Federal judge overturns gay marriage ban in Calif.

ap ^ | Aug 4 | LISA LEFF

[JoeProBono]

SAN FRANCISCO (AP) -- A person close to the case says a federal judge has overturned California's same-sex marriage ban in a landmark case that could eventually land before the U.S. Supreme Court.

[hope_dies_last]

Well we can expect the ground to start shaking out there pretty soon...

[PLD]

Lets stop giving the Queers what they want,and that is publicity..As long as we keep caring what these perverts want then they will keep making us angry..Let them marry their dogs if they want it would probably be better, after the ones I have seen they are UGLY and there is no wonder a straight person do not want to be in the same room with them..Let their Queer judges keep going..We have to make sure we get as many Dem's out of office as we can and get these cooked queer judges out of power..

[dragnet2]

The Judge was nominated by George H.W. Bush....

[Don Corleone]

Kalifornica is toast!

[yorkie01]

California, get some cojones and tell this fuzzy-faced judge that the people have spoken and you’re sick and tired of the tyranny of one perverted judge (AZ and now CA) overruling the will of the people. This was never intended in the constitution. Rise up and speak out and tell the damn sodomists to put it where the sun doesn’t shine.

[Cboldt]

The evidence did not show any historical purpose for excluding same-sex couples from marriage, as states have never required spouses to have an ability or willingness to procreate in order to marry. FF 21. Rather, the exclusion exists as an artifact of a time when the genders were seen as having distinct roles in society and in marriage. That time has passed.

[Filo]

This isn't about "rights"

Yes it is.

it's about using courts to try and force people to accept something unnatural as being natural.

No it's not.

That's what you are turning it into but it's not what it is.

Nobody is forcing you or anyone else to "accept" anything. They are merely preventing you from discriminating based on a characteristic that you dislike.

You're welcome to continue disliking it, but you're not welcome to force people to live by your values.

[jessduntno]

“The Judge was nominated by George H.W. Bush....”

We need a conservative party, I guess. Maybe after the dust clears...

[Filo]

And what exactly is the “law” that is protected?

It's called The Constitution and it applies to you as well as to "them." Equally.

[dfwgator]

The law already applies to gays equally, they can get married to a member of the opposite sex, just like the rest of us.

[RedMonqey]

Another asp in the judicial basket(Souter, Kennedy) delivered by H.W. Bush for the American people.

Hopefully this will be overturned by his son's Supreme Court pick’s Alito and Roberts. Wild card Kennedy from California gives me no comfort, however....

[agooga]

You’re not alone, here, Filo.

[Yogafist]

Rule of law is exactly what this is about. These judges haven’t been confined by the rule of law for a long time, making their decisions based on their ideals for society. the people are held in check with that phrase, but at some point, the judges must also play by the rule of law. Just look at that ridiculous decision that came out of Arizona a couple weeks ago, and tell me about the rule of law.

[Cementjungle]

Nobody is forcing you or anyone else to "accept" anything. They are merely preventing you from discriminating based on a characteristic that you dislike.

Bull. This forces taxpayers to pay for benefits for gay "couples" as if they were "traditional" couples. Such benefits were approved by taxpayers decades ago and were intended to help families when there was an untimely death of a father/mother, or other such situation.

[OneWingedShark]

>Rise up and speak out and tell the damn sodomists to put it where the sun doesn’t shine.

Those sodomites would tell you that’s what they’re *trying* to do... and they just want it to be legal to do.

[Filo]

You’re not alone, here, Filo.

I was pretty sure of that. Conservatism is generally the refuge of those who use intelligence and reason whereas liberalism is typically peopled by those who emote rather than think.

Reading the posts in this thread that's clearly not a universal rule, but I'm sure it's true more than not.

[Marathoner]

Bull. This forces taxpayers to pay for benefits for gay "couples" as if they were "traditional" couples. Such benefits were approved by taxpayers decades ago and were intended to help families when there was an untimely death of a father/mother, or other such situation.

Exactly! And just like the imperial Federal government, where does it stop? Why not polygamy, bestiality, or dropping the legal age of consent to 12 as Baby Ruth Ginsburg suggests?

[dragnet2]

The Judge was nominated by George H.W. Bush....

[dfwgator]

The Bushes, the gifts that just keep on giving.

[Filo]

Bull. This forces taxpayers to pay for benefits for gay "couples" people/taxpayers as if they were "traditional" couples people/taxpayers. Such benefits were approved by taxpayers decades ago and were intended to help families when there was an untimely death of a father/mother, or other such situation.

There ya go. I fixed it for ya.