Judge overturns California's ban on same-sex marriage

Black pastors group demands meeting with Obama over gay marriage
http://www.washingtontimes.com/blog/inside-po...

NY Court Rules Calling Someone Gay Isn't Slander
http://www.nytimes.com/aponline/2012/05/31/us...

lides wrote:

<quoted text>
Oh, you mean the side that lacks the reading comprehension to understand the US Constitution?
<quoted text>
Also know as the homosexual US citizens being denied heir constitutional right to equal protection of the laws.
<quoted text>
Did you see that your side was massacred in the 1st Circuit court of appeals?
<quoted text>
Only a truly stupid person cannot tell the difference between homosexuality and pedophilia.

We will amend it if necessary..........LOL

I am for equal rights but we will not the tiny minority of abnormals to pervert the meaning of the word marriage....

Massacred??.......LOL......31 to 5 is massacred..........LOL

Only a truly stupid person would not admit that NAMBLA.........

Here Is One wrote:

We will amend it if necessary..........LOL

Wow, you really aren’t that bright are you? The majority of Americans support marriage equality. Do you really think any competent elected official will take a position that will absolutely hurt their political career? You would fall far short of the 2/3 majority necessary to amend, to say nothing of the ¾ of state legislature would have to approve the measure.

So, no, you won’t amend, because you will always lack the votes. To attempt as much would be utterly foolhardy. Perhaps that is why you propose it?

Here Is One wrote:

I am for equal rights but we will not the tiny minority of abnormals to pervert the meaning of the word marriage....

Wow, that’s a pretty inept response. Let me help you out, there is no rational reason to deny same sex couples the right to marry. Feel free to prove me wrong, but I don’t think you can.

Here Is One wrote:

Massacred??.......LOL......31 to 5 is massacred..........LOL

Not if the bans lack a rational basis or fail to serve a compelling state interest. If the US Supreme Court holds that they are that perceived advantage disappears in a flash.

The reality is that you are utterly incapable of indicating even so much as a rational basis for such gay marriage bans that would render them constitutional.

Here Is One wrote:

Only a truly stupid person would not admit that NAMBLA.........

Are you an imbecile? Do you know what a pedophile is? Only one who lacked an argument with a rational foundation would employ such inflammatory BS. Do you want to know the ironic part? It only makes you look like a dullard.

Cheyenne277 wrote:

<quoted text>
Bigot racists said the same of interracial marriage when it was banned in 17 states. So what?

...which has absolutely NOTHING to do with the topic of this thread or the gay agenda. Try again.

Unlike being homosexual, there is no such thing as race. Unlike the gays, there WAS and IS a Constitutional protection for equal rights for all Americans. Marriage has never been between same sex people and if Americans have a say about it (and they do), it never will be. Unlike gay marriage, discrimination based on "race" IS unconstitutional. Being black or brown or yellow is not a choice, and being gay IS a choice. I know you will break out into shrill denials, but there is absolutely NO evidence that homosexuality is genetic or biological.

lides wrote:

<quoted text>
Wow, you really aren’t that bright are you? The majority of Americans support marriage equality. Do you really think any competent elected official will take a position that will absolutely hurt their political career? You would fall far short of the 2/3 majority necessary to amend, to say nothing of the ¾ of state legislature would have to approve the measure.

The gays want us to believe that most Americans support homo marriage, but that is false. It is a well funded manipulation of biased polls, fake Catholic and "straight" groups formed by gays to give the impression that the Catholic Church and most heterosexuals are supporting gay marriage, but it is a big fat lie.

So, no, you won’t amend, because you will always lack the votes. To attempt as much would be utterly foolhardy. Perhaps that is why you propose it?

The votes put the bans in place in 31 states. More are coming. Oh, and 31 is more than 2/3 of the United States in case you did not realize it. We have the votes.

Wow, that’s a pretty inept response. Let me help you out, there is no rational reason to deny same sex couples the right to marry. Feel free to prove me wrong, but I don’t think you can.

There are rational reasons. The primary of which is that I do not want my children to think that men can marry men or women can marry women, or that homosexuality is normal. It is not.

Not if the bans lack a rational basis or fail to serve a compelling state interest. If the US Supreme Court holds that they are that perceived advantage disappears in a flash.
The reality is that you are utterly incapable of indicating even so much as a rational basis for such gay marriage bans that would render them constitutional.

Your perceived advantage is what has disappeared in a flash. America has proven 31 times that gay marriage is unwanted in this country. Like I said, more are coming. So, it is comical that gays claim all this overwhelming support when the reality shows otherwise.

Are you an imbecile? Do you know what a pedophile is? Only one who lacked an argument with a rational foundation would employ such inflammatory BS. Do you want to know the ironic part? It only makes you look like a dullard.

All of you gays look like dullards. So many of you making wild, untrue claims and making grandiose assumptions and attempting to use black civil rights issues to push your gay agenda. It is truly pathetic.

Daniel wrote:

The problem with people against gay marriage is that they lost before they started.
They're against gay marriage out of religious reasons, those involving themselves with disdain of homosexuals or thinking if we allow gay marriage next will be some cop doing nuptuals with his K-9 companion.
Well for one the first two distinctions I made are un-Consititutional with that third and last thinking someone would want to marry their dog pound find chihuahua is freaking non-existant let alone out there.
All this arumentative banter against gay marriage is notrhing but thinly veiled BULLSHIT as it has no substance or proof.
And here I am...a man with an IQ slightly above 56 and formerly against Tommy Marrying George who now gtets the fact it's logical given the country we live in gays should be allowed to marry not state by state but nationwide.
Let Suzy marry Shauna and spend energies looking at real problems.

Actually I know quite a few Atheists who disagree with homosexuality. Nice stereotype though. LOL

_Reality Speaks_ wrote:

<quoted text>
...which has absolutely NOTHING to do with the topic of this thread or the gay agenda. Try again.
Unlike being homosexual, there is no such thing as race. Unlike the gays, there WAS and IS a Constitutional protection for equal rights for all Americans. Marriage has never been between same sex people and if Americans have a say about it (and they do), it never will be. Unlike gay marriage, discrimination based on "race" IS unconstitutional. Being black or brown or yellow is not a choice, and being gay IS a choice. I know you will break out into shrill denials, but there is absolutely NO evidence that homosexuality is genetic or biological.

So far the only biological evidence I can find related to homosexuality is the amount of AIDS cases related to the disgusting lifestyle....ROFL.

_Reality Speaks_ wrote:

<quoted text>
...which has absolutely NOTHING to do with the topic of this thread or the gay agenda. Try again.
Unlike being homosexual, there is no such thing as race. Unlike the gays, there WAS and IS a Constitutional protection for equal rights for all Americans. Marriage has never been between same sex people and if Americans have a say about it (and they do), it never will be. Unlike gay marriage, discrimination based on "race" IS unconstitutional. Being black or brown or yellow is not a choice, and being gay IS a choice. I know you will break out into shrill denials, but there is absolutely NO evidence that homosexuality is genetic or biological.

There is no such thing as race? What???

_Reality Speaks_ wrote:

<quoted text>
...which has absolutely NOTHING to do with the topic of this thread or the gay agenda. Try again.
Unlike being homosexual, there is no such thing as race. Unlike the gays, there WAS and IS a Constitutional protection for equal rights for all Americans. Marriage has never been between same sex people and if Americans have a say about it (and they do), it never will be. Unlike gay marriage, discrimination based on "race" IS unconstitutional. Being black or brown or yellow is not a choice, and being gay IS a choice. I know you will break out into shrill denials, but there is absolutely NO evidence that homosexuality is genetic or biological.

Wrong. We've had the ability to accurately and affordably test people's $exuality in a lab setting since the 1950s. And in all that time, not one person has ever been able to show that their $exuality changed during the course of their lifetime. Not from gay to straight, not from straight to gay, not even from gay to bi$exual. Not through theraputic means and not through religious means. Also, there have been tons of studies done on homo$exuality - if it was a choice there would be precursors to that choice leading someone to want to be attracted to the same gender or leading them to actually having attraction for the same gender - yet not one study has ever found any precursor or cause.

Cheyenne277 wrote:

<quoted text>
Bigot racists said the same of interracial marriage when it was banned in 17 states. So what?

Don't evaluate interracial marriage with a perversion, gaytard. They are not the same.

In interracial marriages, there is a mother, father, & a child. And they are all usually heterosexual & are capable of procreation. You homos are neither, nor are your kids risen with both mother & father figures. So your interracial argument is a fail.

Cheyenne277 wrote:

<quoted text>
Wrong. We've had the ability to accurately and affordably test people's $exuality in a lab setting since the 1950s. And in all that time, not one person has ever been able to show that their $exuality changed during the course of their lifetime. Not from gay to straight, not from straight to gay, not even from gay to bi$exual. Not through theraputic means and not through religious means. Also, there have been tons of studies done on homo$exuality - if it was a choice there would be precursors to that choice leading someone to want to be attracted to the same gender or leading them to actually having attraction for the same gender - yet not one study has ever found any precursor or cause.

O RLY? Show me there's a "gay gene" & then we'll talk.

_Reality Speaks_ wrote:

The gays want us to believe that most Americans support homo marriage, but that is false. It is a well funded manipulation of biased polls, fake Catholic and "straight" groups formed by gays to give the impression that the Catholic Church and most heterosexuals are supporting gay marriage, but it is a big fat lie.

No, it has nothing to do with public acceptance, it has to do with equal protection of the laws. Do you mean to imply that interracial couples suddenly were accepted in public just because Loving v Virginia gave them the right to marry?

_Reality Speaks_ wrote:

The votes put the bans in place in 31 states. More are coming. Oh, and 31 is more than 2/3 of the United States in case you did not realize it. We have the votes.

Yeah, and most of them were enacted at a time when support for gay marriage was in the majority. In recent years there has been an increase in support for marriage equality and a decline in opposition. Currently more than half of the US supports marriage equality. A congressman would have to be a fool to propose an amendment that more than half of the country doesn’t support, and that ultimately is patently unconstitutional.

_Reality Speaks_ wrote:

There are rational reasons. The primary of which is that I do not want my children to think that men can marry men or women can marry women, or that homosexuality is normal. It is not.

Yeah, that’s not a rational reason, and you are free to instill whatever prejudices you like in your children. Why you would want them to be bigoted, ignorant, and stupid is anyone’s guess.

_Reality Speaks_ wrote:

Your perceived advantage is what has disappeared in a flash. America has proven 31 times that gay marriage is unwanted in this country. Like I said, more are coming. So, it is comical that gays claim all this overwhelming support when the reality shows otherwise.

Of course, those votes were almost exclusively at a time when those supporting gay marriage were a minority. That is no longer true.

_Reality Speaks_ wrote:

All of you gays look like dullards. So many of you making wild, untrue claims and making grandiose assumptions and attempting to use black civil rights issues to push your gay agenda. It is truly pathetic.

It is not a grandiose assumption that the Constitution mandates that states provide all persons within their jurisdiction equal protection of the laws. That is a fact.
It is not a grandiose assumption that marriage is a set of legal protections. That is a fact.
It is not a grandiose assumption that homosexuals are persons. That is a fact.
Your position is a little light on facts.

thisGuy wrote:

So far the only biological evidence I can find related to homosexuality is the amount of AIDS cases related to the disgusting lifestyle.... ROFL.

You do realize that is due to anal intercourse, which is not exclusively a homosexual activity.
Oh, that’s also not biological, it’s physiological.

Mona Lott wrote:

<quoted text>
Only from freaks like you....

Sorry, normal people aren't homosexual nor host pedophile organizations hosted by homosexuals. You gays are real freaks in this argument

_Reality Speaks_ wrote:

<quoted text>
...which has absolutely NOTHING to do with the topic of this thread or the gay agenda. Try again.
Unlike being homosexual, there is no such thing as race. Unlike the gays, there WAS and IS a Constitutional protection for equal rights for all Americans. Marriage has never been between same sex people and if Americans have a say about it (and they do), it never will be. Unlike gay marriage, discrimination based on "race" IS unconstitutional. Being black or brown or yellow is not a choice, and being gay IS a choice. I know you will break out into shrill denials, but there is absolutely NO evidence that homosexuality is genetic or biological.

your too late. The NAACP says otherwise.

thisGuy wrote:

<quoted text>
Don't evaluate interracial marriage with a perversion, gaytard. They are not the same.
In interracial marriages, there is a mother, father, & a child. And they are all usually heterosexual & are capable of procreation. You homos are neither, nor are your kids risen with both mother & father figures. So your interracial argument is a fail.

Facts About le$bian and Gay Parenting

Numerous well-respected authorities agree that children of same-sex parents are as healthy, happy and well-adjusted as their peers raised by heterosexual parents:

The Child Welfare League of America (CWLA) affirms that le$bian, gay, and bisexual parents are as well suited to raise children as their heterosexual counterparts.

The American Psychological Association, representing more than 155,000 psychologists, states that children of gay and le$bian parents are at no disadvantage psychologically or socially compared to children of heterosexual parents.

The American Academy of Pediatrics, the nation’s leading pediatric authority with 57,000 members, says that children who grow up with gay and/or le$bian parents fare as well in emotional, cognitive, social and sexual functioning as children with straight parents.

The National Association of Social Workers, with nearly 150,000 members, agrees that research on gay and le$bian parenting shows a total absence of pathological findings in their children.

What Research Tells Us

A 1995 National Health and Social Life Survey by E.O. Lauman found that up to nine million children in America have gay or le$bian parents (Committee on Psychosocial Aspects of Child and Family Health, 2002).

Evidence to date suggests home environments provided by le$bian and gay parents support and enable children's psychosocial growth, just as do those provided by heterosexual parents (Patterson, 1995)

There are no systematic differences between gay or le$bian and non-gay or le$bian parents in emotional health, parenting skills, and attitudes toward parenting (Stacey & Biblarz, 2001)

Evidence shows that children's optimal development is influenced more by the nature of the relationships and interactions within the family unit than by its particular structural form (Perrin, 2002)

No studies have found risks to or disadvantages for children growing up in families with one or more gay parents, compared to children growing up with heterosexual parents (Perrin, 2002).

thisGuy wrote:

Sorry, normal people aren't homosexual nor host pedophile organizations hosted by homosexuals. You gays are real freaks in this argument

Sorry, normalcy and pedophilia (you do know what this is right, because if you think it is synonymous with homosexuality, then you are only proving that you aren't that bright) are irrelevant.

thisGuy wrote:

<quoted text>
O RLY? Show me there's a "gay gene" & then we'll talk.

Show me there's a gene for left hand dominance or multiple sclerosis or heterosexuality and we'll talk.

lides wrote:

<quoted text>
Sorry, normalcy and pedophilia (you do know what this is right, because if you think it is synonymous with homosexuality, then you are only proving that you aren't that bright) are irrelevant.

If that's true, then explain what NAMBLA (a homosexual organization) doing with little boys? Care to explain pervert?

lides wrote:

<quoted text>
Wow, you really aren’t that bright are you? The majority of Americans support marriage equality. Do you really think any competent elected official will take a position that will absolutely hurt their political career? You would fall far short of the 2/3 majority necessary to amend, to say nothing of the ¾ of state legislature would have to approve the measure.
So, no, you won’t amend, because you will always lack the votes. To attempt as much would be utterly foolhardy. Perhaps that is why you propose it?
<quoted text>
Wow, that’s a pretty inept response. Let me help you out, there is no rational reason to deny same sex couples the right to marry. Feel free to prove me wrong, but I don’t think you can.
<quoted text>
Not if the bans lack a rational basis or fail to serve a compelling state interest. If the US Supreme Court holds that they are that perceived advantage disappears in a flash.
The reality is that you are utterly incapable of indicating even so much as a rational basis for such gay marriage bans that would render them constitutional.
<quoted text>
Are you an imbecile? Do you know what a pedophile is? Only one who lacked an argument with a rational foundation would employ such inflammatory BS. Do you want to know the ironic part? It only makes you look like a dullard.

Wrong again.....LOL

31 states to 5..........You are losing miserably..........LOL

We are gaining votes everyday..........LOL

Because we don't want you to pervert the name of marriage and that is good enough now back to your closet......LOL

Everyone knows that NAMBLA is a gay organization and just because it upsets you does not change the facts......

Cheyenne277 wrote:

<quoted text>
Show me there's a gene for left hand dominance or multiple sclerosis or heterosexuality and we'll talk.

FAIL

left hand dominance = behavior
multiple sclerosis = disease
heterosexuality = behavior

Plus you still haven't proved there's a "gay gene" EPIC FAIL