Judge overturns California's ban on same-sex marriage

Judged:

5

5

4

Brian_G wrote:

Its good to be able to read. Then you could read law and precedent and almost always be right. Does that explain why so many religious groups have such wonderful schools?

Judged:

5

5

5

RnL2008 wrote:

<quoted text>
You probably feel that the rights of Black Americans should have been put to a vote as well, right? or the rights of women to vote, right?
What happens when the vote is won at the ballot box in Washington and Maine this year?

Judged:

5

5

4

Pat wrote:

<quoted text>
Absolutely the courts should be deciding this issue because their rationale , unlike that of the "American people," is not steeped in bias, rather, it's based on constitutional law, and they've cited precedent in support of their decision. It is wholly irresponsible and unethical to allow people such as you to decide whether or not a US citizen, who happens to be gay or lesbian, can have the same opportunity to marry the person he/she chooses.
It may be temporary, but the trend is leaning toward it being permanent. Enjoy your prejudice while you can, it'll soon be gone.

Judged:

5

5

5

Prof Marvel wrote:

<quoted text>
First of all I'm not saying gays are pedophiles. I didn't use the word "little boys" so when you bring up "little girls" you deal in misdirection.
Secondly, as we see in Massachusetts the gay male opinion of male prostitution is entirely different from the hetero males opinion of female prostitution. No mainstream non-profit would ever carry ads for a female escort service, but in Massachusetts one of the largest youth health agencies (Cambridge Cares About AIDS) carries male escort services ads, such as "Rent-A-Boy."
Did you miss this or are you pretending you missed it?
Obviously, gays see nothing wrong with promoting "Rent-A-Boy" on a non-profit youth agency site. If fact, they cite the same logic as you do: "If there's nothing wrong with girl escort services, why is there something wrong with boy escort services?"
http://www.youtube.com/watch...
This, however, is not the question at all. The question is "What in the hell is Rent-A-Boy doing on the Cambridge Cares About AIDS youth agency site?"
http://www.ccaa.org/pump.html
Would it be too much to ask you to answer that?

Judged:

5

5

5

Brian_G wrote:

<quoted text>The electorate, the democratic process, self government lost - the side of government oppression won. It will increase court traffic, pay off lawyers and crony pals. New government marriage law from court mandate.
It's not right, no matter who you are.

Judged:

5

5

5

Prof Marvel wrote:

<quoted text>
Oh, I see -- it boils down to how two judges interpret the law: if they decide Prop 8 is Unconstitutional, the people who support Prop 8 are stupid.
What happens when SCOTUS decides 5-2 in favor of Prop 8?
Who will you be calling "stupid" then, Sue -- the LGBT community, the two judges, or the gay hair-stylists you work with in that beauty salon in the Bronx?

Judged:

5

5

5

Pat wrote:

<quoted text>
I would say its christian fundamentalists or christian literalists who are archaic in their belief and/or ideals. There are many christians who don't believe that gays and lesbians should be discriminated against.

Judged:

5

5

5

windsome wisdom of ELH wrote:

LOL, you do love reveling in your own idiocy don't you?
<quoted text>
Um...Like so many of your idiotic "example", this is just another desperate attempt to make the faulty information you base your reality on make sense.
The fact is that if some one who has attained the age of majority (for example an 18 year old male) has sex with someone who is underage (a 15 year old female) AND a third party (the minors parents) REPORT it. The 18 year old would be charged with RAPE not pedophilia. That's because sex sex between willing teenagers/young adults is not pedophilia, Pedophilia is RAPE or molestation of a CHILD or (more likely) a series of children by a sexual PREDATOR,.
And BTW, no matter how much shite you toss hoping that some of it will stick an "argument" based on faulty logic will always end in a FALSE conclusion.

Judged:

5

5

5

Prof Marvel wrote:

<quoted text>
I must say, Joe, the quote you give us directly above reads like something someone of your backwoods education would propose.
Earlier I made the point homosexuality is a scientific nomenclature while pedophilia a legal one. I thought this observation rather insightful; no matter, its cleverness went right over your head, Joe.
In the state of Massachusetts the age of consent is 16; in New York 18; in Somalia, 12. Obviously, the science involved in each is scant. Meanwhile, male-to-male sex is called homosexuality at each location and that's because we're talking about a biological phenomena that's replicable and discrete.
You LGBT fellows seek to change this. You want us to throw out the scientific component and keep the legal one. You want this because your agenda posits no homosexual has ever molested a child.
And, here, I'll pause, Joe, to give you a time to catch up ...

Judged:

7

7

7

windsome wisdom of ELH wrote:

<quoted text>
You do know that citizens can not vote laws that violated existing laws into being?
And that marriage equality is law in many civilized countries?
LOL, you probably can't find Dubai on a world map either...
In other words YOU don't know a flucking thing about any number of issues and are basing your comment on crap you read on some nutty conservative website.
In the future you can avoid sounding an ignorant hillbilly spewing propaganda by educating yourself. Please do so before posting again. THANKS so much!

Judged:

5

5

5

Prof Marvel wrote:

<quoted text>
First of all, you moron, no one has ever been charged with pedophilia, because that's a clinical condition, not a statutory law.
The violation of laws pedophiles are charge with are child sexual abuse or molestation, child exploitation, child pornography, incest, kidnapping, statutory rape, or the prostitution of minors -- the very crimes you stupidly use in your example as charges that are not pedophilia charges.
The bottom line is, when an adult has sex with a person under the age of consent our legal system lists him as a "pedophile."
It doesn't matter if he's 18 and his girlfriend a day shy of 18, if he's convicted of having sex with her, he goes down in the books as a pedophile.
You may be familiar with the program "To Catch a Predator." All of the dudes roped-in were branded pedophiles, sent to jail, and assigned the same restrictions all clinical pedophiles are -- no access to children, reporting to local authorities when moving into their neighborhoods, pedophile therapy, restricted access to their own children or grandchildren, etc.
Our legal system does not make the distinction you moronically posit above.

Judged:

7

7

7

windsome wisdom of ELH wrote:

The thing that is NOT RIGHT is your endless bumper sticker slogans. BTW do you get daily e-mails to help you with your "talking points" or do your seek them out from those websites for like minded idiots? Either way have you ever considered "fact checking" before you post BS propaganda that makes you like rather silly?
[]

Judged:

8

7

6

Joe Fortuna wrote:

<quoted text>
Actually that was written by professionals in the field of pedophilia.
I've seen you make a lot of claims, most backed up by nothing but your obsessed opinions. So why don't yopu provide something that will back up your claim that pedophilia is a only a legal term and that homosexuality is only a scientific term.
Because male on male is a homosexual act, doesn't mean having sex with a child is a homosexual act, that is a pedophilia act.
Like my article says, comparing the two is usually done by someone who doesn't know what he is talking about.
Homosexual do molest children, just like heterosexuals, but those that do, are called pedophilies.
You don't have to pause, I'll be around to lap you again anyway.
Biological phenomena, and replicable, and discrete, what a crook. Baffle them with BS doesn't work.

Homosexual do molest children, just like heterosexuals, but those that do, are called pedophilies.

Judged:

7

7

7

BlowHole marv wrote:

Hans Feldmeier, an 87-year-old man from Germany, has kept for the past 64 years.
In 1948 when the U.S. was in the middle of an aid program to help rebuild Germany after World War II. Feldmeier decided to save the lard tin for emergencies.
He took it to food safety experts in Germany, who ultimately deemed the 64-year-old can edible for human consumption. The food safety team did not return the lard to Feldmeier. They did return the red, white, and blue can.
Would you taste the contents of a 64-year-old can of lard?

Judged:

5

5

5

Conservative Democrat wrote:

<quoted text>
I didn't miss it. My firm blocks that kind of webpage, including youtube and I only saw the website now.
"Obviously, gays see nothing wrong with promoting "Rent-A-Boy" on a non-profit youth agency site."
I'm not one to speculate, so as far as your statement above, I say it behooves you not to jump to conclusions which you can't back up.
You're not privy of the contractual reasons, if any, of why such link is on a ccaa website. And speculating about it only makes you look more prejudicial in your own mythical beliefs.
For all you and I know, there could be an advertising contract involved for that link to be placed in the ccaa.org website.
Bottom line, my answer to your question is I don't know. And to expand on it, neither do you.

Judged:

5

4

4

Bruno wrote:

<quoted text>
Listen to yourself, you are no less predjudice than I. I do beleive you and your gay community are affraid that this issue would never come to a vote by the people knowing it would never pass. So you enjoy your gay marriage while you can, it can soon be disolved as well.

Judged:

5

5

5

Phelanite wrote:

<quoted text>
I did overgeneralize. Well said.