Judge overturns California's ban on same-sex marriage

Mona Lott wrote:

<quoted text>
Excuse me? If YOU don't like what public schools teach, you are free to homskool your spawn. Public schools do not exist to teach your religious based prejudices.

You are an IDIOT ... if you can't keep up with the conversations then STFU. you are mis ... never mind ..

Mona Lott wrote:

<quoted text>
So homosexuality is a religious belief, is it? I guess you must be studying up to convert then, eh? How many months have you been posting in these forums? Your persistence is indicative of more than just a passing curiosity.

Pleas you IDIOT, STFU ...

Rational Adult wrote:

Hey Doc,
I guess Dr Robert Spitzer has had an amazing change of heart........he's apologize for being wrong about a "cure". Here's the article for ya:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2012/may/19/p...

By the way.......it would have been a little difficult for me personally to fight against slavery or interracial marriage seeing as I wasn't born yet for the fight against slavery and only about 4 years old when the fight for interracial marriage was taking place!!!

lides wrote:

<quoted text>
How is allowing equal protection of the laws “pushing/forcing the issues of homosexuals on the general public.”
<quoted text>
You’ve yet to indicate a concrete link between allowing same sex marriage and school curricula that would make this point relevant.
<quoted text>
Can you indicate a compelling state interest served by denying same sex couples the right to marry? I don’t think you can.
<quoted text>
No I would not, but that is not an issue, since congress (federal or state) may not make a law respecting an establishment of religion. It appears that you are trying to change the subject again.
<quoted text>
I am not judging, you are. What is more, I am not Christian, so I am not bound by the rules of your bible. I do, however believe in the US Constitution, which guarantees equal protection of the laws.
<quoted text>
I don’t purport to be Christian. Ergo, Christian rules do not apply to me. Riccardo regularly makes arguments of Christianity, but does not seem to follow the tenants of same.

Can you please keep up?? pay attention to whtat I am saying, this is why you are saying that I am changing the subject. KEEP UP IDIOT

Mona Lott wrote:

<quoted text>
Two DOESN'T equal three. Call me ignorant all you want. One thing I'm NOT ignorant about is math.

How about... You are stupid

Silent Assassins wrote:

<quoted text>Sure, Rnl2008, but lesbians still chose to be gay.

Nice try, but it won't work.......I don't post greybox like you do doc.......lol!!!

The Corbomite Maneuver wrote:

Hey doc, stop posting to yourself......ya know that's a sign of a sick mind.......lol!!!

Queers and Steers and Bull Dykes.

akpilot wrote:

<quoted text>
What a bunch of BS. If it wasn't for all the benefits related to marriage- benefits which shouldn't even exists- there would be no fight.
This isn't about marriage, anyone can unite themselves with another, this includes financial, living, you name it- businesses do it all the time. This has everything to do with looking for benefits.
BTW, there was nothing wrong with anything you said about elimination until you got to the local level. There is no Constitutional authority for the government to maintain our road system. Jefferson wanted to, he went so far as to request a Constitutional Amendment be drafted by Congress to allow him to do so, he didn't get it. He also wanted that Amendment to include federal funding of an educational system. Go learn some history, we don't need the federal government running our lives.

So you are saying any couple can unite and file joint tax returns, receive health benefits from their spouse, inheriting their spouses estate, receive their spouses social security benefits, if it is a gay marriage? I think that is what this is about. Same sexes cannot do this. Yes, much of this is financial, but also legal rights to be recognized equally for gay couples the heterosexual couples already have.
I do know there is no Constitutional authority for government to maintain our roads. What I was attempting to point out is the affect if many government jobs were eliminated, such as many on the local level.

Rational Adult wrote:

<quoted text>Hey, thenyou better get to bouncing your sick lefthanded wife and niece, because according to you lefthanded is unnatural. Besides, left brain, have you ever seen a right handed animal. Boy, you are stupid.

Satire is lost on you, but I'm the stupid one.

Read, comprehend, then post.

I say let's give the pervs & freakazoids what they want! They're so fucking messed up in the head that they can't distinguish right from wrong, so let them learn it for themselves! Homosexuality & promiscuity are the biggest contributors of AIDS & other deadly STDs. Let them have their fudge packing (or rug munching) & buttsex in their bedrooms. For those of you who are straight, I recommend you say away from the bisexuals & the "bi-curious" people, because they will more than likely infect you with the diseases of the homo. Let them have their ways with our children & see how they much our children despise them. Give or take 10 years, then we will see the Gay Mafia & the whole GLBT community crumble because of their perverted sick lifestyle. The promisciouty rate will be so high & the lack of morals are only going to contribute to the deadly lifestyle. Then we will see the children of the freaks turn against them using their own twisted morals. Nature has a way of balancing things out. AIDS was one them, so I'm pretty sure nature has an even worst & bigger bug in mind for the homos & their odd ways of sex, & it will be ashame to see innocent people die because of it. Either way, the pervs are going to be held responsible for the next STD epidemic.

thisGuy wrote:

I say let's give the pervs & freakazoids what they want! They're so fucking messed up in the head that they can't distinguish right from wrong, so let them learn it for themselves! Homosexuality & promiscuity are the biggest contributors of AIDS & other deadly STDs. Let them have their fudge packing (or rug munching) & buttsex in their bedrooms. For those of you who are straight, I recommend you say away from the bisexuals & the "bi-curious" people, because they will more than likely infect you with the diseases of the homo. Let them have their ways with our children & see how they much our children despise them. Give or take 10 years, then we will see the Gay Mafia & the whole GLBT community crumble because of their perverted sick lifestyle. The promisciouty rate will be so high & the lack of morals are only going to contribute to the deadly lifestyle. Then we will see the children of the freaks turn against them using their own twisted morals. Nature has a way of balancing things out. AIDS was one them, so I'm pretty sure nature has an even worst & bigger bug in mind for the homos & their odd ways of sex, & it will be ashame to see innocent people die because of it. Either way, the pervs are going to be held responsible for the next STD epidemic.

So,how long have you had brain damage retardo? And is it organic or did somebody shoot you in the head to cause it? yes oh great ignorant one,we're sure lucky that Heteros don't ever get STD's or the H.I.V. virus? Now if you stuck your head in an oven that would indeed be a very good way to balance it out! LOL,And make the world a better place with one less sicko such as yourself! Skedaddle now as I just heard that old familiar cock roach curfew bell a ringing!

The only "kids" gays can have are little turds of shit, which they make after fudge packing their "partner" fudge even further into their intestines. It only shows that their lifestyle is shit, literally

Bill Of Rights wrote:

<quoted text>
So,how long have you had brain damage retardo? And is it organic or did somebody shoot you in the head to cause it? yes oh great ignorant one,we're sure lucky that Heteros don't ever get STD's or the H.I.V. virus? Now if you stuck your head in an oven that would indeed be a very good way to balance it out! LOL,And make the world a better place with one less sicko such as yourself! Skedaddle now as I just heard that old familiar cock roach curfew bell a ringing!

U MAD BRO?

Bill Of Rights wrote:

<quoted text>
So,how long have you had brain damage retardo? And is it organic or did somebody shoot you in the head to cause it? yes oh great ignorant one,we're sure lucky that Heteros don't ever get STD's or the H.I.V. virus? Now if you stuck your head in an oven that would indeed be a very good way to balance it out! LOL,And make the world a better place with one less sicko such as yourself! Skedaddle now as I just heard that old familiar cock roach curfew bell a ringing!

psycho-
A liberal who, or gay / lesbian that, is so obsessed with something that they believe it to be the only right/correct/proper/acceptabl e thing, believes that their way is never wrong nor does anything wrong, believes all other ways are wrong/evil/misguided/unaccepta ble and seeks to shove their belief down your throat because they believe you are in need of being educated, converted, saved, etc. They are always close-minded and unable to think for themselves. They simply follow and try to spread whatever screwed-up ideology they were too weak-minded to save themselves from.

liberal douchebag:

A Democrat, social parasite, or self-described 'progressive' who feels more comfortable having others do their thinking for them. The vast majority of positions espoused by liberal douchebags are merely re-repeatings of things heard from other, more vociferous liberal douchebags. Liberal douchebags are incapable of logical thinking. There are only three requirements for being a liberal douchebag:

1. You must be superior to all others (and you must incessantly announce your perceived intelligence to the point where everyone knows you are actually a liberal douchebag, i.e. "Liberals are smarter because of the direct ingestion of same-sex genitalia."

2. You must not have any ACTUAL accomplishments in life. Anyone who has actually accomplished anything in life would have nothing to do with a liberal douchebag social parasite.

3. You MUST be untalented AND hateful to become a liberal douchebag.
American_Patriot is a liberal douchebag because he feels he needs to interject his views into EVERY area of politics, including those areas in which he has voiced opposition to or disagreement with.

OR

Liberal douchebags, like American_Patriot, whine and cry about how unfair the world is because they are losers who prefer society solve their problems. Then they use names like American_Patriot because they cannot handle the psychological pain of being such a loser.

The Great Sly_Clyde wrote:

<quoted text>Can a state pass a law that goes against the Constitution? Can say Utah, pass a law that states Mormonism is the state religion and requires all its citizens to be Mormon?

You have a very limited understanding of the Constitution. I would venture somewhere in the order of a 6th Grade comprehension level. That is the problem with the school system, they teach the Constitution out of a text book, taking little snippets and adding the opinion of the authors, rather than using the actual text and the words of the drafters.

In your example above with Utah, under the founders understanding of the Constitution, the State of Utah would be well within its right to do so. I already gave you numerous examples of States which had such laws, the founders took no issue with them. It wasn't until 1961 when the SCOTUS declared they knew better than the drafters as to the meaning of the words and ruled such practices to be "unconstitutional" completely ignoring over 100 years of accepted practice starting with the very men who drafted the document, men whom we must assume had the greatest understanding of the words contained within, far beyond anyone alive today.

The Constitution was drafted to protect the states and the citizens from the newly formed Federal Government. The States weren't interested in creating a government which would control them, and have power over them. Think about how stupid that sounds. What purpose would it serve? Remember, the Federal Government didn't form itself, it was formed by the States through their ratification of the Constitution. There was merely one section in that document which limited the power of the state- Article I Section 10- everything else was in regards to the powers or lack of for the Federal Government.

Now, why do we have a Bill of Rights? It wasn't to protect the rights of the citizen from "government", it was to protect the rights of the State and the Citizen from the Federal Government. To understand this you must read the transcripts of the State Ratification debates, most notably Massachusetts where the push for a Bill of Rights started and was even a condition for not revoking ratification, Virginia and New York followed suit. They felt the Constitution as drafted didn't limit the Federal Government enough, they wanted further protection. Madison argued against the Bill of Rights because he understood that the Constitution did not grant the Federal Government the enumerated powers to control ANY of the items the States were concerned with, thus there was no need for it. He went even further to warn that the addition of the Bill of Rights would lead some to feel that the Federal Government wasn't limited by Article I Section 8, for why would we need to outline certain items while leaving others out if in fact Article I Section 8 was to be read to enumerate specific powers with no room for deviation.(How right he was) It is because of Madison fear that he drafted the 9th and the 10th Amendments- to remove any doubt.

The state would have no interest in removing its power and giving it to the federal government. Do you think for an instant that New Hampshire which required all who were members of the State Legislature to be Protestant, for example, would vote to ratify an Amendment which would make that law null and void? It doesn't even make sense, and it wasn't the purpose. The purpose was to prevent the federal government from passing a law which stated that all citizens of ALL the states would be Protestant.

The States didn't fear themselves, they already had their own Constitutions, the didn't create nor did they ratify, a one size fits all Constitution which tossed 13 individual State Constitutions in the shredder.

lides wrote:

Procreation is neither a prerequisite for, nor a requirement of marriage. Infertile couples, who by definition are not “"fundamental" to our existence or survival” are regularly allowed to seek the legal protections of marriage.

You can't read can you?

Truth has no lib friends wrote:

<quoted text>
psycho-
A liberal who, or gay / lesbian that, is so obsessed with something that they believe it to be the only right/correct/proper/acceptabl e thing, believes that their way is never wrong nor does anything wrong, believes all other ways are wrong/evil/misguided/unaccepta ble and seeks to shove their belief down your throat because they believe you are in need of being educated, converted, saved, etc. They are always close-minded and unable to think for themselves. They simply follow and try to spread whatever screwed-up ideology they were too weak-minded to save themselves from.

Hey! Thank you for just describing yourself to a tee,douche bag! Please say hello to Herr Goebbels when you see him you friggin fascist goon! Now slither away or the giant can of RAID will come out and end your miserable existence! UmmK? LOL

Truth has no lib friends wrote:

liberal douchebag:
A Democrat, social parasite, or self-described 'progressive' who feels more comfortable having others do their thinking for them. The vast majority of positions espoused by liberal douchebags are merely re-repeatings of things heard from other, more vociferous liberal douchebags. Liberal douchebags are incapable of logical thinking. There are only three requirements for being a liberal douchebag:
1. You must be superior to all others (and you must incessantly announce your perceived intelligence to the point where everyone knows you are actually a liberal douchebag, i.e. "Liberals are smarter because of the direct ingestion of same-sex genitalia."
2. You must not have any ACTUAL accomplishments in life. Anyone who has actually accomplished anything in life would have nothing to do with a liberal douchebag social parasite.
3. You MUST be untalented AND hateful to become a liberal douchebag.
American_Patriot is a liberal douchebag because he feels he needs to interject his views into EVERY area of politics, including those areas in which he has voiced opposition to or disagreement with.
OR
Liberal douchebags, like American_Patriot, whine and cry about how unfair the world is because they are losers who prefer society solve their problems. Then they use names like American_Patriot because they cannot handle the psychological pain of being such a loser.

Thank GOD! One more strike and poof,you are gone for good! LOLOLOL