California Court Decides Voters Were Wrong For Not Wanting Gay Marriage
Posted by Jim Hoft on Tuesday, February 7, 2012, 12:11 PM
A California appeals court struck down a voter-approved ruling that bans gay marriage.
It was a 2-1 decision.
The LA Times reported:
A federal appeals court Tuesday struck down California’s ban on same-sex marriage, clearing the way for the U.S. Supreme Court to rule on gay marriage as early as next year.
The 2-1 decision by a panel of the U.S. 9th Circuit Court of Appeals found that Proposition 8, the 2008 ballot measure that limited marriage to one man and one woman, violated the U.S. Constitution. The architects of Prop. 8 have vowed to appeal.
The ruling was narrow and likely to be limited to California.
“Proposition 8 served no purpose, and had no effect, other than to lessen the status and human dignity of gays and lesbians in California,” the court said.
The ruling upheld a decision by retired Chief U.S. District Judge Vaughn R. Walker, who struck down the ballot measure in 2010 after holding an unprecedented trial on the nature of sexual orientation and the history of marriage.
ADVERTISEMENT
-
Featured Story:
Rough Night… Obama Loses 36 Arkansas Counties to Unknown Democrat – Loses 67 Kentucky Counties to “Uncommitted”
Published May 23, 2012 at 4:57 am - 68 Comments
The Elector of Saxony commented:
No Federal Circuit has been overruled more often and more vigorously than the Ninth. It is fair to say that opinions of the Ninth should rarely be treated as law, because they almost never end up that way.
MrGoodWench commented:
retired Chief U.S. District Judge Vaughn R. Walker, who struck down the ballot measure in 2010
=====
because he is gay living with a boyfriend himself and refused to recuse himself !
Just one gay man is over-ruling the millions of CA voters , who voted for this prop –TWICE
MustComment commented:
Charming. Once again this proves the voter’s voice, has no voice. This should shock me, yet it doesn’t – as our judicial system is completely out-of-control and has been for a long time.
Cutlers bad Thumb commented:
This is California, I would give the whole state to the illegals, the gays, and all the Liberals,make them all live there and sign over the whole state to Mexico…
The only thing I would miss is Disneyland, but who cares ? It would be more than a fair trade.
MER commented:
As a gay man myself, this ruling is fantastic!
Mormons were behind Prop 8. Wonder how much Mittbot spent trying to prevent people from finding happiness.
Dont you ever get tired of hating?
Stuart commented:
I could get upset had this been the decision of an American court, but it happened in a foreign country…. California.
NeoKong commented:
Of course they did.
Did anyone think they would rule any different ?
Did the voters of California think their voice was more powerful than two federal judges….?
WillofLa commented:
No court judge can overturn a state or Federal Constitutional law that follows as it’s basis is the Constitution of the United States. Otherwise why have legislators write bills if some years later some p*ss ant judge can over ride it based on some uninformed opinion? Why have voters vote on a bill in order to make it law? Let’s just have “Men In Black”, written by Mark Levin, make all of our laws and then under pressure from special interest groups can change it ‘s mind when ever it wants.
Prop 8 follows the “Marrage Protection Act” passed by Bill Clinton that is a amendment to the Constitution of the United States. This punk court cannot over turn it….period. And states that declare they can over turn the law and have gays come there to get married are in violation of the Constitutional law of the land and should have their Federal funding cut off until that stop that nonsense.
Here’s the deal, mankinds history of thousands and thousands of years has proven that marrage is between a man and a woman (not a man who either thinks he’s a woman, or some mentally ill man who believes he’s a transgendered person, nor two men who are pretending that one is the man and the other is the woman), which is provable by blood test when they get their marrage license. Also in order to probagate the species of man and woman, marrage is the only physical way blessed by God in order to reproduce. This is a historic fact that the left just can’t come to grips with no matter how many homo’s they line up in front of some court house.
Remco Kimber commented:
The voters can vote all they want, so long as they vote the way they’re suppose to.
If not, we’ll bring on the unelectable and unaccountable judges.
All leftists operate this way. You can vote but only if you vote the right way. Hitler’s party was voted in; once in, no more elections.
Dare any EU country try to hold an election to leave the EU and see what’ll happen. Once in, no getting out.
MER commented:
Liberty,
How do you know what God wants? You are stupid, evil and backwards. Americans are over the gay thing. Weve moved on. Too many of you cretins just wont let it go…
BillyTex commented:
The reason that this happens is because we do not exercise the judicial impeachment. This Fall we must load the Senate with people that will remove judges that disagree with notion of self-government.
MER commented:
And can we also move on from the leftist=hitler crap? Its disgusting and juvenile.
Taqiyyotomist commented:
LIBERTY IS A MOBY
How many freakin’ times do I have to say this?
He is here to make conservatives look bad, and is a Lib who is primarily informed by South Park and Bill Maher.
MOBY.
Look it up, if you are clueless.
Steve-Oldlineconservative.com commented:
The Ninth Circuit is a joke.
Homosexuals fall into two camps, those who are activists and those that are content just to go on practicing their hedonist lifestyle. Neither has God on their side.
In 08 Obama was against Homosexual “marriage.” That will change. Obama has sullied the military by repealing “Don’t ask don’t tell. Next is the family.
Obama would sell his soul if it would get him re-elected.
Taqiyyotomist commented:
It is not “sarcasm”.
IT IS A MOBY.
Here to destroy GP. For that reason only.
Here to show his friends how GP allows insane, over-the-top comments by people pretending to be conservative in order to discredit GP.
GODDAMN conservatives can be stupid.
Liberty commented:
Taq,
Why would you say this about me? cant we all get along?
Liberty commented:
Taq,
Is Steve-O a MOBY? Look at his homophobic post. Now you are instituting purity tests for posting here.
I am proud of my unwavering conservative cred. Just cause your having a bad day doesnt mean you have to single me out.
C-Christian Soldier commented:
Is.59 OKJV-the Creator questioned:
paraphrase:
“What are YOU doing about un-just JUDGES …”
Then the Creator put on the FULL ARMOR-which was given to us in Eph 6-
Do we REALLY want the Creator to take the Full Armor back-because- if that happens-we ALL will Suffer…
C-CS
Billy Fuster commented:
Taq, what evidence do you have for accusing Liberty? Is this some kinda witch hunt?
retire05 commented:
The first point I would like to make is that a judge is suppose to recuse themselves from any case where the decision would personally impact them in some way, be it financial or social. Judge Walker had a vested interest in striking down Prop 8 as it would impact him personally, since he had been engaged in a same-sex relationship for years and striking down Prop 8 would allow him to participate in marriage with his partner.
The opinion of the Appeals Court will now drive this case to the SCOTUS.
As marriage laws are not discussed anywhere in the Contitution of the United States, and does not fall under the purview of the federal government, the pro-same-sex marriage proponents will argue that this is a 10th Amendment issue, and that California has the right to implement it. The defenders of marriage, as a traditional institution in the U.S., I fear will argure from a traditional POV, not from one of reality.
The reality being that there is no state in the Union that denys a marriage license to a homosexual as long as the homosexual adheres to the standard defination of marriage, one man to one woman. The debate is NOT that gays are not allowed to marry, they are, the debate is that gays are not allowed to change the parimeters of what constitutes marriag in the U.S. The argument can only be sustained if the proponents of same-sex marriage add a caveat to the claim that “gays are not allowed to marry” by saying “the person of their choice.”
But if gays are allowed to participate in what is called marriage with a member of the same sex, then by what right will the nation’s governments deny the same benefit to others who want to redefine what marriage really is? If the excuse is that we cannot tell people who they are allowed to marry, then how can laws against polygamy hold up? If a man choose to have more than one spouse, is that not also his choice, just as a man who choses to have a spouse of the same sex? What about the person who wants to marry their first cousin, based on the rational that their cousin is the “person of their choice?” If two closely related individuals, of consenting age, wish to marry, what is there now to prevent that union and the related social benefits derived from it? Can we bend the law for one segment of our society without bending the law for ALL segments of our society? Anyone over the age of 18 will eventually be able to marry the “person of their choice” with no legal ramifications.
California is not the camel’s nose under the tent. This destruction of traditional marriage will be just the first in a series of actions to come; the final nail in the coffin of traditional families; the teaching that homosexuality is a normal state in our schools (already being done in California) as we cannot be allowed to teach what will be labeled “intolerance for others”; the further erosion of Christian faiths in this nation; and the complete breakdown of society, as outlined by Marx many years ago. Remember, Antonio Gramsci told us that if we were to indoctrinate children into Marxism, it must be done before those children reached the age of 12.
And considering the recent actions of this administration, is there any doubt in anyone’s mind that these actions will eventually lead to the prosecution of Christian ministers and priests who refuse to officiate such marriages?
WillofLa commented:
#5 MER,
Hey, MER, why don’t you go out into the woods and like the Hippies back in the 60′s used to do, put together their own wedding ceremony, and have some Druid priest preside over the ceremony. If all your looking for in actuality is happiness, which I highly doubt is your true intent, then what difference does it make what kind of “marrage” you perform as long as you are happily married. Kinda. But since that’s not your true intention, which is to destroy America’s Christian religious culture and wipe it out of the society under the cause of Liberalism, you don’t really give a damn about “happiness” as you say as long as you and your homo friends know you got rid of Christian’s from American society. That’s all.
Otherwise we’d never hear about how happy you are that American law has been pushed aside by some homo judge probably in California so homo’s can flaunt their gayness in the faces of the rest of American society because you know how much we believe that your sexual/social choice is an abomanation. How long can God’s people hate evil and wickedness? As long as God hates it? Does that answer your question?
Taqiyyotomist commented:
#13
It was actually the “progressives” who filled the mass graves in Hitler’s Germany, in Stalin’s Russia, in Pol Pot’s Cambodia, and (FORTY MILLION PEOPLE IN FOUR YEARS) in Mao’s China.
It is Obama’s cabinet that saw fit to put a “Mao” ornament on the White House Christmas tree. It is Obama’s cabinet that considers Mao to be the “world’s greatest philosopher”.
It is the current American “progressives” who worship Castro, Che Guevara (who personally shot kids in the face in front of their “incorrect-thinking” parents), and Hugo Chavez.
So, no, we won’t stop with APT ANALOGIES. Progressives are following DIRECTLY in Hitler’s footsteps. And Mao’s. And Stalin’s.
How about when the mass graves in America begin to be filled (with “incorrect thinkers’” bodies) by “progressives”?
Will “Godwin’s Idiot Law” be rescinded THEN?
Probably not, as “progressives” are ignorant to history and blind to trends and parallels.
Doesn’t help that they’re also Godless. That tends to blind them even more.
valerie commented:
#5 February 7, 2012 at 12:22 pm
MER commented:
This ruling had no practical effect, and neither did Prop 8. The California state government has the law posted, along with various rulings by its Supreme Court.
California law already provided for marriage between a man and a woman. California later added “civil unions” for gays and people over 65, which would have the same rights and responsibilities as marriage.
If the law were set up logically, instead of reflecting its historical origins, the state would register civil unions, and the churches and people could call the type of civil union whatever they wanted.
Oh. They can do that, already. There is absolutely no problem if a gay couple registers a civil union, and calls it a “marriage.”
I know that some gay people think that they are discriminated against because they don’t have automatic powers of attorney, etc. The thing is, straight people don’t, either. Married people sign all kinds of forms that give effect to their rights. They use wills, designations of beneficiaries, powers of attorney, etc., exactly the same way a gay person must do it. Without those signatures on those forms, life gets a little bit harder when the readily-foreseeable accident or illness happens.
So, if you are gay, and if you are in a committed relationship, you could register a civil union, call it marriage and sign all the paperwork to your heart’s content, so that you can secure your rights in the event of illness, injury or death of either of you. In the alternative, you could skip the entire subject of the civil union, still sign all the paperwork, and still protect the both of you.
What other people think of how you live is really, truly, wholly irrelevant.
MER commented:
Willoturd,
You know exclusively what God wants? God loves all, not matter race, religion or sexual orientation.
retire05 commented:
MER, let’s see if you are honest enough to answer a couple of questions:
What state denies a marriage license to anyone based on the fact that they are gay?
What state asks the question “Are you gay” on any marriage license?
MER commented:
Val,
I should have the same exact rights as you have. Not some kind of lesser status. Your suggestion is a work around. Its insulting and worthless.
valerie commented:
#23 February 7, 2012 at 12:41 pm
Blessed commented:
Fake post. We all know it.
MER commented:
retired,
What states is it leagl to be same sex married?
What planet do you inhabit? Some sort of alternate reality for sure.
Sample Size commented:
“The Mormons were behind it!” Which means what? Mormons don’t have a voice in society?
And care to address the massive NON-Mormon/Religious voters who are uncomfortable with Gay Marriage.
Yes, it’s all about hating–hating Christians.
Republican debate early on: asked who supported gay marriage–every.single.one of them did.
Democrats on gay marriage: NO.
Sarah Palin on gay marriage: They should have rights like everyone else.
Biden: NO.
Soooo pathetic this message has become.
Marriage: leave the word to the church, what’s the point of wanting to own the word? The point is that gays want to rub peoples’ noses in an imaginary pile of crap.
Civil Union: make it legal and equate the term to “marriage” in law. Bam, done.
Then let a generation go by and merge the terms.
But NOOOOOOoooo…gays gotta get militant. It’s not even about understanding social cultures and moving forward in a positive way for all. It’s now about hate. See, you can’t tell them how to think–you nasty Christians! But, uh, we gay people demand that you accept us and think however we neurotically decide. Just makes me want to stop supporting their cause.
valerie commented:
#28 February 7, 2012 at 12:44 pm
MER commented:
You do have the same rights. Re-read my post. It is the truth. The real world has real solutions for grownups who have a purpose in mind.
Adi commented:
Taq actually believes we are headed to the ovens en masse? And he/she questions my validity? Seek help.
retire05 commented:
MER, you are obfuscating. Now the questions were simple enough.
Tell me what state has the question “Are you gay?” on the marriage license.
The fact of the matter is you don’t answer that question because you cannot answer it without changing the parimeters of the debate.
HaHa commented:
paranoid much? folks here are sick. And using the f*g word? Whats next the n****r word?
Sample Size commented:
And do you notice how gay people HATE the church, yet want to Own the word Marriage…
“We hate you backwards church people! But we demand acceptance from you guys!”
Just another reason why the entire equal rights agenda isn’t about acceptance and healing–it’s JUST about hating Christians.
Taqiyyotomist commented:
MER is right.
God doesn’t judge based on “orientation”.
He judges based on “behavior”.
Taqiyyotomist commented:
#37 HaHa
What I wouldn’t bet that your IP addy is the same as the mobys on this thread.
MER commented:
parimeters
is that the same as parameters? Otherwise, Im baffled.
what is obsfuscating?
Taqiyyotomist commented:
Open your eyes to the Mao-respecting cabal in charge of our Government, Adi.
You’ll see, eventually.
It helps to know a little about the Holodomor, the Great Leap Forward, and the Shoah, though.
HaHa commented:
Dude, dial it back. you are a wee bit paranoid. I am a far left liberal and damn proud of it. Whatever problems you have with your fellow haters and liars here is your issue, not mine.
Taqiyyotomist commented:
#41
Speaking of “not in good faith”.
Infer, you idiot moron subgenius. Figure out misspelled words and the author’s intent from the context.
What are you, a monkey?
injunjoe commented:
I guess they don’t call it the 9th circus for nothing. Silly voters what do they know? This is one court that needs to be shut down…
Adi commented:
To Taqiyy,
I never thought I would agreee with Haha about anything, but I do. You are way, way out there.
Do you have any New World Order info to report?
Tyranny's Bane commented:
Remember, there is no establishment.
The greatest trick the devil ever pulled was convincing the world he did not exist. – Verbal [The Usual Suspects (1995)]
#1AMERICAN commented:
what happened govern by the people for the people…CA is one messed up liberal HE!! hole
Taqiyyotomist commented:
I’ll leave the NWO crap to the Paulbots.
I see what I see, and say what I see.
And I see MOBYS, in increasing quantity, on GP.
You know who you are, and you’re abject losers, following a philosophy of abject evil.
No worries for you progs, though. Since you don’t believe evil exists.
“IT’S ALL GOOD!™” — Motto of the American Left. Anything goes. For us, anyway.
wanumba commented:
::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::
#23 February 7, 2012 at 12:41 pm
Blessed commented:
Fags will burn in hell. I know this. Jesus wants it. I know of a couple in our church who are probably fags. They should not be worshipping in our church. Its our church, not theirs. Once I speak to the pastor, we may clean up our church, if you know what I mean…
::::::::::::::::::::
It’s not a sin to redecorate and put in some new remodeling, do’t be anxious, I’m sure with your two fags after cleanup it’ll look great and get lots of compliments.
Ah, do your two fags appreciate you faking comments to make their fellow church folks look like intolerant Left stereotypes?
wanumba commented:
::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::
#26 February 7, 2012 at 12:43 pm
MER commented:
Willoturd,
You know exclusively what God wants? God loves all, not matter race, religion or sexual orientation.
::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::
You left out the part about God THEN perfecting us into what we are SUPPOSED to be, by HIS standards, not our imperfect ones.
NO one can get eternal life without a major overhaul, which requires giving up behaviors God doesn’t like. If you don’t agree, YOU have chosen to reject God, not God rejecting you.
Totally up to you, so whinging is no use. Total free choice. Infinitely FAIR.
Taqiyyotomist commented:
Adi, it will be your issue, when the time comes for you to decide: “Do I want to be a part of the monster, or it’s prey?”
A lot of Germans and Soviets and Chinese had to make that choice.
My guess is, whatever John Stewart and South Park and your favorite musicians convince you to do, you’ll do. Even if that means becoming part of the monster, and helping to fill those (inevitable) prison camps and mass graves.
You will get a choice.
Taqiyyotomist commented:
That last was to #43 Haha (and whichever other nics HaHa is using today)
wanumba commented:
#13 February 7, 2012 at 12:29 pm
MER commented:
And can we also move on from the leftist=hitler crap? Its disgusting and juvenile.
::::::::::::
He was a Socialist which is LEFT. Are you so used to using to wrongly you don’t know the real deal when you see it or are you lying about it because it’s inconvenient truth? Does our education system even teach people how to use a dictionary or is it always, what we “feel” the meaning of the word is?
I have to work in two languages of a day, so this Left tactic of screwing with definitions to screw debates and discussion is especially disgusting and obstructive.
WillofLa commented:
Back in the 60′s when Liberalism raised it’s hoary head, after they were able to gain more rights in main stream society for Blacks, “gays” started yelling that, hey, they deserved “rights” to! So the ACLU took on the court system with the assualt on the Constitution, and the basis of what is marrage in our legal system. Just as the rights of Blacks were already established in most of the states already, long before liberals decided that White people still weren’t treating them right, Blacks were voting, working, marrying, and living just as well as most in our society. But as man is, he is never contented with having what he has, he always wants more. That’s fine, but as our Constitution states each individual is free to pursue their lives as they see fit without interference or henderance from government or another man, and that what they are doing does not violate the rights of their fellow man.
Everything was hunky dory for generations until Socialist and Communists set their lustful eyes on American society. They just couldn’t stand the fact that there was one nation in the world that could resist assaults on it’s freedoms and liberties which it’s Constitution enumerates, and that it could not be defeated by simply convincing some people in that society that they aren’t getting their fair share. And as I stated above, some people just can’t be satisfied with having the same rights as everyone else does. “Gay’s” believe they are somekind of separate race or species of man and deserve the same rights as at least Blacks do. But before homosexuality was removed from the list of psychological illnesses by the Supreme Court, again back in the 60′s from pressure from liberal special interest groups and their homosexual lawyers, everyone knew that being a homosexual was a sexual deviation and perversion. Even today in most countries being a homosexual is considered such a perversion that it is against the law to be a homosexual based on that countries religious base. Even European countries believe it’s wrong and have laws that restrict it’s influence on those countries societies. Everyone except America. Being a Christian nation, with Christian beliefs at it’s foundation and making up it’s founding documents establishing that God is over this nation, Christian beliefs had held the foundation of those in our governments, city, state, and Federal. In that there were Christian’s who held those offices and had their beliefs determine what laws were right and which ones were wrong.
Liberalism comes along and says all that is wrong because there was this thing called “separation of church and state”, which doesn’t really exist, and has been fought by conservatives and others in our governments since liberals have used it in their suets against anything that was Christian in our society. And that is how we have ended up here with people like MER who come along looking for our sympathy in his plight as a “gay” man who is seeking more rights in our society than he deserves. Sorry, that’s not how it works. This nation was not formed by man’s law’s, but God’s. If you have a problem with that you need to take it up with God, and not Christian’s. It’s our belief that you are not some separate species or race. So you are going to have to be satisfied with the limits of the life choices you have made.
Taqiyyotomist commented:
wanumba
That tactic is a specific tactic also used in Islamic “Taqiyya”.
I cannot count how many times a leftist has said to me something along the lines of “Well, that wasn’t REAL communism. That wasn’t REAL socialism. That wasn’t REAL fascism.”
They will never nail down a definition of a term, so no matter which definition you use, they will pull out the REAL one and say “You obviously don’t know what you’re talking about, so it’s no use discussing with you.”
Interesting, that Taqiyya and the favored tactics of Leftist “debaters” (I use the term loosely here) have many shared features.
Not surprising, though, when you consider that the spiritual source for both is the same.
Tyranny's Bane commented:
If any CPAC attendee is injured or God forbid killed, will the media blood libel Maobama for his incendiary rhetoric, as they did Sarah Palin after Tuscon?
Here are some examples of Obama’s incendiary rhetoric:
“If they bring a knife to the fight, we bring a gun.” – Barack Obama in July 2008
“I want you to argue with them and get in their face!” – Barack Obama, September 2008
“Here’s the problem: It’s almost like they’ve got — they’ve got a bomb strapped to them and they’ve got their hand on the trigger. You don’t want them to blow up. But you’ve got to kind of talk them, ease that finger off the trigger.” – Barack Obama on banks, March 2009
“I don’t want to quell anger. I think people are right to be angry! I’m angry!” – Barack Obama on ACORN Mobs, March 2010
“We talk to these folks… so I know whose ass to kick.” - Barack Obama on the private sector, June 2010
“A Republican majority in Congress would mean ‘hand-to-hand combat’ on Capitol Hill for the next two years, threatening policies Democrats have enacted to stabilize the economy.” – Barack Obama, October 6, 2010
“We’re gonna punish our enemies and we’re gonna reward
our friends who stand with us on issues that are important to us.” – Barack Obama to Latinos, October 2010
Taqiyyotomist commented:
TB
Wrong thread, bro!
WillofLa commented:
#21 Retire 05,
Your arguement is exactly correct and very clear what has been the cause of leaving every part of the way our Constitution establishes our society. Any decay or negative change opens the door for more decay and negative change. That is why conservatives have been fighting against the attitude of people like MER for decades now, and that is if we allow traditional marrage to be redefined, then where does it stop? That’s just it, liberals never stop trying to tear this society down and removing the foundational blocks that established our country the best nation on Earth. Regardless of how homo’s feel it is.
MER, you will never get rid of God’s people from this society, nor our ideology which is the foundation of this country. We, with God’s help will either change you into a heteralsexual or make you leave this nation to go to one that will accept your life choice. And no, America has not “moved on” what so ever. As long as the better judgement of God’s people prevails things like Prop 8 will continue to stop you!!
Rhinestone Suderman commented:
Wanumba, is this the same MER who, the other day, on another thread, was all gung-ho for the Crusades, and blathering about how we had to establish Christianity in America by force, and rule over unbelievers?
Who’da thunk?
(Sings) Waaaaat a difference a daaaaay makes!/Twenty-foooooor leeeeeeelte hoooouuuerrrrs!
(No applause, folks, just throw money!)
Rhinestone Suderman commented:
MER, don’t you ever get tired of hating Mormons, “Mittbots” and those who don’t agree with you?
lucrsee commented:
God said, “Go and make yourself plentiful on the Earth”. We are here to procriate. Last I checked, you cannot reproduce if you are putting your sausage into another man’s buns. Deuteronomy. “Any man who lays with another man as with a woman shall be stoned to death.” You homos should be happy that God-loving Americans do not follow His book of law exactly, as they do in other parts of the world, or you’d be lyched in public. Is it not enough that civil unions allow for you to reap the same benefits as those who obey God’s laws? No, of course not. Not only do you want to change our laws and twist the church to your favor, now it is required to teach innocent children about the so-called “contributions” of gays to society which, i can’t think of one positive thing contributed to society by a homo. And if anyone throws out the name Harvey Milk, you are stupid. God does not love all, despite what homos may say. Typical libs – interpreting things the way they want to – just like Barrack Osama does with the Constitution. “Thus says the Lord God: Because the Philistines acted revengefully and took vengeance with malice of heart to destroy in neverending enmity; therefore thus says the Lord God, Behold, I will stretch out my hand against the Philistines, and I will cut off the Cher`ethites, and destroy the ret of the seacoast. I will execute great vengeance upon them with wrathful chastisements. Then they will know that I am the Lord, when I lay my vengeance upon them” – Ezekiel 25 vs. 15-17
CT commented:
Should the Obamination be re-elected I suspect their first order of business will be an attempt to force the Catholic Church to marry homosexuals.
MER commented:
So gay people cant love god and god cant love gay people.
Lemme tell ya a secret…there are gay people in your churches (closeted, plry). There are gay people at your place of employment. There are gay people who serve you your coffee. These gay people are fine, hard working upstanding citizens who pay taxes, buy cars, fix up homes and do all the other thing heteros do.
wanumba commented:
:::::::::::::::::::::::::::
#60 February 7, 2012 at 1:55 pm
Rhinestone Suderman commented:
Wanumba, is this the same MER who, the other day, on another thread, was all gung-ho for the Crusades, and blathering about how we had to establish Christianity in America by force, and rule over unbelievers?
::::::::::::::::::::::::::::
Oh, yes … MER the … er … history buff. Left him at the 4th Crusades sack of Constantinople, the capital of Eastern Orthodox Christendom. Yes, MER, that IS a bit peculiar, Crusaders sacking allies.
Oh, Wait a minute!!! WE could SACK California! Carry off the wealth! Occupy the cities!
Say! Maybe .. hmmm…. does California have any wealth or just IOU chits?
Patty commented:
California is bankrupt, now, the want Gay Marriage. Californians are leaving.
http://articles.latimes.com/2011/nov/27/local/la-me-california-move-20111127
California demographic shift: More people leaving than moving in
More people are moving out of the state than are moving in. It’s the economy, of course, especially housing costs.
High housing prices–too high for many struggling Californians despite a burst housing bubble–have played a role in California’s population shift.
High housing prices–too high for many struggling Californians despite… (Anne Cusack / Los Angeles Times)
November 27, 2011|By Gale Holland and Sam Quinones, Los Angeles Times
For a clue to why California is losing its allure as a place to settle down, just ask Jennifer McCluer, who moved out of California in 2007 after she obtained her license in skin care.
Unable to afford Orange County’s sky-high rents, she opted for Portland, Ore. “A big motivator was that I lived with roommate after roommate after roommate,” said McCluer, 30. “Friends said you could probably live on your own up here. The rent was a huge deal for me.”
Patty commented:
Maybe the only ones left will be the liberals. They may look into what their policies and radicals ideas have done to their state. More important issue than Gay Marriage.
Patty commented:
Gays are running liberal states. Marriage is between one man and one woman. God has no place in these states. No one seems to care. They have no right to marry. Period. But my opinion won’t matter. Just may opinion.
retire05 commented:
MER, if you are a spokesman for the gay movement, I suggest you seek another line of work because you suck at it.
There have been murderers in our churches. There have been pedophiles serving coffee. And more than one place of employment has had people who are outside the norm.
First the argument was that gays should be allowed to do whatever they wanted in the privacy of their own homes. So sodomy laws were struck down. But that was not enough since it was never the real goal. The real goal, if you were even remotely honest, was not to force tolerance on a people who viewed your personal actions as against their beliefs, but to force acceptance on a people who are not willing to accept your behavior as normal. If you really wanted only tolerance, you would have been content with simply being able to conduct yourself how you wanted in the privacey of your own home.
So now, the gay lobby, in its effort to make homosexuality mainstream (a goal of Marx, by the way) wants children indictrinated in the gay life style, contrary to the teachings of their parents. You want to be able to influence children by being able to adopt them and raise them in your way of thinking. And, most importantly, you want protections of being a “priviledged” segment of our society.
You do not want equality, because down deep, you know you already have it. All the arguments about “rights of survivor” are moot in our nation of laws. Through already existing contractual law, you can, and do, have all the same “rights” as heterosexual couples. But that is not enough. You are hell bent to be able to collect a $255.00 death benefit from Social Security. And your argument is boiled down to one salient fact; economics.
retire05 commented:
Matt, perhaps you would like to expound on how you think gays have their 14th Amendment rights violated? Perhaps you would like to answer the questions I put to MER?
And while I doubt it, I would suggest you read the Constitution and tell me where it even remotely deals with the issue of marriage.
Rhinestone Suderman commented:
Wooo-hoo, sack California! I’ma gonna get on my warhorse, and go steal me some Beverly Hills mansions! Let’s invade all the OC yacht clubs, swinging our maces and giving off our might war cry, UNGA, UNGA, UNGA! I want me one of them fancy yachts, with the gold plated bathrooms.
We’ll hold the L.A. city council hostage, until they turn over all their I.O.U.’s. Hey, they gotta be good for something! We’ll steal all the Kardashians’ tacky leopard-print spandex clothing. (The world will thank us.) We won’t hold former governor Schwarzneger hostage, but we’ll laugh at him, and refuse to buy his old movies on DVD.
Then, we can invade Venice Beach! Um, no, skip that. Venice is so crazy, they’d never notice, no matter how much you looted and pillaged. . .
(Hmm, yes, Wanumba, seems to me we did leave MER off sometime around the Fourth Crusade.)
(And after all our pillaging and looting, we will go to Disneyland.)
wanumba commented:
::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::
#64 February 7, 2012 at 2:19 pm
MER commented:
So gay people cant love god and god cant love gay people.
Lemme tell ya a secret…there are gay people in your churches (closeted, plry). There are gay people at your place of employment. There are gay people who serve you your coffee. These gay people are fine, hard working upstanding citizens who pay taxes, buy cars, fix up homes and do all the other thing heteros do.
:::::::::::::::::::::::
Twist and shout!
All with you there on the hard-working stuff – that’s ALL perfectly 100% good. No problemo. Terrific in fact. ANd you must be in isolated la-la-land if you think people don’t know any gays. The toxic stereotype doesn’t reflect the reality that everybody manages to COPE just FINE and very civil without nannies or any rodding, because most people are very polite. SO maybe you need to review that fallacious assumption that creates a toxic atmosphere for discussion and debate..
It’s the behavioral act that involves fecal material, which is the number ONE vector for a plethora of dangerous communicable diseases that has to stop.
Don’t see why that would be a problem, gays would live a lot longer if they abstained from it. Isn’t that correct? Doesn’t LOVE mean giving up your desires for the well-being of the one you love?
Oh or we back to that DICTIONARY problem again? LOVE is NOT a synonym for SEX.
“Love is patient, love is kind. It does not envy, it does not boast, it is not proud. It is not rue, it is not self-seeking. It is not easily angered, it keeps no record of wrongs. Love does not delight in evil but rejoices with the truth. It always protects, always trusts, always hopes, always perseveres.” –1Corinthians 3:4
How many gays protect the one they claim to love?
God has stated He loves ALL people. If God Almighty says we can stop whatever sins we are doing and start living as HE wants us to, then how pompous egotistical must we all be to snarl and sniff otherwise? There is NO ONE without sin, apart from Jesus. Everyone on the planet has to give up their behaviors that are not pleasing to God. Why do you whinge and whine when everyone else is giving up old lifestyles without the all the drama caterwaulering?
Seriously, you aren’t STARVING are you? Or on the STREET? YOu want to see the pix of the people we deal with every day? NO food, no home, two rag shirts when it’s chilly, no shoes, We have REAL problems here and you’re whining about an exaggerated hardship of not MARRYING!! WHen was the last time you gave money to starving kids in AFrica or India? That isn’t some hyperbole of Hollywood, trapped between latte and lunch, it’s no meal for TWO days. A child! No vaccinations, no medicines, no nothing! It’s miracle these people survive as long as they do, I’m frankly HUMBLED by their stoic nature.
They aren’t RICH enough to have the LUXURY to be sitting around in compfy expensive homes that have water and electricity in abundance, heating and cooling, garbed in top of the line clothes with gourmet food and extra disposable income to vacation in chic resorts to fuss about the outrageous inhumanity of no marriage license.
wanumba commented:
:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::
#72 February 7, 2012 at 3:05 pm
Rhinestone Suderman commented:
Wooo-hoo, sack California! I’ma gonna get on my warhorse, and go steal me some Beverly Hills mansions! Let’s invade all the OC yacht clubs, swinging our maces and giving off our might war cry, UNGA, UNGA, UNGA! I want me one of them fancy yachts, with the gold plated bathrooms.
We’ll hold the L.A. city council hostage, until they turn over all their I.O.U.’s. Hey, they gotta be good for something! We’ll steal all the Kardashians’ tacky leopard-print spandex clothing. (The world will thank us.) We won’t hold former governor Schwarzneger hostage, but we’ll laugh at him, and refuse to buy his old movies on DVD.
Then, we can invade Venice Beach! Um, no, skip that. Venice is so crazy, they’d never notice, no matter how much you looted and pillaged. . .
:::::::::::::::::::::::::
Ha! We could then throw open the irrigation channels and FLOOD the Central Valley, to much knashing of teeth, tearing of robes and pulling of hair … and THAT’d TEACH them …!!!
… oh wait … a minute …
Patty commented:
Gays are in the military, I suppose they feel they have every right to marry. I for one feel that a marriage is between on man and on woman. I will always feel this way and when the vote comes to my state I will vote NO.
That is my way to get my feelings heard. That is all I can do. Times are changing and I suppose you have to go with the flow. But I intend to make a detour.
We can scream and shout but if the majority votes for this, so be it. I have nothing gays but the marriage thing goes against what I believe. New time new generation, so there you go.
Matt commented:
The 14th amendment gives equal protection under the law. By denying gays the same marriage rights as heterosexuals I believe we are violating both the spirit and letter of this amendment. I see it as being in the same vein as the old anti-interracial marriage laws that were often justified using the “God wants different races to be separate rhetoric.” also, let’s be honest this whole “traditional family” thing is crap, people attacked the pill on the same grounds. The defenitions of a family, like the constitution itself is flexible. As long as theirs love there can be a family.
All the conservatives on this forum would have been arguing that Eisenhower shouldn’t give in to that communist MLK and the courts and force integration on unwilling parents and citizens in the 50′s and 60′s.
Patty commented:
NEW CIVIL RIGHTS MOVEMENT
Happy Birthday, 14th
Amendment!
Recent advances in gay marriage have created an interesting – and I use that term generously – cornucopia of marriage situations. In California, gay marriage was “illegal,” until May, when the California Supreme Court deemed any ban against same-sex marriage unconstitutional. That allowed 18,000 couples to wed – until Prop 8 was passed, overruling the Supreme Court and making same-sex marriage, essentially, illegal once again. But there are still 18,000 same-sex couples in California who are married – their marriages remain “legal.”
Iowa, Massachusetts, Connecticut, Vermont, New Hampshire, and Maine have all moved to support marriage equality. So, what happens if one of those 18,000 couples moves to, say, Massachusetts? Well, aside from having better access to lobster, nothing. What happens if a promotion takes them to, say, New York? Again, nothing, because New York, while not enabled to perform same-sex marriages, still recognizes them from other jurisdictions. But, if that couple moves to New Jersey, voila! They are not married; they do not receive legal recognition of their marriage by the state. Crazy, huh?
In June 0f 1958, Mildred Jeter and Richard Loving were married in Washington, D.C. and went home to Virgina, where they were subsequently arrested one night, in their bed, having sex, which was illegal. Why? The Lovings were an interracial couple, and in 1958 Virgina, it was illegal for them to be married, and it was illegal for them to have sex. Crazy, huh?
Right now, that very same fictional California couple I mentioned is facing a similar fate. While they aren’t subject to arrest for being married or for having sex (thank God!) they are still not legally married in New Jersey or in any one of forty-two other states. And in the eyes of the federal government, they are not married in any state. Crazy, huh?
The Fourteenth Amendment, which is 141 years old today, was used in the landmark case of Loving v. Virginia to repeal anti-miscegenation laws, making interracial marriage legal. It should protect same-sex couples as well. Via Wikipedia:
“The U.S. Supreme Court overturned the convictions in a unanimous decision, dismissing the Commonwealth of Virginia’s argument that a law forbidding both white and black persons from marrying persons of another race, and providing identical penalties to white and black violators, could not be construed as racially discriminatory. The court ruled that Virginia’s anti-miscegenation statute violated both the Due Process Clause and the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment. In its decision, the court wrote:
“Marriage is one of the “basic civil rights of man,” fundamental to our very existence and survival…. To deny this fundamental freedom on so unsupportable a basis as the racial classifications embodied in these statutes, classifications so directly subversive of the principle of equality at the heart of the Fourteenth Amendment, is surely to deprive all the State’s citizens of liberty without due process of law. The Fourteenth Amendment requires that the freedom of choice to marry not be restricted by invidious racial discrimination. Under our Constitution, the freedom to marry, or not marry, a person of another race resides with the individual and cannot be infringed by the State.”
The Supreme Court concluded that anti-miscegenation laws were racist and had been enacted to perpetuate white supremacy:
“There is patently no legitimate overriding purpose independent of invidious racial discrimination which justifies this classification. The fact that Virginia prohibits only interracial marriages involving white persons demonstrates that the racial classifications must stand on their own justification, as measures designed to maintain White Supremacy.”
And there you have it. The Supreme Court of The United States, in 1959 made it clear:
“Marriage is one of the “basic civil rights of man,” fundamental to our very existence and survival….”
The obvious question becomes, can race be viewed in the same manner as sexual orientation or identification?
http://thenewcivilrightsmovement.com/does-the-u-s-constitution-already-make-gay-marriage-legal/legal-issues/2009/07/09/4137
more @ link
Patty commented:
As time goes on more and more will want a new right. We have come through good times and hard times. We all share the believe that we are equals. A great thing and again, we are individuals and we all have a position, we may not share their views but as long as this world keeps turning things are bound to change. Like it or not.
retire05 commented:
Matt, racial discrimination is based on the visual aspects of one’s skin tone. Are you going to argue that I am capable of determining one’s sexual preferences simply by looking at them, which you have to do to be able to sustain the argument that discrimination against gays is equal to discrimination against someone because of their skin tone If so, how do I determine someone is gay by simply looking at them?
And exactly what rights do you think are conferred on opposite sex couples that is unavailable to same sex couples? No hypotheticals, simple facts are what I am asking for.
And no, the Constitution is not flexible. Actually, it is quite rigid, both in its conception and its original intent. That you choose to believe it is flexible shows that you have little understanding of that document.
Patty commented:
Top Gay Organization Admits AIDS is a Gay & Lesbian Disease, by Concerned Women for America, http://www.cwfa.org/articles/14779/FIELD/nation/index.htm
Top “Gay” Organization Comes Clean: “HIV is a gay disease.” 2/14/2008
Washington, D.C. — In a public statement last Friday, Matt Foreman, outgoing Executive Director of the National Gay and Lesbian Task Force, rattled the homosexual activist community by joining the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), pro-family organizations and a growing number of homosexual activists willing to admit that homosexual behavior is both extremely high-risk and primarily responsible for the spread of HIV/AIDS in the U.S.
Addressing the topic of AIDS, Foreman drastically deviated from the “gay” lobby’s party line by admitting, “Internally, when these numbers come out, the ‘established’ gay community seems to have a collective shrug as if this isn’t our problem. Folks, with 70 percent of the people in this country living with HIV being gay or bi, we cannot deny that HIV is a gay disease. We have to own that and face up to that.”
A little over a year ago, Lorri Jean, CEO of the Los Angeles-based Gay and Lesbian Center, similarly shocked the “gay” community by stating that, “HIV is a Gay Disease. Own it. End it.” ….
… “It’s extremely encouraging to see Matt Foreman, a homosexual activist who has for so long been in denial about the dangers of the lifestyle he has promoted, publicly coming to terms with the undeniable perils of that lifestyle.
“I only hope he will now stop promoting homosexual conduct and push for other liberal elites, especially those running our public schools, to do the same. Educators must truthfully address the ‘gay’ lifestyle’s potentially deadly consequences.
… ‘Gayness’ is not about ‘who you are,’ it’s about ‘what you do.’
The National Gay and Lesbian Task Force has now, in effect, acknowledged that reality. Their honesty is refreshing..”
http://www.ct4women.com/hiv_aids.html
______________________
This is my concern, seems like we are accepting this lifestyle by voting for Gay Marriage. That’s all.
Rhinestone Suderman commented:
Well, no, I don’t think race can be viewed in the same way as sexual orientation, or idenitification.
Next question, please.
(Wanumba, if we flood the flood the Central Valley, I want a pirate ship to sail on the flood! “Arrgh, arrrrrgh, me hearties! Pillage and plunder!”
Sings: “Fifteen men on a dead man’s chest!/Yo-ho-ho and a bottle of rum!”
wanumba commented:
::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::
#76 February 7, 2012 at 3:18 pm
Matt commented:
The 14th amendment gives equal protection under the law. By denying gays the same marriage rights as heterosexuals I believe we are violating both the spirit and letter of this amendment. I see it as being in the same vein as the old anti-interracial marriage laws that were often justified using the “God wants different races to be separate rhetoric.” also, let’s be honest this whole “traditional family” thing is crap, people attacked the pill on the same grounds. The defenitions of a family, like the constitution itself is flexible. As long as theirs love there can be a family.
::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::
Love isn’t enough for a family. We’re so gob-smackingly RICH and COMFORTABLE that we don’t realize how deadly a weak family unit can be at a less rich level.
I worked at a nutrition-rehab center for severly malnourished chidlren in AFrica for two years the WORST cases – marasmus and kwashiokor – and many of the kids died. This was not famine, but poverty. To look at the region, with full production, why would there be poverty?
80% of the cases we dealt with were children of second wives, in a polygamous society. We now have statistical proof that polygamy is an inferior marriage arrangement than one man one wife. In a non-famine emergency, we almost NEVER NEVER had a child from a first wife marriage, ONLY second and third wives. The family resources were too stretched, the interfamily rivalries too toxic and one of the fruits of ipolygamy was often mortal malnutrition for children. Multiple wives will fight, their children compete often brutally with half-siblings for scarce resources. Polygamy does NOT produce strong, cooperative family units.
Marriage permutations are NOT equal in value or outcomes. If someone says othewise, they don’t have any actual experience with other marriage realities. That’s not being mean, it’s stating a fact.
wanumba commented:
#78 February 7, 2012 at 3:36 pm
Rhinestone Suderman commented:
Well, no, I don’t think race can be viewed in the same way as sexual orientation, or idenitification.
:::::::::::::::::::::::
Gonna add there that there is zero basis for “race” in the Bible, in the Judeo-CHristian tradition. “race” is a recent invention of the evolutionists. A toxic one, judging by all the harm its done.
The Bible talks of families, tribes, nations – everyone with the dignity of humanity, a family line, a heritage.
wanumba commented:
:::::::::::::::::::::::::::
#80 February 7, 2012 at 3:51 pm
wanumba commented:
#78 February 7, 2012 at 3:36 pm
Rhinestone Suderman
::::::::::::::::::
I forgot to add, “Arrrgh”
No Man commented:
No man decided voters were wrong for not wanting McCain in 2008.
tommy mc donnell commented:
“this is what democracy looks like” liberal style. you can vote but if we don’t like it we’ll have our judge pal overrule it.
Rhinestone Suderman commented:
Wanumba, yes, race is an artificial construct—a largely 19th Century one, in fact.
Your manhood or womanhood, however, is decided for you pretty much at the moment of conception; it’s written in your DNA.
And even those societies that idealized same-sex relations, such as ancient Greece, insisted that men and women marry, and produce children for society.
(When we pillage Disneyland, we must be sure to grab all the plastic hook hands, eyepatches and pirate hats at “Pirates of the Caribbean”, so we can look the part as the sail the Central California main! Arrrrghh!)
Molon Labe commented:
Isn’t great that queers can get married! Wouldn’t you want to be the proud parents and inlaws of such a couple? Shakespeare had it right, first thing we do is kill all the lawyers.
I’d do it by stuffing them in the closet with Mer. The smell would kill them all.
The 9th circuit is just a bunch of queers, literally.
Molon Labe commented:
By the way can a father now marry his son according to the 9th. I mean if they love each other? How about Bill and his goat? Or Tom and his 14 wives? Or Achmid and his 5 year old child bride? I mean who is to judge?
Not the people, nooooo. We need judges. LOL
jony101 commented:
kagen and sotomayer with there short haircuts and manly looks and unmarried lifestyle, I wonder how they are going to vote in the supreme court. There is reason obama is so pro-gay. Pastor Manning interviewed obama gay lover years ago. It’s definitely an agenda on obamas part. I’m surprise that california voted against gay marriage in the 1st place, but I’m sure if they voted yes, the judges would never have overturned it. What good is voting if the judges have the final say?
wanumba commented:
:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::
#84 February 7, 2012 at 4:20 pm
Rhinestone Suderman commented:
Wanumba, yes, race is an artificial construct—a largely 19th Century one, in fact.
(When we pillage Disneyland, we must be sure to grab all the plastic hook hands, eyepatches and pirate hats at “Pirates of the Caribbean”, so we can look the part as the sail the Central California main! Arrrrghh!)
::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::
Disneyland! Bah! San Diego … real ships for pirates!! Yo-ho!
I think a lot of the male repressed desire is not being allowed to dress up….really dress up.
Being in Africa and India, and constantly urrounded by robes, and outfits, we’ve noticed there’s definitely something usual for letting guys dress up:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YxINX5Y6Fr0
See MEH, I am not as stogey as you suppose. Have some fun. Being all self-oppressed isn’t good for your sense of humor.
OH, the reason for the big blow-out ceremony in the clip was the king CUT TAXES and so the girl decides she’s going to talk to him after all.
Kermit commented:
Did anyone already point out that is no discrimination against gays in marriage yet?
A gay man ca marry a gay woman just as straights do.
BTW, what does “love” have to do with?
Obamas regulation destroy jobs commented:
I cant judge anyone who they choose to love..but I have a problem when they want to get married…as I believe in GOD, and the bible..the law of the land (civil unions) is the law of the land for LEGAL civil unions. Its wrong to be married according to the bible..Im against it.
MARRIAGE is for a man and a woman–period. You cant rewrite the law of GOD the bible. Give to Cesar what is Cesar. They should have civil unions–with the rights of married couples.
This is all because Obama and his openness to abortion, homosexuality, gays, his communist ideologies (Lenin/Stalin)…he is the devil..King of Liars. His attacks on our religion our oil, farms, truckers, military…science..everything..now he is lying on campaign finance..he loves power..
Rhinestone Suderman commented:
San Diego’s got some good boats!
vangrungy commented:
it’s the Pink Swastika redux
oldguy commented:
States don’t marry anybody, they issue licenses to marry. The marriages are performed by either a church or a Justice of the Peace so if homosexuals want to marry, let them go to a Justice of the Peace in the county. This is basically what a civil union is. Just don’t try to force churches to perform gay marriges.
el polacko commented:
the court did not find that “voters were wrong” but that the initiative, itself, does not pass constitutional muster in regards to the proponents’ case for the state’s interest and under the protections accorded by the 14th amendment.
rather than spouting inanities, slurs, and conspiracy theories, anyone actually interested in this subject may want to spend an hour or so to read the actual opinion of the court. they will find that many of their concerns were addressed and that the court’s conclusions were based on ample reference to precedent.
http://dig.abclocal.go.com/kgo/PDF/PROP8_RULING.pdf
Steve-Oldlineconservative.com commented:
English does not have a word that adequately describes how disgusting and vile homosexuality is but neither does Greek or French or any language for that matter.
As long as there are homosexuals teens and adolescents will be in danger. Homosexuality and Pedophilia are commensurate.
Homosexuals cannot justify their way of life. So why do they keep trying to pass themselves off as part of the mainstream? Fact is they don’t even accept themselves.
And why do they want to marry when they cannot marry? Only a man and a woman can marry. The assertion that they cannot marry is based on the human anatomy. Homosexuality is an anatomical contradiction. It flies in the face of reason.
Adi commented:
The enlightened know better than the whelp.
But then again, it is California the proto-failed liberal state.
Soon to a neighborhood near you.
Obama's Magic Elixir commented:
The court did not find that “voters were wrong” but decided that their votes didn’t matter, for the courts are above the peons. Only the annointed can decide what can pass constitutional muster, regardless of the intentions of the founding fathers. Nor did the 9th Politboru find that it needed to perform mental gymnastics any longer since they have enough queer judges to over rule the serfs.Now comrades,rather than spouting inanities, slurs, and conspiracy theories, anyone actually interested in this subject may want to spend an hour or so to read the Constitution. As it has been re written and re edited by the 0th Circuit Court. After the appropriate show trials and confessions the appartcheks will write the actual opinion of the court. These Party members will advance the concerns of the deviamts, perverts, and assosciated members of the Democrat Party and insure that the reactionary and counter revolutionary views of the Wall Street capitalists are dealt with by a quick bullet to the head courtesy of Obama’s TSA. Remember the military will soon be populated by queers while christians and other unpeople are removed from positions of authority so that the people’s revolution may proceed!
Hail Obama, hail the revolution, hail NAMBLA!
Adi commented:
There is someone using my name to post in this thread. #31 and #42 wasn’t I.
Simsalabim commented:
The fact of the matter is this:
Homos are very promiscuous as a group and they are not interested in the intimacy and sanctity of marriage. They are only interested in destroying and tearing down what God has ordained. It’s evil.
Look for yourself at the number of homos that got married in the states where it was permitted. Look even further to the number that got married and then divorced.
Adi commented:
#101
And right you are!
You should force The Flying Spaghetti Church (which you hardly acknowledge) to force a Flying Spaghetti Priest (which you hardly respect) to accept your believes (which are all inclusively perfect) and marry you according to the Flying Spaghetti cannons (which you are hardly familiar with).
Wouldn’t THAT make The World a better place?
Do tell.
Obama's Magic Elixir commented:
Comrade Matt expresses the view of the Maximum Leader Barrack and the annointed. Who can doubt their wisdom?
Let us hear it for the NAMBLA troopers who worked so hard for this tremendous victory for the 14th Amendment. Surely we will see many queers marrying lesbians now?
Obama's Magic Elixir commented:
Can I marry my goat now? Especially considering the 9th quoting the 14th amendment!
wanumba commented:
:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::
#101 February 7, 2012 at 9:42 pm
Matt commented:
The flying spaghetti monster disapproves of gays being allowed to marry. I must enforce the flying spaghetti monsters will on America in order to gain his favor, lest I be banished to the garlic pit and not gain entrance to the meatball kingdom. The founders believed in the flying spaghetti monster, beck said so! He wouldn’t lie to us, he’s a great American! Spaghetti monsters will be done and let us cast the gays into the shadows and preserve our great pasta pastafarian nation!
:::::::::::::::::::::::::
Never shop or blog comment when you’re hungry.
tommy mc donnell commented:
gays have been around since the dawn of time. why all of a sudden do they want to get married? people got married because they wanted to have a family. that is why religions santified marriage. gays are not going to have children so why should they marry. i don’t know if they got conned into this by the left to attack the the family or the divorce lawyers are conning them to create more businesss for themselves.