Judge overturns California's ban on same-sex marriage

Aug 4, 2010 Full story: www.cnn.com 200,933

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

“KiMare'a the Monster Mutation”

Since: Nov 10

Location hidden

#156321 Aug 25, 2012
RnL2008 wrote:
<quoted text>
ARE YOU FRUCKING FOR REAL? This nursery rhyme from like the 1950's is your reasoning that EVERY HETEROSEXUAL MARRIAGE WILL PROCREATE......what a joke!!!
Beside, the names could be any names......Jack and Jill went up the hill.....not sitting in a tree!!!
I know plenty of opposite-sex married couples who for whatever reason aren't, can't or simply choose not to have children.....and your claim that Gay and Lesbian couples HAVE NO POSSIBLE POTENTIAL to naturally procreate is TOTALLY irrelevant to the right to marry the person of one's choosing!!!
That really hit 'home', didn't it?

Something so simple and ageless. Something you not only said as a girl, but something you taught your own children.

The expectation of what life brings. Or more specifically what marriage means.

I think the Jack and Jill who went up a hill fetched a pail of water. Oh, and they were brother and sisters. Couldn't marry each other, just like gays.

This Jack and Jill were not brother and sister. As is most often the case, they got married and had children.
ELH

Portland, OR

#156322 Aug 25, 2012
KiMare and Professor sitting in a tree

K-I-S-S-I-N-G!

First cam love,

then cam marriage

Then came... OMG!!!! you have a penis AND a vagina???
ELH

Portland, OR

#156323 Aug 25, 2012
KiMare and Professor sitting in a tree

K-I-S-S-I-N-G!

First cam love,

then cam marriage

Then came the turkey baster...

girls are yucky.
FlyingHorse

Covina, CA

#156324 Aug 25, 2012
Watch out for the soft rocks fallingon your head from the flyingHorse.

“ reality, what a concept”

Since: Nov 07

this one

#156325 Aug 25, 2012
jacques renault wrote:
you went overboard saying her "science" got homosexuals removed from the DSM;
I never said that the work of Hooker and those who substantiated her work in the 60's got the listing removed, what I have said repeatedly, is that the empirical science was on the side of those demanding its removal. THAT is indisputable.

“ reality, what a concept”

Since: Nov 07

this one

#156326 Aug 25, 2012
Prof Marvel wrote:
(Yawn)
In her 1957 report, Evelyn Hooker did not use a random sample to test the stability of homosexuals, but allowed gay rights activists to recruit those homosexuals most likely to illustrate her thesis that homosexuality is not a pathology. Individuals who proved unstable were deleted from the final sample.
Dear, if homosexuality were in and of itself a mental illness, that would have shown up even in a non-random sample. I guess you didn't think of that. Of course you didn't think of that or anything else for that matter, look who I am talking to, the only man in America aside from the sociopaths involved in the group that finds MassResistance a credible organization. Hooker used a match pair sample to fully test the thesis, something not possible using a purely random sample. It really doesn't matter who was involved in the study cupcake, if all homosexuals are in fact mentally ill, that would have been demonstrated even in a highly selective group.
Prof Marvel wrote:
Indeed, and after finding out the purpose of her study the Mattachine Society was only to happy to hand-pick study subjects for her.
Of course in your homosexual mind this is fine. In the world of science, however, it totally invalidates her story.
The wonder is this silly woman didn't grasp this.
Oh, and we're real sorry she wasn't bright enough to grasp it.
You haven't given us anything which should be confused with science dear, or are you forgetting that you've been quoting a former English professor with an obvious bias?
continued

“ reality, what a concept”

Since: Nov 07

this one

#156327 Aug 25, 2012
Prof Marvel wrote:
Learn to read. The number was three -- which represents 10% of her study population of heterosexuals.
And this invalidates her study how? The biased English professor didn't even offer an answer for that one.
Prof Marvel wrote:
Wrong again -- here's why:
"...Critics of Hooker's Rorschach results make at least two points. First, they question her ability to administer and score the test. As an animal researcher until the time she undertook this project, she obviously had logged comparatively little experience in administering Rorschachs, a delicate and highly complicated task in which the clinician gently and obliquely elicits spontaneous responses. Some authorities in the field maintain that, under ideal circumstances, a more qualified expert would have explored many avenues Hooker failed to note and would have found out many things Hooker missed -- including indications of the pathology of the homosexuals.
A second criticism of her methodology is the lack of "blindness" in the administration of the Rorschach. Ideally, given the nature of the results sought, the test should have been administered under circumstances in which both interviewer and subject were unaware of the purpose of the test. In the case of the Hooker study, both she and her subjects knew what she was striving to prove -- and both she and the homosexuals had a vested interest in proving the hypothesis that homosexuals were not necessarily pathological.
Unnamed "critics", dear, aside from a biased English professor who clearly is incompetent on the subject he is claiming to write about. His "source" listed for this alleged criticism is supposedly Hooker's own study, which makes absolutely no sense whatsoever. The more likely source is the one listed below it, none other than Paul Cameron.
Prof Marvel wrote:
She actually gets every calculation in her study wrong. Here's a couple of them:
"... Turning to the table upon which she lists the age, IQ scores, and education of all 60 subjects, a careful reader finds that the figures neatly arranged in columns contradict her summary. While she says the age range for all subjects is 25-50, the chart indicates that the youngest subject is 26 and the oldest 57. The figures on the table indicate an average age of 35 for the homosexuals and 37 for the heterosexuals -- different averages than the ones Hooker gives.
In summary, the woman was a dingbat rat-tester gang activists got to front for them.
Dear, not even your biased English professor goes that far, or are you merely selectively reading his garbage? The truth is you have offered nothing more than the musings of an unqualified hack who has close ties with the equally disreputable Family Research Institute, proving once and for all that you have no shame in defending your gay derangement syndrome.
Reality

Madison, WI

#156328 Aug 25, 2012
KiMare wrote:
<quoted text>
That really hit 'home', didn't it?
Something so simple and ageless. Something you not only said as a girl, but something you taught your own children.
The expectation of what life brings. Or more specifically what marriage means.
I think the Jack and Jill who went up a hill fetched a pail of water. Oh, and they were brother and sisters. Couldn't marry each other, just like gays.
This Jack and Jill were not brother and sister. As is most often the case, they got married and had children.
little red ridding hood ran into the big bad wolf in the forest. The wolf said hey Red give up the basket or I will fluck you, Red replied no flucking way asshat stick to the story and eat me.
FlyingHorse

Covina, CA

#156329 Aug 25, 2012
Ricky, i see flying horses circling your dweling.

Watch out.

“Just keeping it real”

Since: Apr 12

Location hidden

#156330 Aug 25, 2012
Prof Marvel wrote:
<quoted text>
Thanks for proving my point -- which was how the gay community uses extreme behavior in the straight community to justify "normal" behavior in the homosexual community.
Once again, thanks.
Oh no, thank you Gary. Thank you for demonstrating what a lying chicken shit coward you are! If you would like to disprove me, them by all means, please point out in my post where I "justified" ANYTHING!! lol! Damn you are stupid!

Hey Gary, when you present these mythical "justifications", will you also tell us what page in your crusty black book that the GLSEN is credited on? Remember when you made that claim dipshit?! Oh, and how are you coming with those 13 Bible verses you claimed existed?!

Watch everyone as Gary Chicken Shit Liar does not present ANY of the supposed "justifications" he accused me of, watch as he doesn't provide a page number with the credit of the GLSEN in his jerk off manual, and watch as he does not privide the Bible verses he claimed existed! Watch as the biggest fat assed cowardly liar you have ever encountered evades these questions!

Gary Lloyd...pathetic liar!! Such a chicken shit coward!

“Just keeping it real”

Since: Apr 12

Location hidden

#156331 Aug 25, 2012
akpilot wrote:
<quoted text>
You are hence forth doomed in this thread
Huge Y A W N
Frank Rizzo

Union City, CA

#156332 Aug 25, 2012
Reality wrote:
<quoted text>little red ridding hood ran into the big bad wolf in the forest. The wolf said hey Red give up the basket or I will fluck you, Red replied no flucking way asshat stick to the story and eat me.
So then Reality blew the wolf.

YUK!YUK!YUK!

Since: Jun 07

Location hidden

#156333 Aug 25, 2012
Prof Dingleberry wrote:
<quoted text>
Huge Y A W N
I agree, Yawn.

Yet you continue to post.

“Just keeping it real”

Since: Apr 12

Location hidden

#156335 Aug 25, 2012
jacques renault wrote:
heroine addicts didn't go nuts after Trainspotting came out
why are homosexuals going nuts about the Little Black Book? THEY WROTE IT
*heroine is just dandy per the Little Black Book, the worst hall of mirrors I've ever seen; homosexuals were in the process of shutting all exits from it until the Chick fil A debacle
LOL! What gay on this forum is "going nuts" over it?! You stupid dolt! The only persin going nuts over it is Gary Lloyd....because he's a chicken shit lying bitch who needs it in order to masturbate. No one else gives a shit.about it in the least.

Thanks fire demonstrating your stupidity Jackie

“The Great and Wonderful Marvel”

Since: Aug 09

Atlanta, GA

#156336 Aug 25, 2012
Rick in Kansas wrote:
<quoted text>Dear, if homosexuality were in and of itself a mental illness, that would have shown up even in a non-random sample. I guess you didn't think of that. Of course you didn't think of that or anything else for that matter, look who I am talking to, the only man in America aside from the sociopaths involved in the group that finds MassResistance a credible organization. Hooker used a match pair sample to fully test the thesis, something not possible using a purely random sample. It really doesn't matter who was involved in the study cupcake, if all homosexuals are in fact mentally ill, that would have been demonstrated even in a highly selective group.
<quoted text>You haven't given us anything which should be confused with science dear, or are you forgetting that you've been quoting a former English professor with an obvious bias?
continued
Random sampling is the gold standard for all behavioral studies your nonsense about "matched pairs" notwithstanding. Indeed, it seems you're just injecting a term in the discussion you don't fully understand with the hope no one else does.

The purpose of Hooker's study was to determine if standarized tests (ink blot, etc.) revealed pathology markers in homosexuals. If your claim is such a study could not have produced reliable results using random sampling you should be able to explain why not and why every study since Hookers has used random sampling.

I won't hold my breath.

The bottom line is this: the Mattachine Society hired this unknown, thoroughly incompetent fag hag to produce a bogus study showing homosexuality is not a mental condition. They supplied her with the test subjects, told her what the result should be, and actually rushed her to complete the study so much she got all the math wrong and took short cuts at every step of the way.

All of which explains why the study was largely ignored until 1973 -- it wasn't taken seriously. The APA certainly didn't pay it any mind for 12 years.

In fact, it only became a factor when gay activists were trying to force the APA to drop homosexuality as a mental disorder. Gay activists insisted the Hooker study was solid evidence. But the Hooker study had been around -- and ignored by the APA!-- 12 years by then!

The fact is, the Hooker study is one of the sloppiest, poorly-conducted, error-filled studies in science -- just what we'd expect from the gay community.

She breaks EVERY rule of scientific research, gets all of the math wrong, and years later came back and gave different excuses for every flaw in the study.

Meanwhile, you want us to believe this piece of crap is some kind of Holy Grail of scientific research.

And the funny thing is, straight morons who support same-sex marriage are already queuing-up to say that very thing.

No surprise there ...

“Just keeping it real”

Since: Apr 12

Location hidden

#156337 Aug 25, 2012
Prof Marvel wrote:
Regarding the APA's Removal of Homosexuality from its list of Mental Disorders
It's been 30 years since the APA removed homosexuality from its list of mental disorders. We now know this was done as a result of unrelenting pressure from gay activists who stormed APA meetings, harassed APA doctors, etc.
Still, we can argue back and forth whether it was pure political pressure or science that caused the APA to take this action. What we can't argue, however, is that the APA didn't have the wealth of data about Homosexuality that has accumulated since.
Even if we overlook the 450,000 gay males who died by male-to-male anal sex, homosexuality has been a complete disaster. Homosexual parades and youth sex manuals like "The Little Black Book" show a people and culture thoroughly at odds with mainstream culture.
There's nothing "normal" about men parading in penis suits and erect penis hats or half-nude boys on dog leashes being led down the street by their "tops."
These are sick behaviors -- pathological behaviors caused by a discrete mental disorder.
Homosexuality caused Larry Brinkin to crash and burn. Homosexuality explains why the gay HIV rate is 65% of all new cases while gays are only 3% of the population. Homosexuality is clearly a destructive force.
In other words, we now have 30 years of evidence -- behavioral data!-- showing without question homosexuality is a mental disorder and this means allowing homosexuals to teach children homosexuality is safe, normal, and as wholesome as mom's apple pie is akin to letting addicts teach kids crack smoking is safe.
Tolerance is the worst possible position to take on homosexuality. There is no middle ground here, no way to coexist with homosexuality and that's because homosexuals will not stop being homosexuals -- they cannot stop being homosexuals no more than a leopard can change his spots.
Evidence of this is how homosexuals have declared OPEN SEASON on underage boys in Massachusetts.
Still got nothin huh Gary?! You never will!! What a pathetic tool! Keep posting you cowardly lying sack of chicken shit!! Nothing demonstrates the stupidity of anti gay bigots like their own words!

“The Great and Wonderful Marvel”

Since: Aug 09

Atlanta, GA

#156338 Aug 25, 2012
Prof Dingleberry wrote:
<quoted text>
Oh no, thank you Gary. Thank you for demonstrating what a lying chicken shit coward you are! If you would like to disprove me, them by all means, please point out in my post where I "justified" ANYTHING!! lol! Damn you are stupid!
Hey Gary, when you present these mythical "justifications", will you also tell us what page in your crusty black book that the GLSEN is credited on? Remember when you made that claim dipshit?! Oh, and how are you coming with those 13 Bible verses you claimed existed?!
Watch everyone as Gary Chicken Shit Liar does not present ANY of the supposed "justifications" he accused me of, watch as he doesn't provide a page number with the credit of the GLSEN in his jerk off manual, and watch as he does not privide the Bible verses he claimed existed! Watch as the biggest fat assed cowardly liar you have ever encountered evades these questions!
Gary Lloyd...pathetic liar!! Such a chicken shit coward!
Actually, I'm through with you, Dingleberry.

Your posts have become as shrill and incoherent -- "You're a liar Prof Marvel! A liar! Liar! Liar!-- as that drunk who sleeps behind the Penn Station mensroom.
Mona Lott

Hoboken, NJ

#156340 Aug 25, 2012
Prof Dingleberry wrote:
<quoted text>
Still got nothin huh Gary?! You never will!! What a pathetic tool! Keep posting you cowardly lying sack of chicken shit!! Nothing demonstrates the stupidity of anti gay bigots like their own words!
TESTIFY! It serves as written PROOF of their malicious intent.

“Just keeping it real”

Since: Apr 12

Location hidden

#156341 Aug 25, 2012
Prof Marvel wrote:
<quoted text>
The Little Black Book was absolutely targeting heterosexual boys which is why the publishers of the booklet were busted at a high school youth conference handing it out to them. You want us to believe the publishers attended the conference with no intention of handing out their booklet to the underage students but the physical evidence speaks for itself -- the booklets were on a table for students to pick up.
That should have got everybody thrown in jail, including the principal of the school.
Add to this, the booklet was actively distributed to underage runaway boys at gay-run drop in centers like "Youth on Fire" a fact I established by calling up YOF and asking.
Finally, the content, language, and editorial slant of the booklet clearly targets adolescent boys. You don't say things like "If coming out will result in being kicked out of your home or school..." unless you're speaking to kids still at home or in high school.
Maybe you know of a sollege that kicks students out for being gay; I don't.
Also, the cherubic cartoon character used in the booklet they call "Dr. Dick" is a 1930's public domain cartoon lifted from high school health education pamphlets of that era.
There's much more indicating it was meant for underage boys most especially, the fact that the publishers were busted handing it out to underage boys at that Brookline high school as I've said.
The only evidence it wasn't intended for underage boys is your say-so, which simply isn't enough to make your case.
But the thing is this: whether it was for underage boys or not, it depicts sex practices normal people find despicable and medical people find morbidly unhealthy.
You seem to think "rimming" is a healthy behavior. You need to get your head out of your ass ... of your lover's ass.
And spare us your lame "Straights do it too!" defense. If you've got stats on that, I'll take a look at them; but anyone with a brain knows rimming is not a normal heterosexual behavior. Does it happen among straights? Yes, of course it does, but so does suicide and murder.
Meanwhile, the gay publishers of the Little Black Book tell us rimming, pee-play, and fisting are normal homosexual sex practices.
You can't have it both ways, pal. You can't tell us there's nothing wrong with the practices in the book then turn around and tell us gays don't do any of the practices in the book.
That's not the way it works, fella.
yawn! All that nonsense and you still can't own up to the fact that you outright LIED abiut the GLSEN! Chicken shit coward.

please keep your tirades up twit!

“Just keeping it real”

Since: Apr 12

Location hidden

#156342 Aug 25, 2012
ftabmember wrote:
<quoted text>
-----
Did you know that 40% of the APA voted to RETAIN homosexuality as a MENTAL ILLNESS. Yes, 40% would not succumb to the intimidation and bullying of the homosexual groups. Brave people indeed, to stand up for the truth while others chose to reject it.
-----
and people didn't want to give up being slave owners too. Bet you admire thay minority of fools too!

Im betting you own a Confederate flag!

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.

Wasco Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
One night stand 58 min find me 16
jasmine garza cchs 2 hr lmfao 4
CA California Proposition 19: the Marijuana Legali... (Oct '10) 3 hr happy hour 15,991
michael walker? 5 hr meh 1
vaneza marquez 6 hr Vaneza Marquez 37
Jessica Ayon (Jess Amore) & Marisol Ayon (Mari ... 7 hr ben 3
Hoe' 9 hr Purplepussyflower 9
•••
•••
•••

Wasco Jobs

•••
Enter and win $5000
•••
•••
•••

Wasco People Search

Addresses and phone numbers for FREE

•••

Wasco News, Events & Info

Click for news, events and info in Wasco
•••

Personal Finance

Mortgages [ See current mortgage rates ]
•••