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
Bazooka Joe

La Puente, CA

#156029 Aug 23, 2012
Just to prove a point thathas been well known for years, the Republican / Tea Party Nation members are caught red handed stealing.

“Just keeping it real”

Since: Apr 12

Location hidden

#156030 Aug 23, 2012
Prof Marvel wrote:
<quoted text>
Yet more evidence that taking this dingbat seriously is a waste of time.
Here's the bottom line:
The Little Black Book is actually worse than kiddie porn. Kiddie porn is intended for sick adults like Larry Brinkin. The Little Black Book was meant to recruit innocent young boys into a sex cult.
It's all there: first, the welcoming greeting -- "Hey, Queer Boys!" then line after line of encouragement and tactics the adolescent readers should use to have that first glorious homosexual experience.
It talks about "Coming Out" as it's the most awesome experience a boy can have. In doing this it completely blurs the line between homosexuality and heterosexuality. Every page reads like it's a foregone conclusion the reader will have a homosexual experience in the near future.
Dingleberry wants us to believe the information in the booklet is only about safe sex, but read it yourself and see if you agree with this outrageous lie:
http://www.massresistance.info/downloads/Litt...
Indeed, in two instances the editors actually give the name and numbers of two of the Boston area's notorious man-boy clubs -- places described by registered pedophile Adam Flanders about "Gay-Straight Alliance Clubs," detailing exactly what they are: places where men and boys hook up.
http://mainebusiness.mainetoday.com/newsdirec...
Whoever heard of a safe-sex manual that encouraged boys "to come out", that referred them to man-boy clubs, that listed gay bars with descriptions like "young hot leather crowd" and "mutual jerking off is hot fun!"
Honestly, what do you think happens to the kid when he reads something like that?
And no matter that it uses the terms "boys" and "Youth" whenever it addresses its readers, Dingleberry wants you to believe it wasn't intended for boys and youth; that it was intended for exclusively adult males over 18.
But the booklet was handed out to boys as young as 14 throughout the Boston-Cambridge area -- we know this because every boy that entered the Youth on Fire drop-in center for runaways got one.
All the youth organizations in this area are now run by gay men and we can only assume it was their bright idea to publish and distrute this filth -- until, that is, they got busted handing it out to kids who were supervised -- that would be kids at that Brooklyn high school youth conference.
And when they got busted they lied -- they said it was an accident, that the booklet was never intended for high schools, that it fell off the truck and rolled onto a display table ...
You straight morons who support same-sex marriage were warned about this sort of thing. You were told you can't trust homosexuals -- that the moment your back is turned they'll go after your kids.
The Little Black Book is all the evidence you should need.
"Being honest and outfront about your sexuality is cool."
Yawn. Same unsupported nonsense, different day. An obsession over a booklet that isn't even being published anymore according to the obsessor himself.

Hey Gary, just fyi, no one reads all your repetetitive ranting. Everyone else is aware that mindless, baseless repetition is the sin qua non of idiots and shills

On top of that, you have already proven yourself to be an intentional liar. When you can prove you have a shread of dignity by supporting your past statements, we'll consider paying attention to your current ones.

“Just keeping it real”

Since: Apr 12

Location hidden

#156031 Aug 23, 2012
thisGuy wrote:
<quoted text>
"14 of the 15 people in my office are Christians. That doesn't make my company a Christian Company."
-LOL It doesn't? Then who makes up the majority? The Athiests? LOL
Um, stupid, this country, just like my office, is not "ruled" by the majority. My office, just like this country, is not "founded" or "ruled" by Christian principals.
thisGuy wrote:
<quoted text>
"The majority of my neighbors are Christian, that doesn't make my neighborhood a Christian neighborhood."
-LOL Really? So you leave in a community where almost everyone celebrates Christian holidays (Easter, Christmas, Thanksgiving), live in a neighborhood where they go to a chruch to practice their Christian faith,....& somehow they AREN'T Christian? LOL You can't be serious.
I didn't say "they" weren't Christian you simpleton. I stated that just because they are, it doesn't magically make my neighborhood subject to, or governed by, Christian principals and tenants. It also means my neighborhood was not "founded" by Christianity.

You might try taking a class in comprehension. It's apparant from your response that you don't currently possess this skill.
thisGuy wrote:
<quoted text>
"Seriously, did you actually think that was an argument?"
-LOL Not really, since it came from a queer (aka YOU). You queers seem to enjoy believing queer theories...must be why you homos are called "queers"....ROFL
Thanks for the further demonstration of how stupid you are.
thisGuy wrote:
<quoted text>
"Um, Nature isn't a god."
-OK, then tell me: Where did the atom come from? We know the universe was created by the Big bang, but where did the Big Bang come from? Why do ghosts exist & how? And why is it they are so afriad of people who say "Jesus Christ"? Give me a good explaination on how hauntings occur & why....if you can LOL. Look around you, fudgee. We wouldn't even exist if it weren't for nature. And who do you think created nature? Honestly, I think a supreme being is responsible for nature's existence.
Again, thank you for demonstrating so publically how stupid you are. Despite all your nonsense about hauntings and the big bang, nature is still not a god, and nature is especially not your christian god. You can believe that your sky Santa "created" nature all you want. That doesn't alter the fact that "nature" and "your god" are not the same entity.
thisGuy wrote:
<quoted text>
""As the Government of the United States of America is NOT, IN ANY SENSE, FOUNDED ON THE CHRISTIAN RELIGION; as it has in itself no character of enmity against the laws, religion, or tranquillity, of Musselmen; and as the said States never have entered into any war or act of hostility against any Mehomitan nation, it is declared by the parties that no pretext arising from religious opinions shall ever produce an interruption of the harmony existing between the two countries."
- The Treaty of Tripoli
-signed and drafted under the administration of George Washington
-ratified and signed under the administration of John Adams"
--Cool Story Bro. It still doesn't change the fact 50 out of the 53 framers were Christian, & the fact the Mayflower Compact was created by pilgrims, who escape to America from religious persecution. WAKE THE FUCK UP. You are living in a Christian nation
And you repeating the number of our founders that were Christians still doesn't alter the fact that we are not, were not, and will not ever be a "Christian" nation. We are not goverened by, nor have we ever been governed by Christianity. We are not ruled by Christianity. We were not formed from Christianity. Just because many of our citizens, and many of our founders were Christians, that FACT isn't altered.

The Treaty of Tripoli, an OFFICIAL U.S. DOCUMENT issued by our "Christian" founders confirms that.

Thank you for your revisionist version of things though! it's always good to start the day with a laugh!

“Just keeping it real”

Since: Apr 12

Location hidden

#156032 Aug 23, 2012
thisGuy wrote:
<quoted text>
WAKE THE FUCK UP.
Wow, you Christians sure to have potty mouths. Do you think our Christian founders spoke like this? Did you learn to speak like that in Sunday School this week?
thisGuy wrote:
<quoted text>
You are living in a Christian nation
Prove it. I've presented an official U.S. document that clearly states we aren't. Your turn. Present us all with the official U.S. documentation that claims we are a Christian nation and ruled and governed by Christian tenants.

**crickets chirping**

“Just keeping it real”

Since: Apr 12

Location hidden

#156033 Aug 23, 2012
akpilot wrote:
<quoted text>
We certainly are heading toward a "theocracy"- though it isn't really a "religion". It is liberalism/progressiveness/and political correctness.
The new religion is the alienation of those whom achieve.
Yawn. Yeah, I think I heard my grandfather say the same thing once. As he discovered, progress is progress, it keeps coming regardless of how hard those with a conservative agenda try and keep the status quo in order to feel special.

Since: Jun 07

Location hidden

#156034 Aug 23, 2012
RnL2008 wrote:
<quoted text>
No, what I said was that the bible is a myth......there is no actual proof that what is claimed in the bible actually has taken place......now, things that have taken place 200 years ago have actually been proven......but again, you can believe the bible, I choose not to!!!
As for history, I believe that there is a difference between history and religious myths.....especially when it supposedly involves incest, talking snakes and a woman created from a man's DNA.
But you are entitled to your opinions as well!!!
Sorry Rose, on this you are wrong. There are a number of things which appear in the bible which have been proven to be factually and historically correct.

Sure, one can choose to believe or not believe in the "supernatural" portion's, that is simply a question of one's personal faith, but the fact remains that much of it has been proven to be nothing more than a historical representation of what was happening at the time.
DumbBar

La Puente, CA

#156035 Aug 23, 2012
Why oh, why is this little doggie of a poster so bad?

Since: Jun 07

Location hidden

#156036 Aug 23, 2012
Prof Dingleberry wrote:
<quoted text>
Yawn. Yeah, I think I heard my grandfather say the same thing once. As he discovered, progress is progress, it keeps coming regardless of how hard those with a conservative agenda try and keep the status quo in order to feel special.
Eventually you will grow up and see that your grandfather was correct.

Your problem is you are unable to think outside of the talking point's and labels.
Mike

Westminster, CA

#156037 Aug 23, 2012
RnL2008 wrote:
<quoted text>
No, what I said was that the bible is a myth......there is no actual proof that what is claimed in the bible actually has taken place......now, things that have taken place 200 years ago have actually been proven......but again, you can believe the bible, I choose not to!!!
As for history, I believe that there is a difference between history and religious myths.....especially when it supposedly involves incest, talking snakes and a woman created from a man's DNA.
But you are entitled to your opinions as well!!!
Talking snakes is taking it too far however it may have been used to depict or illustrate an evil. Would you beleive that things that happened prior to 200 years have just been deluded and fadded out, forgotten? just as is some of the things that occured 200 years ago, the next generation may find it hard to beleive events that took place. It's the atheist that worked hard to demean what the bible says. I thought somewhere you said you were a beleiver.

“Just keeping it real”

Since: Apr 12

Location hidden

#156038 Aug 23, 2012
Mike wrote:
<quoted text>
But you believe in the Constitution and the Bill of Rights ?? lol the bible is another book of religious history, one man recording events that took place at the time of Christ is that so hare to understand???
When your bible is found in the "history" section of your local library, let us know, ok?

When the public school system teaches that life started with two naked people eating from a forbidden tree, do let me know.

When science is able to confirm that all sea life, both fresh water and salt water were able to live together in a mixed blend of water for a year, that completely enveloped Mount Everest, please let us know, ok?

Oh, and the bible wasn't written by "one man". Buy a clue.

"Religious History" = MYTHS.

and just fyi, the Constitution and the Bill of Rights are not "historical" documents. They don't require "belief", nor do they "record events".

Your attempt at an analogy is a failure.
DumbBar

La Puente, CA

#156039 Aug 23, 2012
What's terrifying is that Republican/Tea Party Nation member Todd Akin is not alone, and his comments are just the tip of the crazy iceberg.

Willard Mitt Romney and Paul D. Ryan may have called for Todd Akin to step aside, but then the just-approved 2012 GOP platform.

Calling for a United States constitutional amendment banning abortions in ALL cases, with no exception for rape or incest. And it was written as directed by the Willard Mitt Romney/Paul D. Ryan campaign!
Mike

Westminster, CA

#156040 Aug 23, 2012
Prof Dingleberry wrote:
<quoted text>
Wow, you Christians sure to have potty mouths. Do you think our Christian founders spoke like this? Did you learn to speak like that in Sunday School this week?
<quoted text>
Prove it. I've presented an official U.S. document that clearly states we aren't. Your turn. Present us all with the official U.S. documentation that claims we are a Christian nation and ruled and governed by Christian tenants.
**crickets chirping**
Just lookimg at your rediculous photo proves there is a God, and each time you change it will even make you a believer.

“Just keeping it real”

Since: Apr 12

Location hidden

#156041 Aug 23, 2012
thisGuy wrote:
<quoted text>
LOL if it isn't a theocracy, then how come I hear so much about queers throwing hot coffee over Christians who sing gospels. What about Chick-Fil-A? Why it is I hear so much about faggots vandelising & even sending death threats to the owner & the employees just because the CEO believes in the biblical definition of marriage. What about the queer who was about to do a mass shooting at FRC? Seems to me like it is, & Liberals & Queers are the ones pushing for it.
You hear so much about these things because fundamentalist christians take every opportunity they can to pretend that they are persecuted and victimized by others because they are christians. It's a tired routine that has been around forever.

That doesn't prove we are a theocracy, it just proves that Christians are giant cry babies who love to take every opportunity they can to pretend they are being persecuted. Mostly because their bibles tell them that being persecuted for their believes is a admirable thing, so they look for it everywhere they can. It's commonly referred to as a martyr complex.

Tell me thisGuy, if these types of events are as common place as you would like to pretend, then why is it that all you fundies combined together can only refer to the handful that you present here?! Because they have been completely blown out of proportion, because christian fundies can't substantiate the amount of persecution they pretend exists by using actual statistics and facts.

“Just keeping it real”

Since: Apr 12

Location hidden

#156042 Aug 23, 2012
thisGuy wrote:
<quoted text>
LOL More homo humor
Re-read your history, moron. The creators of this nations didn't want to get rid of religion, in fact, many migrated to this country to escape religious persecution. They only wanted it separated from the State. Separating Church & State does not mean our founders were fighting against religion, they just wanted it separated from the government. Pay attention, & you'll learn something
If they wanted it seperated from the government, that means we aren't a theocracy. Contradict yourself much ace?

No one is "fighting against religion" thisGuy, we're merely pointing out that we were not founded upon it, nor are we governed by it.

Now instead of all this claptrap, why don't you, or one of your fellow "we are a Christian nation" revisionists present the room with the official government documentations that confirm this?

“Just keeping it real”

Since: Apr 12

Location hidden

#156043 Aug 23, 2012
Prof Marvel wrote:
<quoted text>
I've edited down most of Dingleberry's response because most of it is gibberish that teaches us nothing.
No, you've edited it because it shows what a lying sack of cowardly shit you are.
Prof Marvel wrote:
<quoted text>
I believe I've handily shown, however, Dingleberry's thorough ignorance about the Little Black Book episode.
You erroneously believe a LOT of things. Two that come immediately to mind are that you believe (and have accused) that the bible contains hundreds of verses addressing homosexuality. You have also stated that that the GSLEN contributed to, and is credited in, your beloved Little Black Book. To date, you have yet to support these accusations, despite being asked to over 10 times. The only thing you have "handily shown" Gary, is that you are a lying coward.
DumbBar

La Puente, CA

#156044 Aug 23, 2012
Yawwn, another slow day for the tweeks on this topic.
Hey AKIdjit

Alhambra, CA

#156045 Aug 23, 2012
akpilot wrote:
<quoted text>
Sorry Rose, on this you are wrong. There are a number of things which appear in the bible which have been proven to be factually and historically correct.
Sure, one can choose to believe or not believe in the "supernatural" portion's, that is simply a question of one's personal faith, but the fact remains that much of it has been proven to be nothing more than a historical representation of what was happening at the time.
So Jack and Rose really were on the the Titanic?!

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Historical_ficti...

“Just keeping it real”

Since: Apr 12

Location hidden

#156046 Aug 23, 2012
KiMare wrote:
I guess the previous question was too scary to answer.
Actually it was answered ad nauseum. You are just too stupid to be able to comprehend the answer because you erroneously begin from a starting point that evolution determines clothing choices and establishes certain behaviors to be male or female. Neither of these are true, thus your repetitious question was simply stupid.
KiMare wrote:
Here is another thought;
LOL!! Since your last "thoughts" were so educated!!
KiMare wrote:
In defense of calling gay unions marriage, the assertion is made that children are not a requirement for marriage.
Um, no, that's not quite the accurate spin KiMare. The assertion that children are not a requirement of marriage is not a defense of marriage, it is a defense of people that continually pretend that procreation is required in order to marry. There is a big difference. No one has stated that BECAUSE procreation is not required, gays should therefore be able to. NO ONE. Your intentional attempt to misrepresent that has been exposed, and is now dismissed.
KiMare wrote:
A unbelievably stupid statement!
The assertation that children are not a requirement of marriage is an unbelievably stupid statement? Really? Please explain to everyone here how a truthful statement can also be unbelievably stupid.

**crickets chirping**
KiMare wrote:
It amazes me that people have the audacity to even make it.
Let me get this straight. You are amazed that someone would make the statement "children are not a requirement of marriage". Got it. Are you amazed because you are under the impression that children ARE a requirement of marriage? Please explain the origin of your "amazement".
KiMare wrote:
The first indication of how stupid it is the fact that it comes from gay couples that have ZERO potential to procreate.
No KiMare, that's not an indication of how stupid the statement is. If the statement were stupid, it would be stupid no matter who said it. If a straight person were to state that procreation is a requirement of marriage, it would still be a stupid, and false statement.

Whether a gay couple can procreate without assistance is completely irrelevent, just as it is irrelevent for many straight couples, and it is merely a HUGE indicator of your desperation to create an arguement. Thus far, you have failed at demonstrating how stating that "children are not a requirement of marriage" is an "unbelieveable stupid statement" as you assertain.
KiMare wrote:
The second is the reason no one makes that demand. The 'demand' for children isn't there because the likelihood is so strong, it is and has always been assumed in marriage.
No, it is not assumed. And we were talking about "demands" we were talkking about "requirements". Children are not now, nor will they ever be a requirement of marriage. I certainly hope you get to the part of proving that statement to be "unbelievable stupid" sometime in this decade.
KiMare wrote:
Its like someone asserting for gays to be in a gay union they are required NOT to have children. Why bother with such a unnecessary question?
No, actually it's NOTHING like that. It would only be like that if no gay people had children. Damn you are stupid.
KiMare wrote:
Remember the nursery rhyme?
Jack and Jill sitting in a tree, K-I-S-S-I-N-G.
First comes love.
Then comes marriage.
Then comes a baby in the baby carriage!
Wow, that was quite the closer!! "Hi, I'm KiMare and in order to support my arguments today, I will be quoting Nursery Rhymes."

Um, will you be getting to the part where you demonstrate the "unbelievable stupidity" of the statement that "children are not a requirement of marriage" anytime soon? Please keep in mind, in order to demonstrate that it is "unbelievable", you must demonstrate it is false.

Good luck with that you nitwit.

“Just keeping it real”

Since: Apr 12

Location hidden

#156047 Aug 23, 2012
KiMare wrote:
<quoted text>
You might think about forgetting 'theology' and start watching Fox News, the most fair and balanced news available.
Yet again you prove that you have nothing truthful to say.
DumbBar

La Puente, CA

#156048 Aug 23, 2012
Ya just don't learn do ya!

Your all over with on this topic, you have shown yourself to be under aged and an idiot.

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.

Placentia Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
Wanted to buy Geodes (Apr '08) 4 hr ONTHEMTN 2
Santa Ana jury convicts two men of gang-related... (Jul '07) 10 hr Anaheim ss 1,135
La Mirada Boosters In trouble under Moschetti Wed LM parent 37
Known gang member found fatally shot in East Va... (Nov '12) Wed WCNHC 65
LMSA Soccer (Feb '10) Wed DAVIS 5,300
Gang member gets 40 to life for shooting father... (Apr '10) Tue Amy 145
Review: Victor HO & Rennie Cheung MD Dec 23 silentkillz1 1

Placentia News Video

Placentia Dating
Find my Match
More from around the web

Placentia People Search

Addresses and phone numbers for FREE

Placentia News, Events & Info

Click for news, events and info in Placentia

Personal Finance

Mortgages [ See current mortgage rates ]

NFL Latest News

Updated 1:28 am PST