Comments

celia wrote on Sep 9, 2010 7:08 AM:

" Well, yes, 7million strangers voting on my marriage is wrong! And that's the whole point: prop 8 should never have existed in the first place.

I'm glad to see "truth" agreeing that same sex marriage is not a threat to "traditional marriage", even though, as my straight friend stated, that was not the "line" during the election. Bacause the prop 8 side cannont prove harm, that will be the end of propH8, the end of this particular discrimination and the beginning of a new, more evolved chapter in our history, nothing to fear but fear itself. "




str8notnarrow wrote on Sep 8, 2010 3:16 PM:

" "Noone has ever said same sex marriages harm traditional marriage"Huh? That was the battle cry of the propH8 idiots. I remember repeated lies about what a threat same sex marriage is to traditional marriage, lies about humans marrying dogs, lies about harming children and the whole "protect family values" balonie. That bunk worked for the lemmings at the poles but in a court of law with an educated judge(backed by educated Bar association, gove and atternie genersl)it just doesn't hole up because they were fear not facts. Facts matter in court and will prevail against fear. "




Truth of course wrote on Sep 8, 2010 10:22 AM:

" Oh, so 18,000 couples decide that the 7 million voters in the state of California are wrong? Straight, you just can't seem to measure the facts from the "twisted fiction" the Progressives spew---however, all is well in the garden, the correction will be made soon, hang on your your fragile egos!
No one has ever said same sex marriages harm "traditional marriage between men and women"---all the labels and interpretations you give it does not change it--it is not real--a union between anyone of same sex is still called "a civil union"--I think you should be happy about that! "




str8notnarrow wrote on Sep 7, 2010 4:26 PM:

" Barbara, I don't believe you watch the "liberal Media". If you did pay attention to facts, you would see that there are no facts to back up claims by the haters that same sex marriage is harmful.Good observation zoot. rory and truth are stellar examples of the need for critical thinking skills.(i get typos and spelling but those post make no sense) Really, anyone can google the info regarding Judge Walkers ruling and the gossip around it and him.

Truth is, we have 18000 same sex MARRIED couples in CA and more on the way= Happy Day! "




rory wrote on Sep 5, 2010 1:58 PM:

" mariage is between a man and a woman.. for 40 years I have been married. She and I a (male)are married do not call it that any thing else..That is the problem and many others. God didn't intend it to be any other way!!! sick is sick..I could go on but you know they will not publish all my view.. "




Truth of course wrote on Sep 2, 2010 2:21 PM:

" Straight and Zoot: My facts are true facts, I read those facts in the liberal media, not fox news! You people, because you have not believed anything which is factual and have twisted the truth for the last 10 years are wrong!
Why do you want to believe what is not factual? I feel sorry for you. Just because Obummer says it, does not mean it is true! I will keep telling you the truth, you can deny it for all your lives, I could care less about the results! "




zoot wrote on Sep 2, 2010 7:22 AM:

" It's good to see "Truth"'s arguments; it lets those of us who believe in facts and truth and the American Way remember that we're dealing with a large portion of the population for whom "truthiness" is far more important than truth. At least three factual errors in five sentences. "




str8notnarrow wrote on Sep 1, 2010 3:02 PM:

" "truth" where do you get your "facts"? Fox news? Judge Walker was randomly selected to hear the case, has not officially come out as Gay and it doesn't matter anyway as he did a great job! Why would a practicing hetrosexual judge be any less bias?

It's LEGAL to be gay so ALL rights should apply to ALL LEGAL citizens. And that will happend with propH8 as it is illegal to target a LEGAL group of people for inequality which is unloving. I'd hate to see your definition of "love". "




Truth of course wrote on Aug 31, 2010 10:39 PM:

" Straight: I don't know where you are reading your facts; the judge declared his homosexuality, that is why a higher court appealed his decision. He needed to declare that he is one of the gay ones, before he made that kind of decision, he is biased, that is why he is wrong on his ruling. He cannot make an un-biased decision as he is indulging in that behavior himself.
Conflict of interest....I dunno...what ever you want to call it, he fought every other judge to be able to be on that bench making that decision.
That is wrong. "




TO str8notnarrow wrote on Aug 31, 2010 10:00 PM:

" Your definition of LOVE is simply insane. If the US Constitution says that something is LEGAL, then it's LEGAL. If it says it's NOT LEGAL, then it's NOT LEGAL. Plain and simple. It has NOTHING to do with LOVE or HATE, it's LAW. You seem to be stuck in 3rd grade. "




str8notnarrow wrote on Aug 31, 2010 4:02 PM:

" misrepresented, here I'll break it down for you. Love includes the act of treating people fairly. Hate as in prop 8, was hateful as it targeted a group of lawful citizens to have unfair treatment. I kind of like the title but then I'm secure enough with myself to not make up lies about a group that threatens me not. RE; the judge. He has not answered to Gay question not does he have to and neither is it relevant. He did a very good job of FACTS, something the propH8 people did a poor job at. "




Misrepresented wrote on Aug 30, 2010 9:54 PM:

" I suppose people can write whatever they want. But Love wins over H8 should NOT have been published. The factual issue hasn't got ANYTHING to do with that title. In fact, it may still be overturned due to the gay judge's failure to disclose. "




justanopinion wrote on Aug 27, 2010 6:00 PM:

" I'm not saying its right, I'm saying it protected by the constitution. Sometimes we have to suffer through things we don't like for the protection of those things matter most such as our constitution. BTW political organizations also are tax exempt. If you form a political group who raises monies to support a cause, it is tax exempt. "




Marilyn wrote on Aug 27, 2010 2:56 PM:

" You can argue these issues till the cows come home and not get anywhere. The ruling was based on our rights, not beliefs. Out of the civil war came a bill of rights for all Americans. The people of California can not vote to change their constitution to exclude a group of people from their right to marry because of the bill or rights. End of argument. "




celia wrote on Aug 27, 2010 7:43 AM:

" justanopiion. You are correct to a degree. churches do have some tax exempt status issues that propH8 did challange and is being worked out in courts. Yes, churches have a right to preach lies and hate, some are really good at it. considering that most churches preach against lies and hate out of one side of their mouth yet spout it on the other side suggest major hypocracy, again their right. I just wish more people would have the guts to pull support from such churches. Thanks Steve Young! "




zoot wrote on Aug 27, 2010 7:03 AM:

" "The church has every right to raise money and create propaganda against or for any thing they want" -- indeed they do. However, the general populace shouldn't be forced to support, in the form of tax free status, churches that indulge in political propaganda. Churches should stay out of politics unless they really want politics getting involved with the churches. "




tabbitha wrote on Aug 26, 2010 5:14 PM:

" I am not afraid of gay marriage. Nor am I a biggot just because I don't agree with gay marriage. Marriage licenses were first issued to prevent people from marrying if they were interacial, related (such as brother and sister), ploligamy, and if they were seeking to marry animals (weird, I know. But some people are strange that way!). Have your marriage licenses issued by the State and then go have Civil Unions. Have all the rights you want but don't call it marriage because it's not! "




justanopinion wrote on Aug 26, 2010 9:32 AM:

" The church has every right to raise money and create propaganda against or for any thing they want. It doesn't have to be true because when constitution protected freedom of speech it didn't specifiy that that speech had to be honest. (Just look at the teabaggers). Does this make the church right? No way but it is their right. Some dirtbag church out of Kansas gets to go around and protest funerals of children and soldiers. No matter how badly we want to shut them down...we haven't figured out how to do it without trampling on the constitution! "




str8notnarrow wrote on Aug 24, 2010 3:35 PM:

" Why do some insist that marriage is religiously based when marriage lisences are issued by the county clerk not churches? Why do some people stubernly hold onto lies and fear about same sex couples? When they are unable to prove HOW same sex marriage damages straight marriage, why do they keep saying they are defending marriage?What exactly are they defending against? I guess these questions will join the others that go unanswered. Facts don't matter to fearful bigots. So, the reality is, Gay people exist; same sex marriage harms noone; get over your irrational fear and bigotry. "




celia wrote on Aug 23, 2010 5:26 AM:

" ditto zoot.

Steve Young, famed BYU and NFL player, and lifeling mormon, walked out of church when the propH8 propaganda was going on in the service. He then became an advocate against propH8. That was a big deal given his ancestry.I don't know his current standing in thechurch, but I know it went against the authoritarian leadership. Steve is a rare example of a mormon who said "NO" to bigotry and the wrongful use of religion. I know others who left the mormon and catholic churches because of propH8.A google search and movie "The Mormon Proposition" "




zoot wrote on Aug 22, 2010 3:40 PM:

" Though I can't see where Celia ever said about a church "demanding" donations, 70% of the financial backing for Prop 8 came from Mormons, after the church sent letters, held video conferences, and, in church meetings, asked for volunteers to support the campaign. When you're a member of an authoritarian sect, and you're asked to donate, you donate. "




Truth of course wrote on Aug 22, 2010 12:00 AM:

" Wow, Celia, I think you are very confused on everything you say about H8, no one demanded donations to the church for that proposition to be passed/defeated, where do you get your information-----MSNBC? "




Ken wrote on Aug 21, 2010 8:33 PM:

" Celia: Shabbat Shalom! That is what I said. Christians are not following what God said. To keep the Sabbath (Saturday, actually Friday night to Saturday night) Holy. Did God change His mind? They are 9 commandment, skipping the fourth. Things are diluted, twisted and most of the "church" today you can't tell the difference from the world. And, Sodom and Gomorrah will repeat itself. Thanks for your help! "




celia wrote on Aug 21, 2010 5:41 PM:

" Ken. The Sabbath is Saturday....

Once again, we see that there is a difference in interpretation. I read it s no state sanctioned religion. I see it both ways;state out of religion and religion out of state. PropH8 was started and supported by certain religions and pushed religion into government issued marriage licenses. Many churches pressured their members to donate to propH8 as well as vote for it. Using churches for such things also violates that sacred seperation.

"Even christians are twisted" yes, many are but not all. I know a few reasonable ones. "




Ken wrote on Aug 21, 2010 8:36 AM:

" "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion" US Constitution. The way I read this, it was meant to keep the state out of the church. Twisted once again just like the world today. If we truly sought to love and please God It wouldn't be like it is!
Even Christians are twisted. Did God change His mind when He said to keep the Sabbath Holy? 9 commandment, Sunday Christians. "




celia wrote on Aug 20, 2010 3:56 PM:

" tabatha. Athiest can get married.You don't need a church or even a minister to get married.Marriage is not stricty a religious issue. If marriage were truly not a civil issue, then, as zoot sugested, no laws would be related to marriage. So, yes zoot, lets see how the married folk would like to loose all their married benefits. Another question that only you can answer. Did you really read the entire ruling by Judge Walker? Honestly, did you? I mean the actual 136 page ruling, not the fox views version? "




celia wrote on Aug 20, 2010 3:49 PM:

" I respect the right of people to believe what they want.(sorry "truth" no judges ruling can deny people the right to believe as you falsly stated)I would not want to live in a society where people were not free to believe and worship as they wish or wish not to. And church should stay out of government! A good book on this is "Crazy for God" written by an evangelical Christian who sees the error of the bully pulpit in civil law.PropH8 clearly crossed that line, is unconstitutional and will be struck down. "




celia wrote on Aug 20, 2010 3:44 PM:

" back in town after filming in the middle of nowhere and iPhone kicks out of kvsun.Good points Gail,zoot and Veronica, espicially regarding so many children in foster care needing homes.Times change, reasons for marriage change and child bearing is one thing we don't need that much of.When sociaty did need lots of people, pologomy was the law(biblical).

"truth" the ruling is 136 pages and can't fit on this post. Anyone can google it.
tabatha. speaking of metaphores, the bible is a book of them. "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion" US Constitution/google again. "




Truth of course wrote on Aug 18, 2010 10:47 PM:

" Tabbitha: I am really happy this blog (read EDITOR) is posting your replys; she will not post mine when I quote the constitution, law, or morality of issues. Thank you for being a good American. She probably will not post this either, but frankly, I am ready to quit trying to let the people know; then it will be her responsibility to God for keeping them uninformed! Goodbye. "




zoot wrote on Aug 18, 2010 4:56 PM:

" Tabitha -- you are 100% right. Government should stay out of the marriage business, since it's a religious issue. Government should give no special benefits to people who are "married"; organizations such as hospitals should have no special rules regarding whether or not people are "married"; if people who have a civil union want to call it "married", it's their own business, not the government's. The proper answer to "marriage is between a man and a woman" is "so what?" and "your religion is your business; please don't make it mine." "




tabbitha wrote on Aug 18, 2010 11:50 AM:

" In as much as you say, 'the Church has no business sticking their collective noses into the world of politics.' The government has no business sticking their collective noses into the world of religion.

Marriage is a religious establishment. Marriage isn't politics, it's faith. "




tabbitha wrote on Aug 18, 2010 11:46 AM:

" Separation of church and state is NOT in the Constitution.

Separtion of church and state is a METAPHOR used by Thomas Jefferson when he wrote the Danbury Baptist Association to explain that the government could not establish a state religion. Justice Stanely F. Reed said it well, 'A rule of law should not be drawn form a figure of speech.'

'The purpose of the 1st Amendment was nto to protect American's , its instittuions, it's leaders, or the 'public arena' from religion. It was to protect religion FROM government intrusion' Judd W. Patton. "




Veronica wrote on Aug 17, 2010 9:02 PM:

" Also- last time I checked, there was that whole seperation of church and state thing.. I kind of understand that to mean that religion (be it yours, mine, or Bob down the street's) has no place in the laws of our country.

You may disagree with it on a religious basis. That's fine. That's your right. As it is everyone elses right to disagree with you and your thoughts on marriage.

It can't be said enough- if you don't agree with gay marriage, don't get one! "




Veronica wrote on Aug 17, 2010 8:49 PM:

" Elderly people can't (typically!) have children. People who are infertile cannot have children. Oddly enough, there are even people who simply don't wish to have children.

Should they not be allowed to marry?

The ability to have children has no bearing on whether or not people should be allowed to wed. (Besides, there are plenty of children in foster care that need families- do people NEED to bear more children?)
Personally, I'm wondering why this was up for vote anyways.Correct me if I'm wrong, but was there a vote for interracial marriage? "




Truth of course wrote on Aug 17, 2010 6:55 PM:

" Gail and Celia: This is my third comment on this thread since Monday that is not printed. Both other comments have the court report and desciption, so you can see this blog is biased for the Gay Marriage issue! PHOOEY! "




Gail Korner wrote on Aug 16, 2010 9:22 PM:

" There is an inherent problem with trying to legislate "morality" and religious beliefs onto the mass population that may have differing viewpoints of morality and religious beliefs. I agree with Celia in that, if you do not condone same-sex marriage, don't do it. But don't discriminate on account of your personal and religious beliefs. Just keep to your heterosexuality and perhaps unfilled lives and choose to live and let live. It is not rocket science. "




celia wrote on Aug 16, 2010 9:45 AM:

" Some things in life are simple. If you are sick and tired of reading about Gay marriage; stop reading about Gay marriage. If you don't approve of same sex marriage; don't marry one of your same sex.

Your religious liberties are not at risk. You have the right to attend the church of your choice and believe as you wish. Since some churches do want to perform same sex weddings, you deny them religious liberty by not allowing that.

Bottom line is the fearful anti marriage equality gig is up. FACT wins over fiction and fear. "




celia wrote on Aug 16, 2010 9:36 AM:

" The American Bar Association officially backs Judge Walkers ruling. Which is why they are lawyers and "truth" and tabitha are not. In addition, Walkers ruling is a must read in many law schools as it is a very good example of well documented finding of facts. Since "T&T" cannot substanciate their claims, they are an example of why prop 8 is not valid:their lawyers couldn't substanciate their claims either.

If you feel that "marriage licenses are wrong" then are you willing to give up yours along with all the goddies that come with it? "




tabbitha wrote on Aug 16, 2010 8:58 AM:

" I think I saw the same article! The judge was not only wrong but very arrogant in his ruling! I think the judge should be disbarred! "




Truth of course wrote on Aug 16, 2010 7:01 AM:

" I recently read an article regarding the ruling of this judge; on every issue, his ruling is erroneous, most of what he interprets does not follow the Constitution, and the horror of it all is that it even negates the right to believe! He took away something that is the essence of legimate government, the consent of the governed. The following are negated by his ruling: freedom, parental rights, and also the loss of religious liberties! "




tabbitha wrote on Aug 15, 2010 1:28 PM:

" Truth, I agree with you too! California and really pretty much the whole country is becoming a modern day Sodom and Gomorrah. Sadly, the will of the people is no longer heard. It's a shame when the wants of a few trample the rights of many. "




Truth of course wrote on Aug 15, 2010 12:32 PM:

" Tabbitha: I agree with you! And I do not understand why Celia is so adamant about publicizing her ability to marry a person she can't even have children with!
I am sick of hearing about it--So what?!
Let it stand---who cares---everything else is going to "pot" and this country will not be able to govern itself much longer, everyone wants to do things the way the Progressives want...so I say...let's go ahead and live like they want and see how long God allows this world to "go around!" "




tabbitha wrote on Aug 15, 2010 11:50 AM:

" I have read the ruling. I beleive the ruling is wrong. Why do you keep bringing up that you have a California marriage license? I don't care! I feel marriage license's are wrong too! Once again I will say, they were created to keep members of opposite races from marrying. Marriage licenses should be abolished. The sate needs to stay out of marriage! "




celia wrote on Aug 15, 2010 5:40 AM:

" FACT;my wife and I, along with apx.18000 other same sex couples, have a California state marriage license. FACT: It has been proven that the marriage of same sex couples has not harmed opposite sex marriage.FACT: Marriage has changed, gender roles and expectations have changed and many minds have changed in the light of modern science, psychology and medicine.

There are some minds that refuse to look at facts and lag behind on the issue of marriage equality. The same minds that refuse to read the ruling and are reflected in some of these post. "




tabbitha wrote on Aug 14, 2010 10:03 PM:

" Keep civil law out of religion and make no mistake, marriage is a relgious institution. You cannot rewrite history. "




tabbitha wrote on Aug 14, 2010 10:01 PM:

" Simple, don't get married! Have a civil union or a domestic partnership. I'm not saying you shouldn't have rights. I'm just saying don't call it marriage because marriage is between a man and a woman. And know, I don't know all about that lady and her issue. But POA is a powerful thing and, yes, it trumps marriage! My Aunt and Grandma (not related and yet not a same sex couple either) owned property, had bank accounts together, and had POA in case either one got sick. We never had any problems. "




tabbitha wrote on Aug 14, 2010 9:57 PM:

" No, I do not know all about the lady who had to get POA. It's stange, but looking back, I remember when I was in labor at KMC in 2001. Now, I have been married since 1997 and my husband is the father of my child. I had nothing to hide and yet the nurse would not talk to me when my husband was present. Weird. After my son was born, in my groggy state, I remember a nurse saying something about POA to another patient. "




tabbitha wrote on Aug 14, 2010 9:52 PM:

" Ok, but what happens when some nut (and let's be fair, every religion, race, sexual orientation, ect, has nuts!) demands to be married in a same sex ceremony in a Catholic Church? Catholics do not beleive in same sex marriage. It goes against our religion. Will the same sex couple sue the Church? That's when it impedes on my rights as a Catholic. "




Truth wrote on Aug 14, 2010 4:06 PM:

" To Celia, sorry, all I did was write the marriage ceremony part you quoted, but the Editor chose not to post it, because everything I write, she interprets as a challenge....oh well! "




celia wrote on Aug 14, 2010 11:05 AM:

" just want to be clear that I agree with "to tabitha" with regards to church is for religion and a marriage license should continue to be seperate. I have a much more simple solution to this whole issue. Let's keep religion out of civil law! By all means, keep attending the church of your choice, I do respect that right. I do not respect churches that meddle in personal matters that don't affect them.

Can't wait to attend more happy weddings andthink of the boon the the CA economy via the wedding industry. "




Truth of course wrote on Aug 14, 2010 10:23 AM:

" Celia, I have answered your question three times, but the Editor doesn't print my replys, she is in favor of you and other gays that want to destroy hetrosexual marriage,...sorry, you will have to appeal to her to print replys that make sense. She probably thinks I am redundant, but isn't bringing up this issue every other month REDUNDANT when the majority of voters are against it? Well, you can see the prejudice/bias here for sure! "




to tabbitha wrote on Aug 14, 2010 8:45 AM:

" The story you tell about the doctor is missing something. If you are married, you are entitled to all information and do not need a POA. Secondly, if marriage is supposed to be left up to the church and I don't attend church, how is my voice heard? Church is for religion...not everyone has religion. Therefore, it is the govt's responsibility to ensure that all citizens have their civil rights protected....NOT a religin. "




celia wrote on Aug 14, 2010 7:41 AM:

" RE: power of attorney vs marriage. Hmmm? that sounds unusual and don't know enough about that particular case.You should see the stack of legal papers my wife and I have for hospital situations. And the lawyer fee to write that up was not cheap. Even with all that, it depends on who we are dealing with as to if they will honor our legal contracts. Bottom line, there needs to ba an across the board legal standard that is honored at all hopsitals for all couples. "




celia wrote on Aug 14, 2010 7:37 AM:

" Ok, DP or CU for ALL with the SAME rights as marraige. Great. Churches can perform marriage. There are several churches(including a few in KRV and Ridgecrest) who will perform same sex marriage. Not so simple is it? Some people say "we were married in the catholic/mormon/baptist etc. church", which is still the case and will continue to be. Same sex couples should e able to say "we were married in the MCC, Episcopalian, Lutheren, Methodist, Prespitarian, Unity, Unitarian etc. church".Why not marriage licanse and then the church distinction if that;s what the couple wants? "




tabbitha wrote on Aug 13, 2010 6:20 PM:

" Oh and I would like to point out that just because you are married it doesn't guarantee anything! There is a post on the Ridgecrest Daily Independant by a lady who said that last year she had surgery and the Dr. couldn't tell her husband anything until they got a lawyer and she gave him power of attorney. So apparently power of attorney trumps marriage. Think about it! "




tabbitha wrote on Aug 13, 2010 6:17 PM:

" If you were married by the state then it's legal under the law. However, what I'm trying to point out is that the state shouldn't be in the marriage business in the first place! That should be up to the Churches. All the state should be in charge of is civil unions and domestic partnerships and they should make laws giving everyone the same rights without having to call it marriage. "




to Truth wrote on Aug 13, 2010 5:21 PM:

" Hey, Truth....gonna answer my question about how volunteers are related to gay marriage? "




to tabbitha wrote on Aug 13, 2010 5:20 PM:

" So, if marraige is a religious establishment sanctioned by God and the Church, and I don't go to church nor do I have one God, does that mean that my marriage is a farse? Not legal? AND to Truth, if the judge has a conflict of interest because he was gay, how it not a conflict of interest if the judge is straight? Illogical, once again, ma'm. "




celia wrote on Aug 13, 2010 1:53 PM:

" Hey "truth" are you telling another lie by saying Kagan is Gay? I guess anyone who thinks different than you is Gay? Well then, we have a majority.

Come to think of it, you probably should not read Judge Walkers ruling. It contains 80 finding of facts. That's probably too much for your narrow brain to handle and I don't want you to implode. You provide way too much comedic material.

The only votes that matter in a marriage are those of the two consenting adults being wed. "




celia wrote on Aug 13, 2010 1:07 PM:

" hey "truth" how are ya? Still have an aversion to facts I see. Judge Walker has not"declared that he is homosexual" fox news has. Even if he is, that does not disqualify him from a fair ruling. With your "logic" no woman judge can rule on anything related to woman, black judge on black issues, male on male issues etc. The American Bar Association backs up Walkers ruling, which is a must read for law students as it is so well done. I'll be psycic here and say, with certanty, that you have not read the ruling. "




tabbitha wrote on Aug 13, 2010 12:41 PM:

" Facts are that the government should not be in the business of marriage. Marriage licenses came about to keep interacial couples from marrying. I say do away with marriage licenses completely! I'll say it again, marriage is a religious establishment sanctioned by God and the Church. Same sex couples should have civil unions or domestic partnerships. It should not be called marriage! "




Truth of course wrote on Aug 13, 2010 11:51 AM:

" Celia: Judge Walker has declared that he also is a homosexual; so he could very well be found to have a conflict of interest violation, much like the new supreme court judge, she also has
made the same admission, so if this goes to the supreme court to make a ruling, she will also be in voilation if she does not step aside in voting. I know this is hard to believe, but the power still belongs to the people, not the judges of any country, nor to the POTUS--we can thank God for that! "




celia wrote on Aug 13, 2010 10:42 AM:

" tabitha, I, as well as every other married person, got my marriage license at the county clerk, not a church. And the person who performed our wedding said "by the power invested in me by the State of California" not by the power of "God and church" so get your facts straight. pun intended.speaking of ignorance, have you read Judge Walkers ruling? "




tabbitha wrote on Aug 12, 2010 8:50 PM:

" More like surrounded by ignorance! Marriage is a religious institution. I don't mind same sex marriage until it intrudes on my rights and the rights of others. I still do not understand why same sex couples are fighting for marriage. Let their be civil unions or domestic partnerships. But don't call it marriage because same sex marriages are not sanctioned by God or the Church! "




celia wrote on Aug 12, 2010 7:23 AM:

" My iPhone kicks me out of kvsun so had to get home to comment. But it looks like the cause for marriage equality is well covered! Thanks!

Well, "truth" the Bar association has reviewed Judge Walkers ruling and they back it up. And I highly doubt that all it's members are Gay. Judge Walker himself has not answered the Gay question, hardly something a "gay, liberal, activist" judge would do.

BTW Mexico and Costa Rice have joined in favor of Marriage Equality. So, with Canada being pro M.E. we are surrounded...by love! "




To Truth wrote on Aug 11, 2010 11:52 AM:

" What does being an active volunteer in the community have to do with being in favor of people having the right to marry? People are entitled to their opinions and beliefs AND want to help out their community. Exactly what is the problem? "




Truth of course wrote on Aug 10, 2010 11:35 PM:

" Facts: you don't scare me, so stop trying to threaten me! I only have one statement to make; how can one judge who also proclaims to be a homosexual, strike down the vote of 7 million people in the state of California? Talk about a conflict of interest!
Well, that is what is being examined right now, so that is why I said, "Don't hold your breath!" "




facts wrote on Aug 9, 2010 9:53 AM:

" Well "truth" the facts are,as Celia stated, that Judge Walkers ruling was well written, factual will not bow to outdated, unproven ,bigoted opinion. I highly doubt that you have read the ruling, which makes your opinion uninformed, like 52% of voters were in 2008. BTW your post did sound a bit threatening and I'd be careful if I were you. Anything happens to a GLBT supporter post can be traced.

It's 2010 and the younger generation has more pressing issues to deal with. Time is in favor of equality and it's none too soon. "




To Truth wrote on Aug 8, 2010 3:11 PM:

" Whether the KRV is 'conservative country' and 'will fight this issue till Hades freezes over' is irrelevant. The issue is being heard in federal courts, and the outcry of a small bastion of conservatives in a small rural community doesn't amount to a hill of beans.
The parties in favor of Prop 8 presented a very weak case and Judge Walker ruled accordingly.
All Americans are guaranteed equal protection under the 14th Amendment.
Long live equality for everyone! "




Truth of course wrote on Aug 8, 2010 1:49 PM:

" Don't hold your breath, this will be struck down soon...I would not advertise I was happy about this if I were involved in this community as a volunteer if I were all of you, this is not a threat, nor intended to sound like one, it is just fact. This community will fight this issue till hades freezes over, mark my words, this is conservative country. "




Gail Korner wrote on Aug 7, 2010 11:47 PM:

" We are slowly making progress to equality and it does one's heart good to witness that. "




Celia wrote on Aug 5, 2010 1:55 PM:

" Thank you Samamtha and Peg!

It is truly wonderful to see solid facts(80 in the 136 page judgement) overide the fear and lies propagated by the anti equality side. Judge Walkers legal, quantifiable and substanciated facts set the standard for future cases. There is no way the anti equality side has a chance against such hard core facts as they have none. even their two pathetic witnesses were thrown out as unqualified "opinions" not based in fact. FACT is a dirtly four letter word for them....Yeah fairness! "




Peg wrote on Aug 5, 2010 9:41 AM:

" Fantastic victory! "




Samantha Walker wrote on Aug 4, 2010 9:34 PM:

" I'm so happy, I've been on the verge of tears all day! I know it's not over yet, but this is a HUGE step toward finally getting equal rights to all! "