations.
How many have argued that sex between men and women doesn't make babies? Or argued there aren't two sexes?

So sex between men and women no longer makes babies?
Frankie Rizzo

Union City, CA

#188900 Apr 16, 2013
Big D wrote:
<quoted text>
It isnít that you arenít allowed to discuss it Frankie, you can say whatever you want here, and we can laugh at you for it, the same as you laugh at us for anything and everything we say. Donít pretend you donít it is far too late for that.
That isnít the point, the point is if you are going to use the decades old standard playbook against same sex marriage, word for word that we have been hearing for years... donít be too surprised when we call you on it.
But you are wrong. I genuinely support marriage equality. You claim I do not to avoid the truths I am making you feel. The inner Big D bigot so to speak. It makes you angry too. But that's on you. Don't shoot the messenger. Polygamy deserves the same respect and consideration that same sex marriage has. Y

Shall I repost your hateful spew regarding child molestations, welfare cheating and other sordid crimes you associate with a loving law abiding poly family? Or do you want to forget that?
Frankie Rizzo

Union City, CA

#188901 Apr 16, 2013
Big D wrote:
<quoted text>
My point is simple claiming to support same sex marriage or poly when you actually arenít is hypocritical
and this is from someone that would, and has voted for same sex marriage and will vote in favor of Poly if and when it ever comes up.
I am willing to wager I am more in favor of Poly than you are, it is just that you are more obsessed with the subject because you think you can use it against same sex marriage.
I am less interested in it because I donít think it will be possible for at least a decade. Same was true of same sex marriage 10 years ago.
You are afraid of polygamy, I am not. I will be happy to see it legalized. You won't be. The end.

Polygamy deserves the same respect and consideration as same sex marriage. And that makes you angry with me? Don't shoot the messenger.
Frankie Rizzo

Union City, CA

#188902 Apr 16, 2013
woodtick57 wrote:
<quoted text>if you want to change that law, go ahead, but it doesn't wash with the marriage equality argument...
Don't hog the movement dude! Marriage equality is not exclusive to same sex marriage. See how you are?

What don't you understand about equality? It means for all marriages. Not just ones you approve of.
Frankie Rizzo

Union City, CA

#188903 Apr 16, 2013
Big D wrote:
<quoted text>
That is the next paragraph in the decades old religious nut jobs pamphlet opposed to Same Sex marriage.
First you bring up Poly, then you move straight to Incest.
Ya ya... heard it all before.
You arenít scaring anyone other than those that are so brain bound by religion they would not be in favor of same sex marriage anyone, that argument wonít work on anyone with a pinch of intelligence left.
Your problem is you are playing to your constituency, those already opposed to same sex marriage, you wonít convince any of the majority to oppose same sex marriage with that kind of tactic.
Same reason Republicans arenít winning the presidency, they are playing only to their out of touch constituency and not the majority of voters.
I am not trying to scare anyone. I am not scared of poly and incest. Why are you?

Please get off your "Frankie's a liar" schtick. I am not trying to trick you. You are frustrated because you realize you are against marriage equality, Get angry with yourself, not me.
Frankie Rizzo

Union City, CA

#188904 Apr 16, 2013
heartandmind wrote:
<quoted text>
no where in the court cases was polygamy included or even discussed. it was not included. i'm not going to project and guess why or why not.
what we can discuss is what is really pertinent to the Prop 8 case - what is documented via court documents to be a consideration. that's the topic of this thread - the judge's findings in the Prop 8 trial.
if you want to discuss polygamy - then show us where in the court documents that it's discussed, included or mentioned. specifically.
If the other laws against polygamy were repealed but prop 8 stayed in force would polygamy be legal in California? No? Why not? Because prop 8 forbids it! Duh!

Prop 8 discriminates against poly the same as it does against same sex marriage. Or else it would say marriage is "only men and women" But it doesn't say that it says marriage is "only ONE man and ONE Woman"
Big D

Modesto, CA

#188905 Apr 16, 2013
Frankie Rizzo wrote:
<quoted text>
You are afraid of polygamy, I am not. I will be happy to see it legalized. You won't be. The end.
Polygamy deserves the same respect and consideration as same sex marriage. And that makes you angry with me? Don't shoot the messenger.
I never said I was angry with you, only sorry for you
Frankie Rizzo

Union City, CA

#188906 Apr 16, 2013
Big D wrote:
<quoted text>
Did you just switch sides? Are you now all of a sudden supportive of Same Sex marriage?
Or are you trying to nibble at specific laws that have nothing whatsoever to do with Prop 8 that you know would scare your constituency even more. Your problem isnít your constituency, the people you need to try and convince is everyone else.
The more outlandish you get, the more you look like a screaming fanatic... that works in some circles... but not where you need it.
From here... you look like you are getting desperate, and I suppose you should be.
If anyone acts like a screaming fanatic here, it's you.
Big D

Modesto, CA

#188907 Apr 16, 2013
Frankie Rizzo wrote:
<quoted text>
I am not trying to scare anyone. I am not scared of poly and incest. Why are you?
Please get off your "Frankie's a liar" schtick. I am not trying to trick you. You are frustrated because you realize you are against marriage equality, Get angry with yourself, not me.
I am not afraid of it, never was.

I would vote for it with a clear conscience if and when it comes up.

I am not frustrated, but you sure must be, your points are just falling apart right and left
Frankie Rizzo

Union City, CA

#188908 Apr 16, 2013
Big D wrote:
<quoted text>
Because we are a nation of Justice, Freedom and Equality, were justice is blind to Race, Creed, Color, Sex, Religion, Orientation or National Origin.
Because it is the right thing to do


It's SUPER D!!!
Frankie Rizzo

Union City, CA

#188909 Apr 16, 2013
Big D wrote:
<quoted text>
I am afraid mother nature is opposed to your position, homosexuality is common among many mammals.
Or are you arguing that any marriage is against mother nature, that is a better argument I suppose there are some monogamous mammals, but not nearly as many.
Had a gay dog once. Silly little f***er. Lived till he was 15. I miss that little flaming jackass. Cried a few tears when he died. He was so gay you expected flames to shoot out his ass at any minute! Broke the ice with women in the park how he used to carry on sniffing boy dog butt only.
Frankie Rizzo

Union City, CA

#188910 Apr 16, 2013
Big D wrote:
<quoted text>
I never said I was angry with you, only sorry for you
Frankie Rizzo

Union City, CA

#188911 Apr 16, 2013
Big D wrote:
<quoted text>
I am not afraid of it, never was.
I would vote for it with a clear conscience if and when it comes up.
I am not frustrated, but you sure must be, your points are just falling apart right and left
No they are not. Yours are. You cannot lie your way out. We see right through you. You are "as transparent as glass".

Judged:

14

14

14

Reply »
Report Abuse Judge it!
Funkers

Covina, CA

#188912 Apr 16, 2013
Maybe the convicted PONZI schemer Raymond Bitar gave his expert guidance to Chris Jeffers, Josh Betta and Jeff Kugel along with Douglas Tessitor and his thugster friends he has on it's city council.

Full Tilt gambling empire offshore Russian Mob controlled.
2 posts removed
Frankie Rizzo

Union City, CA

#188915 Apr 16, 2013
Big D wrote:
Which reminds me... Mother Nature is a great argument for Poly supporters.
Of which you are not.

Judged:

13

13

13

Reply »
Report Abuse Judge it!
Frankie Rizzo

Union City, CA

#188916 Apr 16, 2013
Big D wrote:
<quoted text>
You know me, I donít care about historically, historically Christians were murdered for sport and entertainment, historically protestants were burned at the stake for their beliefs, historically women were not allowed a vote and so on and so forth.
Just because something used to be true, doesnít make it a good thing.
There are those that argued that slavery was a building block of society, numerous times through history in many civilizations.
Any excuse to bring up Christian holocausts.

What happened Big D? Why are you so filled with hate?

Judged:

13

13

13

Reply »
Report Abuse Judge it!

Since: Dec 09

Knoxville, TN

#188917 Apr 16, 2013
Pietro Armando wrote:
<quoted text>
How about there's no rational reason to have it. None, niente....zip...how did western civilization survive into the 21st century, on this quaint notion that marriage is a union of husband and wife? Radical...before ya know it someone will suggesy that human reproduction is sexual. What a concept....sex between men and women makes babies. Who knows maybe one of those babies will grow up and call himself "Woodtick57"........ .hmmmmmm.....sounds like a steak sauce for insects.....
Do you think that if same-gender marriage becomes the law of the land here in the U.S., all of a sudden heterosexual couples will stop or slow down having babies?

Expanding marriage will not impact heterosexual marriages, nor will it impact the birthrate.

You guys keep throwing "children" at this issue and it simply has no place in the discussion.

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
Evolution vs. Creation (Jul '11) 4 min WhyAllTheFuss 120,852
Barack Obama, our next President (Nov '08) 4 min USAsince1680 1,125,321
'Fox News Sunday' to Host Kentucky Senate Debate (Oct '10) 4 min Nutz 158,750
Bachmann Gets Security Detail After Isis T... 5 min cancer suxs 12
Rahall-Jenkins House race remains tight 6 min Randall 37
Obama wants an election about the economy, not him 10 min Aprilvue 496
Teen's Shooting Highlights Racial Tension 11 min Ronald 3,306
The President has failed us (Jun '12) 17 min woodtick57 269,655
'White boy' Biden calls tea party 'crazy' 2 hr squeezers 203

US Politics People Search

Addresses and phone numbers for FREE