Judge overturns California's ban on same-sex marriage

Aug 4, 2010 Full story: www.cnn.com 201,321

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
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.

“The Great and Wonderful Marvel”

Since: Aug 09

Atlanta, GA

#156049 Aug 23, 2012
Prof Dingleberry wrote:
<quoted text>
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.
Recently, the LGBT added the letter "Q" for "Questioning Youth" to its acronym. There was no sensical reason to do this save to expand access to underage boys.

This is akin to the National Rifle Association or the League of Women Voters adding a "Q" to their acronym. It's ridiculous and not needed. Moreover, it smacks of Hitler Youth Groups a kind of organization we've never had in this country.

But gays get away with it because straight morons who support same sex marriage let them.

The upstart is gay predators now have a way of openly hooking-up with underage boys.

By now most of us have read registered pedophile Adam Flanders's letter about the alcohol, drugs, and man-boy encounters that went on in the "Gay-Straight Alliance" club he was a member of. He writes of how he and other adults routinely molested 14-year-old boys at these meetings.

Absent from the story is a law enforcement crackdown of these sham "clubs." The Flanders story should have been a wake-up call for law enforcement around the country but it wasn't.

The Little Black Book was a homosexual recruitment tract targeting underage boys. I presented the evidence; you haven't refuted a word of it.

The first tip-off is the fact that it was clearly promoting homosexual sex. There's no sensical reason for this either. Gays are only 4% of the population. Why not a sex book for everyone?

[sound of crickets]

Only one thing explains the creation of the Little Black Book -- out of control homosexual lust. The homosexuals running all the health organizations in the booklet wanted unfettered access to Boston-area boys -- they wanted fresh meat at their "Gay-Straight Alliance Clubs" and other man-boy hook-up scenes.

The only lie here is the one that has it gays are all monogamous, law-abiding citizens who just want equality, a white picket fence, and insurance benefits.

Bottom line, the men behind the Little Black Book were predators looking for prey and would have found plenty of it at that high school event they handing out the Little Black Book at hadn't they got busted.

That's all.



DumbBar

La Puente, CA

#156050 Aug 23, 2012
Go flog your monkey in front of a mirror instead of on this topic.
RiccardoFire

Elk Grove, CA

#156051 Aug 23, 2012
Prof Dingleberry wrote:
<quoted text>
Yet again you prove that you have nothing truthful to say.
actually you are not fooling anybody with your new name. Keep feeding the flames of hate, I'm sure that is helping. lol.
Hey DB

Alhambra, CA

#156052 Aug 23, 2012
Prof Dingleberry wrote:
<quoted text>
Yet again you prove that you have nothing truthful to say.
olMare watching the "news"

http://themoderatevoice.com/wordpress-engine/...

;0)

“Just keeping it real”

Since: Apr 12

Location hidden

#156053 Aug 23, 2012
Well, since you chosen to cut and paste a post that has already been debunked, I hope you won't mind if I simply do the same with the response. Were you somehow under the impression that repetition magically creates truth?
http://www.topix.com/forum/san-diego/TH6FC2NT...
KiMare wrote:
From an evolutionary perspective, as Richard Dawkins puts it, genes are 'selfish'. Genes in a sense are desperate to survive, and so healthy animal psychology will be permeated with thoughts of heterosexuality in order to promote continuance of the species.

Animals are permeated with thoughts of heterosexuality??!!!! Really, Dawkins said that?!!! Please cite the source.
KiMare wrote:
In fact, males and females have inherited (in general) antipodal characteristics to MINIMIZE homosexual attraction.

Wow, you are brilliant!! Guess that's why homosexuals only make up a small percentage of the population!!! Wow, call the press!!! Hey, why is there nothing in your "research" that concludes that males and females have inherited antipodal characterstics to ELIMINATE homosexual attraction? Get back to us right away on that one, ok??!!!!! Seems to me our continued and constant existence throughout our species' time on this planet would be a clear indicator that we serve an evolutionary purpose! LOL! But please, don't let rational thinking get in the way of your blabbering!

Carry on!
KiMare wrote:
In addition to enhancing the proverbial hunting and gathering,
Heterosexuality ensures one is a better hunter and gatherer? Who knew?!!! I'll bet there are a lot of lesbians that would disagree!! Wow, this is some fascinating stuff you're making up KiMare!!

[QUOTE who="KiMare"]
everything from the added bass in male voice, masculine body chemistry producing male scents, larger more powerful body, to substantially thicker body and facial hair, all serve as 'ornamentation' to create gender differentiation and consequentially it's reciprocal attractions.
Yes KiMare, and sometimes those reciprocal attractions come from the same gender! Shocker!!!!
KiMare wrote:

Thus in example, many women will be irrationally turned on by facial hair on a guy, but men will generally be disgusted by facial hair on a woman.
So, let's make sure we are understanding. According to you, men being "disgusted" by facial hair on women, experience this feeling because evolution has determined it!!! Wow!! That's some funny stuff you're spouting KiMare!!! One has to wonder how our species survived before women started shaving their legs and arm pits!!!

Given this evolutionary predisposed "feeling" of disgust that men would have had for getting their penis anywhere near a hairy legged, hairy pitted, woman with an over grown bushy vagina!!!!!

You should write a paper on that KiMare!!
KiMare wrote:

Homosexuality is a disgrace to the will of natural selection.

And yet Nature produces about 18,000 more of us homosexuals EVERY DAY!!!! Hate to break it to you moron, but trying to invoke Nature to attempt to support yourself is the move of a complete fool!!!

Carry on!!
KiMare wrote:
It's a 'bottle cap' preventing otherwise potentially intelligent productive people from passing the legacy of their genes to the next generation.
Gays prevent procreation? Since when? Gays can't be intelligent? Since when?

LOL!!! What a buffoon!!! LOL!! My sides are aching from your stupidity!!!
DumbBar

La Puente, CA

#156054 Aug 23, 2012
Go flog your monkey in front of a mirror instead of on this topic. While your trying to think of a come back!

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
LMSA Soccer (Feb '10) 2 hr Davis 5,336
Hundreds of protesters from Orange County picke... 14 hr bogey eater 9
BUY COUNTERFEIT MONEY CONTACT pakerpaul 7 ... 22 hr pakerpaul 2
Legit supplier of m-a-rij-uauna,pain n anxiety ... Thu Ladyray 2
2015 Valentines Day Gifts ,u ready ? Wed nacyluck 1
Raid on 'Big Daddy' hilltop party could be cost... Wed Kurtz 1
Two armed men wearing ghost masks rob Placentia... Dec '14 DavidC 1

Placentia News Video

Placentia Dating
Find my Match
More from around the web

Placentia People Search

Addresses and phone numbers for FREE

Personal Finance

Mortgages [ See current mortgage rates ]

NFL Latest News

Updated 2:12 pm PST