Breaking: Federal Judge Rules California Gay Marriage Ban Unconstitutional, Claiming Constitutional Right To Gay Marriage

Really?

All these years and we hadn't noticed.

Proposition 8 fails to advance any rational basis in
singling out gay men and lesbians for denial of a marriage license.
Indeed, the evidence shows Proposition 8 does nothing more than
enshrine in the California Constitution the notion that oppositesex
couples are superior to same-sex couples. Because California
has no interest in discriminating against gay men and lesbians, and
because Proposition 8 prevents California from fulfilling its
constitutional obligation to provide marriages on an equal basis,
the court concludes that Proposition 8 is unconstitutional.

Via Gabe.

More: The argument offered by those seeking to keep Prop 8 in place was, actually, my preferred argument: The state does not have an interest in propagating love. It has an interest only in fostering stable families (meaning: with children). Straight marriage is directly implicated by this interest, since most married couples have children. Gay marriage is irrelevant to this interest, since few gay couples have children (and none, of course, naturally by the couple itself).

The Court claimed this was a post-hoc rationalization, and, in any case, "irrational."

Further, it claimed that those who had pushed Prop 8 relied upon unfair stereotypes of gays and other considerations, such as the strong desire of almost every parent on earth (liberal or conservative) to not have his kid told about gay sex and gay marriage in school. Since the thrust of these new laws is always "There is no difference, and it's illegal to treat things differently," the only way to prevent this is to enshrine the difference in law.

The judge, however, found this to be proof of "animus" towards gays and therefore the law must be unconstitutional.

He has, with his little typewritten missive, declared unconstitutional every single state law that distinguishes between gay and straight marriage. He has ruled that gay marriage is a Constitutional right which may not be denied any person.

This ruling is not restricted, except by circumstance of the case, to California.

I think that David Bowie's Life on Mars? best represents my beliefs about this odd ruling.


Posted by: Ace at 04:50 PM



Comments

1 SUMMON THE FAAAAAABULOUS METEORS!

Posted by: Unclefacts, AoSHQ Pro Debate Squad, And Summoner Of Meteors. at August 04, 2010 04:51 PM (eCAn3)

2 You really need to fix your headline as it obviously matters:
Federal Homosexual Judge Rules California Gay Marriage Ban Unconstitutional, Claiming Constitutional Right To Gay Marriage

Posted by: laceyunderalls at August 04, 2010 04:52 PM (T3YvQ)

3 I wonder what tradition of marriage in western antiquity this judge used to come to the conclusion that a state sanctioned marriage could not be limited to a man and woman.

Posted by: MikeTheMoose at August 04, 2010 04:53 PM (0q2P7)

4


Yay.

I'm so glad we have an unelected, appointed for life aristocracy to explain to us proles what our country should look like.

So much simpler than that messy, gauche democracy shit.


Posted by: s'moron at August 04, 2010 04:53 PM (UaxA0)

5 It's breathtaking how many different ways they have of telling the citizens, whom they allegedly serve, to fuck off.

Posted by: The Pricker! at August 04, 2010 04:54 PM (lTSIS)

6 I'm sure semen squirting spraybottles will be going off up and down the west coast in celebration.

Posted by: brett favre's crocs at August 04, 2010 04:54 PM (9B8os)

7
MO's Prop C will follow the same fate by another activist judge, I suspect.

Maybe that's why the Democrats didn't put much effort into defeating it at the ballot box; they know it will be overturned.

Posted by: your fickle fiend, the summer wind at August 04, 2010 04:54 PM (uFokq)

8 time to impeach some judges

Posted by: joeindc44 at August 04, 2010 04:54 PM (QxSug)

9 Again really? Really? Well fire up the appeals.

Posted by: MikeTheMoose at August 04, 2010 04:55 PM (0q2P7)

10 Elections! Is there anything they can do?

Posted by: Homer Simpson at August 04, 2010 04:55 PM (AZGON)

11 What a shock.

Posted by: Dr. Spank at August 04, 2010 04:55 PM (xO+6C)

12 no rationale basis? Really? Can't think of one? at all?

I really would like to see a Senator ask him this question at the judge's impeachment trial.

Posted by: joeindc44 at August 04, 2010 04:55 PM (QxSug)

13 i'm not touching this with a 100 ft pole. or joanies oven mitts.
alright maybe once
why isn't civil marriage acceptable? with legal rights, taxes, hosptitalization rights, partner rights after death?
why marriage?
srs question. don't want to fight , just understand why.

Posted by: willow at August 04, 2010 04:55 PM (/x2TR)

14 By the way, what exactly is the California state budget for judicial crowns and other assorted sovereign headwear?

Posted by: George Orwell at August 04, 2010 04:56 PM (AZGON)

15 Wow. Just wow. I guess Missourians can expect teh same with Prop C.

Posted by: Darth Rove at August 04, 2010 04:56 PM (GfYt/)

16 Next, removing that unconstitutional ban on the marriage of man and goat. Our love cannot be denied!

Posted by: Abdul Alhazred at August 04, 2010 04:56 PM (VmtE9)

17 So where is the Constitutional right to a marriage license? Do I have a Constitutional right to a plumbers license? Since your Rights come from God, I wonder what God would say about this crap.

As far as I know, the Constitution and it's penumbra and emanations only included abortion.

Posted by: bill-tb at August 04, 2010 04:57 PM (y+QfZ)

18 This was the least surprising thing ever- militant homosexual judge rules for gay marriage just for the hell of it.
My state is a bad joke.

Posted by: jjshaka at August 04, 2010 04:57 PM (lkUER)

19 My Handy-Dandy Foolproof Screening Process For Potential Federal Government Officials Which Would Put An End To All This Insanity

1.) Ask the candidate if they want the office.
2.) a.) If the answer is 'no', they may seek the office.
b.) If the answer is 'yes', they are permanently barred from Federal office.

Posted by: DarkLordOfTheIntarWebs at August 04, 2010 04:58 PM (IkEhE)

20 Meanwhile, Ace's manic phase continues unabated. The depression is going to be historic. Is it time to be concerned?

Posted by: AnonymousDrivel at August 04, 2010 04:58 PM (swuwV)

21 Gee, I wonder...Clinton appointed judge? [check]. Judge shopping [check]. Nefarious bullshit [check].

Posted by: Darth Rove at August 04, 2010 04:58 PM (GfYt/)

22 Fuck you very much, Clownifornia.

Posted by: Proposition C at August 04, 2010 04:58 PM (AZGON)

23 "There is no rational justification for this unique pattern of discrimination."

Its not discriminatory. A gay man is equally able to marry a woman as a straight man. Duh.

Posted by: joeindc44 at August 04, 2010 04:58 PM (QxSug)

24 The progressive income tax fails to advance any rational basis in singling out those of various means of wealth for a higher rate of taxation. Indeed, the evidence shows the progressive income tax does nothing more than enshrine in the California Constitution the notion that certain individuals are superior to others based on economic status. Because California has no interest in discriminating against anyone, and because the progressive income tax prevents California from fulfilling its constitutional obligation to provide the ability of citizens to engage in private wealth accumulation on an equal basis, the court concludes that the progressive income tax is unconstitutional.

Wonder how many laws we can strike down like this....

Posted by: Doc at August 04, 2010 04:59 PM (MYT77)

25 Is it one man one goat, or can you marry the whole herd?

Posted by: KF at August 04, 2010 04:59 PM (ytCsK)

26 I thought the judge was a conservative. Why does everyone think he's gay?

Posted by: Dr. Spank at August 04, 2010 04:59 PM (xO+6C)

27 For those of you in Clownifornia, Dennis Prager ought to be interesting listening tomorrow.

Posted by: George Orwell at August 04, 2010 05:00 PM (AZGON)

28 Next he should declare protease inhibitors unConstitutional, and the EPA can put HIV on the endangered species list. Fair is fair.

Posted by: Jay Guevara at August 04, 2010 05:00 PM (L0i1S)

29 More -- added a digest.

Posted by: ace at August 04, 2010 05:00 PM (KUUXH)

30 See! I told you so! The Federal government rules you, bitches! Why, you uppity commoners aren't even worth a bit of my urine!

P.S. Waxman just asked me to be his bride. I'm flushed with excitement. And cocaine. But mostly excitement.

Posted by: Fortney Stark at August 04, 2010 05:01 PM (k4bdL)

31 Said it before in another thread... Clownifornia may be the first state to declare polygamy legal if you're Muslim. Give it five years.

Posted by: George Orwell at August 04, 2010 05:01 PM (AZGON)

32 I want to be called Loretta.

Posted by: Stan at August 04, 2010 05:01 PM (eCAn3)

33 He has, with his little typewritten missive, declared unconstitutional every single state law that distinguishes between gay and straight realmarriage.
FIFY.

Posted by: Jay Guevara at August 04, 2010 05:01 PM (L0i1S)

34 Muhammed (pbuh) allows me to marry 4 goats and have as many goat concubines as I may support.

Posted by: Abdul Alhazred at August 04, 2010 05:02 PM (VmtE9)

35
why marriage, you ask?

The Left is using the homosexuals to ultimately strip the churches of their 501c status. The Church's practices will be found to be unconstitutional and will lose their tax-free protection.

Essentially, the Left is trying to drive religion out of business.Without religion, more people turn to government. Read The Grand Inquisitor.

Posted by: your fickle fiend, the summer wind at August 04, 2010 05:02 PM (uFokq)

36 The Benevolent Dictators strike again.

Posted by: davidt at August 04, 2010 05:02 PM (HtIec)

37 The judge made a fundamental error in his decision. The Constitution affirms rights of individual American citizens. It does not affirm or confer rights on couples. The judge speaks of Prop. 8 asserting that mixed-sex couples are superior to same-sex couples and finds that un-Constitutional... but the Constitution doesn't speak to equal protection of couples by composition, only equal protection of individuals. And if any State can make laws defining the parameters of a valid marriage in that State, its obligation is to ensure that all individual citizens of that State are held to the same standard -- so long as forbidding an individual citizen from obtaining a license to marry a person of the same sex applies to all citizens, equal protection is satisfied.

Posted by: stuiec at August 04, 2010 05:02 PM (7AOgy)

38 Posted by: Doc at August 04, 2010 04:59 PM (MYT77)

Well played.

Unfortunately you used reason. Therefore you are disqualified.

Posted by: George Orwell at August 04, 2010 05:02 PM (AZGON)

39 Why the fuck do we even bother?

No matter what, the liberals will always win. The country is finished.

Posted by: I give up at August 04, 2010 05:02 PM (gLNLT)

40 because Proposition 8 prevents California from fulfilling its constitutional obligation to provide marriages on an equal basis

I can't find that right, even in my copy from the CATO institute - does he provide a reference in the text?

Posted by: Jean at August 04, 2010 05:03 PM (WkuV6)

41 Hope this will just stoke the justified anger across the land.

That kids should be raised by a man and a woman isn't not "rational"?!
F.OFF, Judge Walker.

Coming soon: bans on preferences for "traditional couples" in adoptions; bans on teaching Judeo-Christian views on homosexuality. Bans on my right to call male/male sex pretty disgusting.

Posted by: ParisParamus at August 04, 2010 05:03 PM (GgR+e)

42 Gee, activist judge violates the will of the people to make up non-existent rights. What a surprise...

Last time I checked, there wasn't anything about gay marriage in the constitution. Instead of changing hearts and minds in California the gays seem far more interested in minority-rule by judicial fiat. And yet they act so surprised that those of us on the right are tired of their antics. They claim they want equal rights but then subvert the rights of fellow citizens. You know, if the majority of gays weren't leftist scum bags maybe they'd get more respect and latitude on the marriage issue.

Posted by: ChicagoJedi at August 04, 2010 05:03 PM (WZFkG)

43 I want to have babies!

Posted by: Loretta, who was formerly Stan at August 04, 2010 05:03 PM (eCAn3)

44 Let me think.
In the western world marriage as an institution of the state dates back to Ancient Greece.

At that time the purpose revolved around procreative activity, and encouraging a better upbringing environment for the next generation of citizens.

As many know the Greeks were not anti-gay, but the state simply had no interest in homosexual relationships.

Posted by: MikeTheMoose at August 04, 2010 05:03 PM (0q2P7)

45 Judges. Always trying to stick a round peg into a ...well... round peg.

Posted by: dogfish at August 04, 2010 05:04 PM (Ncv/n)

46 Is it one man one goat, or can you marry the whole herd?
Posted by: KF

If the definition of what constitutes the couple is discriminatory, then so is the number. As is the definition of 'adult'.

Posted by: Blue Hen at August 04, 2010 05:04 PM (R2fpr)

47 Polygamy next, folks. Much easier to support under freedom of religion than this made up nonsense.

Posted by: Y-not at August 04, 2010 05:05 PM (5ZZzF)

48 The Constitution affirms rights of individual American citizens. It does not affirm or confer rights on couples.

You don't expect us to read that shit, do you?

Posted by: U. S. District Court at August 04, 2010 05:05 PM (AZGON)

49 "This ruling is not restricted, except by circumstance of the case, to California."
As a practical matter, it doesn't apply beyond the boundaries of the Ninth Circuit. If the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals rules on the case, its decision will apply only within the boundaries of the Ninth Circuit. Only if and when the US Supreme Court rules on the case will the decision be deemed to apply nationwide.

Posted by: stuiec at August 04, 2010 05:05 PM (7AOgy)

50 I oppose homosexuals being married because I believe homosexuality to be a mental illness and the response should be along a continuum of treatment to imprisonment.
I am hard pressed to understand how it is people without my extreme views get all up in arms about homos marrying.

Certainly you reject the idea that the primary purpose of marriage is procreation, and cling to some silly, womanly idea of a life long love. (urp)

It's actually a little insulting this talking out of both sides of your mouth, if you do not have a problem with homosexuality then please explain to me the problem with the marriage. The only problem I can think of is you don't have the stones to come out and say homosexuality is perverted,

Posted by: EzE at August 04, 2010 05:06 PM (W59Qh)

51 The Constitution affirms rights of individual American citizens. It does not affirm or confer rights on couples. You don't expect us to read that shit, do you?
Posted by: U. S. District Court at August 04, 2010 05:05 PM (AZGON)
You would expect Federal judges to be very familiar with the US Constitution -- the conservative ones because it is dear to their hearts, and the liberal ones because it's convenient reading material in the bathroom... may as well read it before they wipe their asses with it, yes?

Posted by: stuiec at August 04, 2010 05:07 PM (7AOgy)

52 admit it, you always knew that liberal judges would find a way to back-door gay marriage...

Posted by: phreshone at August 04, 2010 05:07 PM (1AnxB)

53 By its terms, I am saying there is nothing in the opinion that restricts the reasoning only to california.

Simply put, the judge has found there is no rational basis whatsoever to distinguish.

he hath so ordered.

Posted by: ace at August 04, 2010 05:07 PM (KUUXH)

54 Wow, Ace! Today must be a P.R. for you--most posts evah? What a banner day, plus you scooped Gabe! He double posted you--heh! How do you like them apples?

Posted by: runningrn at August 04, 2010 05:07 PM (CfmlF)

55 Probably plenty of Jazz Hands right about now...

Posted by: conscious, but incoherent at August 04, 2010 05:07 PM (YVZlY)

56 Bans on my right to call male/male sex pretty disgusting.

Didn't you read my book? That's not free speech, that's hate speech. So it's verboten.

If I control the language, I control your thought. And Ingsoc controls the universities, the schools. You will learn to love BB. You will.

Posted by: George Orwell at August 04, 2010 05:08 PM (AZGON)

57 Last time I checked, there wasn't anything about gay marriage in the constitution.

It's right there, next to the abortion clause.

Posted by: Alec Leamas at August 04, 2010 05:08 PM (r1OG3)

58 Judges. Always trying to stick a round peg into a ...well... round peg squeak hole.
Posted by: dogfish at August 04, 2010 05:04 PM (Ncv/n)
FIFY.

Posted by: stuiec at August 04, 2010 05:08 PM (7AOgy)

59 stuiec, you're being a little specious there.

It is an individual right to get married. Once we gave legal rights to some couples, we have to give them to all couples.

It's the right call.

The church can define marriage anyway it wants and that needs to be protected.

But if the state treats one person one way, it has to treat everyone the same way.

If we don't believe in equal protections under the law, then I don't know what we believe in.

Posted by: Tommy V at August 04, 2010 05:08 PM (qU57d)

60 I've known several gay guys that married women and had kids.

So what's the big civil rights problem here? No one stopping them from getting married.

Posted by: FreakyBoy at August 04, 2010 05:08 PM (uKraB)

61 Brillant point again stuiec. You da man.

Posted by: dagny at August 04, 2010 05:08 PM (464eJ)

62 6 I'm sure semen squirting spraybottles will be going off up and down the west coast in celebration.





Erections have consequences, people!

Posted by: runningrn at August 04, 2010 05:08 PM (CfmlF)

63 You will learn to love BB. You will.
Posted by: George Orwell at August 04, 2010 05:08 PM (AZGON)
BB - "Boy-on-Boy," right?

Posted by: stuiec at August 04, 2010 05:09 PM (7AOgy)

64 Well, now the gays get to discover the joy of the marriage penalty. You belittle western culture, I give you monkey for your back!

Posted by: Penfold at August 04, 2010 05:09 PM (1PeEC)

65 16
Next, removing that unconstitutional ban on the marriage of man and goat. Our love cannot be denied!

Posted by: Abdul Alhazred at August 04, 2010 04:56 PM (VmtE9)
**************************Hey, Abdul -- how's it hangin'?

Posted by: cthulhu at August 04, 2010 05:09 PM (/0IOT)

66 I feel gays should be allowed to as miserable as the rest of us.

Posted by: Dr. Spank at August 04, 2010 05:09 PM (xO+6C)

67 I can see no reason why I shouldn't be able to marry a man and a woman if I so choose. Marriage Schmarriage.

Posted by: 4thGenerationBuck at August 04, 2010 05:10 PM (AtjNL)

68 How about making the divorce fees ultra-high... you want a contract with the state's consent, breaking it is going to cost you...

Posted by: phreshone at August 04, 2010 05:10 PM (1AnxB)

69 You know, this was secretly a plot by the matrimonial bar to generate more business.

Posted by: Penfold at August 04, 2010 05:12 PM (1PeEC)

70 What's dear leader going to say?

As I recall, he was against gay marriage.... or at least said he was.

Will he have Holder file against this ruling?

Posted by: FreakyBoy at August 04, 2010 05:12 PM (uKraB)

71 39 Why the fuck do we even bother?No matter what, the liberals will always win. The country is finished.

I'm with ya!

Posted by: Freedom at August 04, 2010 05:12 PM (zgZzy)

72 OK Ace. What's the "Life on Mars" reference about?
Do I take that as a reference as to how far out there removedCalifornia/thisruling is or is it something deeper?

Posted by: Jim in San Diego at August 04, 2010 05:12 PM (oIp16)

73 It's actually a little insulting this talking out of both sides of your mouth, if you do not have a problem with homosexuality then please explain to me the problem with the marriage. The only problem I can think of is you don't have the stones to come out and say homosexuality is perverted,
Posted by: EzE

Try reading some of the posts. The reasoning is terrible, and the judge had a conflict of interest. those are the problems. As is the undermining of the other factors that currently define marriage (two/adults).
I have the stones to say that gay marriage has never been recognized in the US until now. And that it was arived at by judicial fiat. And that after ignoring a vote and attacks upon people that voted or donated money.
Think harder.

Posted by: Blue Hen at August 04, 2010 05:13 PM (R2fpr)

74 64 Well, now the gays get to discover the joy of the marriage penalty. You belittle western culture, I give you monkey for your back!
Posted by: Penfold at August 04, 2010 05:09 PM (1PeEC)
and the pain of divorce!

Posted by: conscious, but incoherent at August 04, 2010 05:13 PM (YVZlY)

75 The Big One cannot come to Kalipornia soon enough.

Posted by: Hatchet Five at August 04, 2010 05:13 PM (GBTXy)

76 time to impeach some judges

Time to elect some conservative Senators and Congressmen so we can impeach and convict some judges.

Posted by: John P. Squibob at August 04, 2010 05:13 PM (/U/Mr)

77 I'm re-reading my tattered copy of the Constitution and I'm missing the part where it says judges get to nullify the will of the people.

someone put me some effin knowledge

Posted by: Unclefacts, AoSHQ Pro Debate Squad, And Summoner Of Meteors. at August 04, 2010 05:13 PM (eCAn3)

78 singling out gay men and lesbians for denial of a marriage license.
Any flaming gay man who wants to marry a woman may do so legally and lawfully. I know a few who have done so.
Two straight men cannot marry. Two straight women cannot marry.
A gay man and a lesbian may marry.
So no one is singling out gays and lesbians per se.
Like stuiec says, he's conflating couples with individuals.
The state doesn't give a rip if you're in love, doesn't give a rip if you desire your spouse sexually. There is no test when applying for a marriage license as to whether you're gay or straight, or as to whether you're in love.
Marriage is a bedrock institution because it unites the two cosmic complementarities, male and female, yin and yang.
Sorry, but no matter how butch and fem a same-sex couple is, they're excluding one of the sexes.

Posted by: dicentra at August 04, 2010 05:13 PM (Sl03x)

79 Outrageous outrage!!!

Posted by: Charles Light Loafers Johnson at August 04, 2010 05:13 PM (zgZzy)

80 It is an individual right to get married.
It's an individual right to get "married". You are redefining marriage. In case you missed it, marriage is a man and a woman making a legal contract for the purpose of living together, making a home, and recognizing their fidelity to one another. The purpose was to provide a place that children could be raised, fed, clothed and educated.
Once we gave legal rights to some couples, we have to give them to all couples.
So brothers and sisters, fathers and daughters, man and dog? What's a couple? Seriously, if you want to have legal civil unions fine. Marriage is not between random entities.

Posted by: dagny at August 04, 2010 05:13 PM (464eJ)

81 It's actually a little insulting this talking out of both sides of your mouth, if you do not have a problem with homosexuality then please explain to me the problem with the marriage. The only problem I can think of is you don't have the stones to come out and say homosexuality is perverted,
Posted by: EzE at August 04, 2010 05:06 PM (W59Qh)
only have a problem with an expectation of expecting a church to consecrate .
why not civil? i don't believe they say much about it?
religion and it's constituents that believe as they do by religious books they read, why have to go there? srsly why?
so i don't agree with specific ideals spouted, do i have the right to say , everyone else better get on the same page religiously.?
do you? which ideals do you hate?
srsly not fighting, it's a quandry for me.

Posted by: willow at August 04, 2010 05:13 PM (/x2TR)

82 <i>Why does everyone think he's gay?</i>

Wikipedia mentions that there have been rumors to this effect.

<i>Polygamy next, folks.</i>

Nope. Pederasty next. Fruits have wanted to pork underaged boys since ...uh...forever, despite their pathetic attempts to distinguish homosexuals from pederasts. Pederasty is definitely the next issue warming up in the bullpen.

<i>The Constitution affirms rights of individual American citizens. It does not affirm or confer rights on couples.</i>

Oh, so NOW the Constitution is Holy Writ to be interpreted strictly, with none of that "living Constitution" horseshit. Where the fuck was he when Obama took over GM, abrogated loan contracts and fired the CEO? Hmmm?

Posted by: Jay Guevara at August 04, 2010 05:14 PM (L0i1S)

83

admit it, you always knew that liberal judges would
find a way to back-door gay marriage...


Posted by: phreshone at August 04, 2010 05:07 PM (1AnxB)
We all saw what you did there.

Posted by: Ed Anger at August 04, 2010 05:14 PM (7+pP9)

84 EzE,

Do me a favor? Shut the fuck up?

Thanks, cocksucker.

Posted by: ace at August 04, 2010 05:14 PM (KUUXH)

85 On the one hand, I'm long past the point where I'll begrudge anyone reasonable happiness in this rapidly declining world.

On the other...play their game, get their result. Want a different result? Stop playing their game.

You know your options; you make your choices. I can tell you nothing more.

Posted by: DarkLordOfTheIntarWebs at August 04, 2010 05:15 PM (IkEhE)

86 Seriously, EzE, this "public communication with other human beings" thing isn't your bag.

I hope you find something you're good at!

But not this. It's not for you.

Posted by: ace at August 04, 2010 05:15 PM (KUUXH)

87 why isn't civil marriage acceptable? with legal rights, taxes, hosptitalization rights, partner rights after death?
Because the whole and only point is to put a boot on the neck of anyone who'd ask that.
Because they CRACKAZ (and other similar terms).

Posted by: oblig. at August 04, 2010 05:15 PM (x7Ao8)

88 Marriage isn't a word, it's a sentence!

*I can't claim credit for this, i think it is from The Scarlet Pimpernel, or at least the AE tv movie version.

Posted by: Penfold at August 04, 2010 05:16 PM (1PeEC)

89 >>>OK Ace. What's the "Life on Mars" reference about?

1, it's freaky,

but mostly 2: I feel like I was just transplanted to Mars, being told that gay marriage is and always has been a constitutional right.

So... is there life on Mars? Guess we'll be finding out.


Posted by: ace at August 04, 2010 05:17 PM (KUUXH)

90 It's actually a little insulting this talking out of both sides of your mouth, if you do not have a problem with homosexuality then please explain to me the problem with the marriage. The only problem I can think of is you don't have the stones to come out and say homosexuality is perverted.
Posted by: EzE

I'm opposed to gay marriage, but I am all for civil unions. Why redefine marriage? It is really that necessary when civil unions exist? I am more outraged about a liberal activist judge overturning the will of the people.

Posted by: Wyatt Earp at August 04, 2010 05:18 PM (zgZzy)

91 To me Marriage is just a definition, as long as gays are allowed to have the same rights as straight couples then there is no discrimination. For example discrimination of women has been abolished, does that mean that all women are now referred to as men no. It means that women have the same rights. We no longer discriminate against blacks. Does that mean that all black men are now referred to as white .. No. WTF.. Its just a definition

Posted by: SoCalMe at August 04, 2010 05:18 PM (bKnnS)

92 It is an individual right to get married. Once we gave legal rights to some couples, we have to give them to all couples. It's the right call

I heartily endorse this view,. My partner does too. He would be here to add his assent, but his fascist parents are making him do his chores first.

Posted by: NAMBLA member local # 69 at August 04, 2010 05:18 PM (R2fpr)

93 I have yet to read a convincing argument as to why they would be DENIED to right to marriage.

I have no idea why anyone straight would even care one way or the other.

Posted by: Tommy V at August 04, 2010 05:18 PM (qU57d)

94 It is an individual right to get married. Once we gave legal rights to some couples, we have to give them to all couples.

How can there be an individual right that involves two (or more stay tuned for this part) people (people today; probably vertebrates tomorrow)? And who's to say that a "couple" is only two? Doesn't that enshrine normalcy (shudder)? Maybe a whole commune could get married, barnyard animals included. Liberal utopia!

Your first mistake is in calling them "couples." Wrong.

Posted by: Jay Guevara at August 04, 2010 05:18 PM (L0i1S)

95 Our congress and judiciary have made it abundantly clear there really is no reason to vote anymore......just wait 'til our overlords tell us how much to pay and what to do.

Posted by: J at August 04, 2010 05:18 PM (T3/qP)

96 89 >>>OK Ace. What's the "Life on Mars" reference about? 1, it's freaky, but mostly 2: I feel like I was just transplanted to Mars, being told that gay marriage is and always has been a constitutional right. So... is there life on Mars? Guess we'll be finding out.
Posted by: ace at August 04, 2010 05:17 PM (KUUXH)
Thanks!
One of my favorite Bowie songs too.

Posted by: Jim in San Diego at August 04, 2010 05:19 PM (oIp16)

97 Posted by: SoCalMe at August 04, 2010 05:18 PM (bKnnS)

Put down the pot son. Save the last few brain cells.

Posted by: ChicagoJedi at August 04, 2010 05:19 PM (WZFkG)

98 Try reading some of the posts. The reasoning is terrible, and the judge
had a conflict of interest. those are the problems. As is the
undermining of the other factors that currently define marriage
(two/adults).

Please, spare me the sturm and drang, would not a heterosexual judge be just as susceptible to a conflict of interest?

Let's see you agitate for the elimination of no fault divorce laws first, you know make the "till death" stuff actually mean something, maybe then I won't think of you all as a bunch of pansies unable to come out and say it, "Homosexuality is wrong and should not be tolerated".

Better yet, make marriage mean something, don't need no government for that. From where I sit, marriage is a joke and should not be a protected class.

Posted by: EzE at August 04, 2010 05:19 PM (W59Qh)

99

All your futures are belong to us.

Posted by: The People Wearing Black Robes at August 04, 2010 05:20 PM (7+pP9)

100 Once we gave legal rights to some couples, we have to give them to all couples.
You missed stuiec's point. Every individual has the sameright to enter into marriage as long as:
(a) the partner is of the opposite sex
(b) the partner is not married to someone else
(c) the partner is not a minor sans parental consent
(d) the partner is not in your nuclear family
Those sameconditions applyto everyone equally. The fact that some people are unable to bond with members of the opposite sex is tragic but not relevant to the question of what marriage is.

Posted by: dicentra at August 04, 2010 05:20 PM (Sl03x)

101 93 I have yet to read a convincing argument as to why they would be DENIED to right to marriage. I have no idea why anyone straight would even care one way or the other.
Posted by: Tommy V at August 04, 2010 05:18 PM (qU57d)
Nobody I know voted for Nixon either.

Posted by: Pauline Kael at August 04, 2010 05:21 PM (oIp16)

102 It's not a constitutional right to gay marriage.

It's a state's obligation to apply the law equally.

Seriously, "I don't like it" is not a serious basis for how the law should be applied.

Posted by: Tommy V at August 04, 2010 05:21 PM (qU57d)

103 I have no idea why anyone straight would even care one way or the other.
Why would blacks even care if some performer goes in blackface and puts on a minstrel show? It doesn't hurt them, does it? Same argument.
It makes marriage - real marriage, between normal people - into a joke, the same as a minstrel show makes blacks look ridiculous.
That's why.

Posted by: Jay Guevara at August 04, 2010 05:21 PM (L0i1S)

104 EzE,

Seriously, do me a solid? Shut the fuck up. I can't take your stupid redneck fuck-uped-ness anymore.

Thanks for understanding,

Fuck off

Posted by: ace at August 04, 2010 05:21 PM (KUUXH)

105 From where I sit, marriage is a joke and should not be a protected class.


Posted by: EzE at August 04, 2010 05:19 PM (W59Qh)

From where I sit, you're a retard, and should shut the fuck up. Now go get your fuckin shinebox.

Posted by: Unclefacts, AoSHQ Pro Debate Squad, And Summoner Of Meteors. at August 04, 2010 05:21 PM (eCAn3)

106 This ruling is not restricted, except by circumstance of the case, to California.

Way to fire up the wingnut base a little more, Judge Vaughn.

Posted by: Axelrod with head in hands at August 04, 2010 05:22 PM (WkuV6)

107 Posted by: Tommy V at August 04, 2010 05:18 PM (qU57d)

Denied because... the people of California voted NO on gay marriage overwhelmingly. Because there's no right to marriage in the constitution. So the right to marriage is defined by the state. And the state of California doesn't want it. Plain and simple.

If you support judges making up rights you're a leftist. Plain and simple.

Posted by: ChicagoJedi at August 04, 2010 05:23 PM (WZFkG)

108 Why do we DENY people the right to walk around naked in public? Why why why? It's just a convention. Why do we deny the right of children to have sex? It's just a convention.
Personal property is a convention too...........ah, I see where you're going.

Posted by: dagny at August 04, 2010 05:23 PM (464eJ)

109 So we can't even amend the Constitution anymore? This is a violation of our fundamental SOCIAL CONTRACT in America. The law is just what the judge decides it is, no recourse at all?

The backlash here could push CA into the Republican column again -- although the judge was a Bush One appointee.

Posted by: DaMav at August 04, 2010 05:24 PM (QNU76)

110 From where I sit, marriage is a joke and should not be a protected class.
Posted by: EzE at August 04, 2010 05:19 PM (W59Qh)
We're all enriched by your insight. Thanks for sharing.

Posted by: Cicero at August 04, 2010 05:25 PM (QKKT0)

111 It's not a constitutional right to gay marriage. It's a state's obligation to apply the law equally.
And that's why close relatives were not mentioned, but Lesbians and Gay men were. That's why the other defining factors were left in place, though undermined. That's why this debate on both coasts has been referred to by the media and Gay activists as being about Gay marriage. Because it's not about Gay marriage. What utter crap.

Posted by: NAMBLA member local # 69 at August 04, 2010 05:25 PM (R2fpr)

112 What, no flaming skull?

Posted by: shanne at August 04, 2010 05:25 PM (z1ddk)

113 Let's see you agitate for the elimination of no fault divorce laws first, you know make the "till death" stuff actually mean something, maybe then I won't think of you all as a bunch of pansies unable to come out and say it, "Homosexuality is wrong and should not be tolerated".Homosexuality is wrong and should not be tolerated!!!!!

Posted by: Richard Simmons at August 04, 2010 05:26 PM (zgZzy)

114 why isn't civil marriage acceptable? with legal rights, taxes, hosptitalization rights, partner rights after death?

why marriage?

srs question. don't want to fight , just understand why.

Posted by: willow at August 04, 2010 04:55 PM
----------------------------------------------------------

Because this is a fight about gays being accepted as "normal" within American society and the denial of marriage was one of the last bastions of separation between straights and not-so-straights. To me this about gays declaring that they're equal to straights and as such should be viewed as no different than hetero's.


What few realize is that this push for "equality" is much more sinister and more reaching, than merely a fight for marriage rights. If the Feds declare that gays are a protected class then any discrimination at all will then be subject to a suit. So, kids will be taught (in public schools no less) that homosexual behavior is normal, as is any other LGBT behavior because to do any less would be a de facto instance of discrimination.

Further, any church that refuses to marry two individuals, regardless of gender, will be accused of discrimination. What happens next is the saga that's played out with the Boy Scouts in recent years. Basically, pariah status among the various gov't "systems". Not to mention loss of tax exempt status because their actions are against "public policy".

This is about far more than just gay marriage. It's about a ignoring the will of the people, again, and the formation of policy (sweeping no less) by judicial fiat. I fully expect the SCOTUS to come down 5-4 affirming Walker's decision. Which is why, as many have said before, the country is fucked already.


Posted by: volfan at August 04, 2010 05:26 PM (Ck59J)

115 No one has answered the question of why gay marriage has to be called marriage. Just pick another word and go ahead.

Posted by: dagny at August 04, 2010 05:26 PM (464eJ)

116 Indeed, the evidence shows Proposition 8 does nothing more than enshrine
in the California Constitution the notion that opposite sex couples are
superior to same-sex couples.

To a gay man. To everyone else it enshrines the definition of marriage as a man and a woman. That's it.

The argument you brought up is valid Ace but it buys into the idea that there need be any basis whatsoever, other than their will, for the people to pass such an ammendment. All this law does is reserve the word marriage for one certain use. A use coincidentally it has always had.

It's like group of people decided one day that the definition of the word lake, by law, should include a puddle in their yard so that they could sell there house as lake front property because it's discrimination that they should get less for their house because it's not actually on a lake.

Posted by: Rocks at August 04, 2010 05:27 PM (Q1lie)

117 I won't think of you all as a bunch of pansies unable to come out and say it, "Homosexuality is wrong and should not be tolerated".
Right. Because there are only two possible stances here: either you favor gay marriageand consider the sexes as fungibleor you hate Teh Ghey and want to burn them all at the stake.
I, for one, feel strangely liberated by admitting that.

Posted by: dicentra at August 04, 2010 05:27 PM (Sl03x)

118 volfan, thank you for your comment.

Posted by: willow at August 04, 2010 05:29 PM (/x2TR)

119 No one has answered the question of why gay marriage has to be called marriage. Just pick another word and go ahead.

Posted by: dagny at August 04, 2010 05:26 PM (464eJ)

That is the elephant that everyone dances around. California has Civil Unions. Prop 8 did nothing but reserve a word to it's traditional meaning.

Posted by: Rocks at August 04, 2010 05:29 PM (Q1lie)

120 @100 Well done, dicentra.
Everyone has the right to marry, but not necessarily the person he wants to marry. First cousins can't marry, for example. Why can't they express their love?
The point that the fruits fail (or refuse) to grasp is that the institution does not exist for their gratification or financial well-being; it exists, ultimately, to provide for raising children, so that all of society doesn't end up like the underclass slums, where feral fatherless punks run wild. (I know that not all couples can or want to have children - that's irrelevant to the purposes of the institution.)
The destruction of marriage as an institution among blacks (thanks, liberals!) directly destroyed the black family, which in turn destroyed black communities with crime, drugs, and gangs. No marriage, no fathers, no guidance for boys...no civilization.
Making marriage into a joke will finish off the work of the Hollywood scum in destroying the institution, and make all of society like Compton.

Posted by: Jay Guevara at August 04, 2010 05:30 PM (L0i1S)

121 What about us?

Posted by: Necrophiliacs Anonymous at August 04, 2010 05:32 PM (L0i1S)

122 "in California the gays seem far more interested in minority-rule by judicial fiat. And yet they act so surprised that those of us on the right are tired of their antics."

Lots of lefties are against gay "marriage" also

Posted by: The Great Satan's Ghost at August 04, 2010 05:32 PM (SDV51)

123 Can't wait to hear the justifications for sweet, tender Islamic polygamy as compared to the outrage that is freak-show Mormon polygamy.

Posted by: t-bird at August 04, 2010 05:33 PM (f/uoy)

124 To me this about gays declaring that they're equal to straights and as such should be viewed as no different than heteros.
Gays are equal to straights under the law. That's not the problem.
It's that gay couplings are not the same as hetero couplings, not by a long shot, but our society's concept of marriage and sex has degenerated so far that it's beenreduced to property law and sex.
No, the radical gay activists are hoping to destroy marriage by undermining it from within. Not all gays who want gay marriage have this goal, but the ones who do have the goal are the ones who will relentlessly work to bring it about.
Racial differences are merely cosmetic; sexual differences are real.

Posted by: dicentra at August 04, 2010 05:33 PM (Sl03x)

125 the question of why gay marriage has to be called marriage. Just pick another word and go ahead.
Posted by: dagny at August 04, 2010 05:26 PM (464eJ)
that's what i fioght in my mind.
why not civil legally binding partnership. forever more in misery and health, poverty and disgust and such. why open this up to religion?

Posted by: willow at August 04, 2010 05:34 PM (/x2TR)

126 any church that refuses to marry two individuals, regardless of gender, will be accused of discrimination.
And this delights the pants off the atheist/marxist/environmentalist/secular humanistcrowd.

Posted by: dagny at August 04, 2010 05:34 PM (464eJ)

127 Tommy V:

Your argument has been repeatedly demolished on this thread, and yet you still keep repeating that it hasn't, so please stop--you're embarrassing yourself.

Posted by: ECM at August 04, 2010 05:35 PM (nYKDd)

128 115 No one has answered the question of why gay marriage has to be called marriage. Just pick another word and go ahead.

Posted by: dagny at August 04, 2010 05:26 PM (464eJ)

--------------------------------------------------------------

Goes back to the whole "separate but equal" argument. Didn't work then and I doubt that it would succeed with our modern judiciary. I agree with the equal in all but name argument, but to the Feds, even a scintilla of discrimination against a protected class, is still unconstitutional. Makes no fucking sense but judicial sanity today is about as rare as fiscal restraint in Congress.

Posted by: volfan at August 04, 2010 05:35 PM (Ck59J)

129 Posted by: The Great Satan's Ghost at August 04, 2010 05:32 PM (SDV51)

Wrong. Leftist are all for gay marriage because it subverts tradition, religion and the will of the people. The left is just against gays. Once they've served their purpose they will be purged.

Posted by: ChicagoJedi at August 04, 2010 05:35 PM (WZFkG)

130 @126 Pretty good, it would seem.

Posted by: Necrophiliacs Anonymous at August 04, 2010 05:35 PM (L0i1S)

131 why isn't civil marriage acceptable? with legal rights, taxes, hosptitalization rights, partner rights after death? why marriage? srs question. don't want to fight , just understand why. Posted by: willow at August 04, 2010 04:55 PM
The motive hereis undermining marriage, not gaining valued rights. Marriage is one more aspect of Western culture that is hated by activists of the stripe that brought this lawsuit.
I know many gays including some in my family and none has ever disclosed to me a burning desire to marry their partner. All of the benefits of marriage are already available to them through contract and civil unions, and few bother to take advantage of those. Look and the pitifully small numbers of gays who went to get married during the window of time that it was permitted in California. Doesn't exactly suggesta groundswell of pent-up desire for the right to marry. I know that many who did get married did so with film crews in tow, determined to make a politicalstatement.
The redefinition of marriage is just one more manifestation of the reflexive leftist agendato destroy everythingon which Western cultureis founded.

Posted by: Cicero at August 04, 2010 05:36 PM (QKKT0)

132

Let's see you agitate for the elimination of no
fault divorce laws first, you know make the "till death" stuff actually
mean something, maybe then I won't think of you all as a bunch of
pansies unable to come out and say it, "Homosexuality is wrong and
should not be tolerated".
[ . . . ]


Posted by: EzE at August 04, 2010 05:19 PM (W59Qh)
Anybody else here remember the TV show Divorce Court?

I loved it. I kept asking my Mom, over and over again, what sexual intercourse was -- years before she wanted to explain to me the facts of life. After a while she would turn off the TV whenever it was coming on.

Posted by: Ed Anger at August 04, 2010 05:36 PM (7+pP9)

133 I have yet to read a convincing argument as to why they would be DENIED to right to marriage.



I have no idea why anyone straight would even care one way or the other.

Posted by: Tommy V at August 04, 2010 05:18 PM (qU57d)

I have yet to hear an argument as to why anything except a union of a man and a woman should be called marriage considering marriage is the union of a man and a woman.Tell me why shouldn't a judge rule the word gold should be applied to copper? They are both a yellowish colored metal. I mean why not? There's lots of copper. Everyone would be rich overnight. It would be great for everyone. Isn't a gold dealer discriminating against me when he will not pay me the going price for gold when I hand him my copper?



Posted by: Rocks at August 04, 2010 05:37 PM (Q1lie)

134 stuiec, you're being a little specious there. It is an individual right to get married. Once we gave legal rights to some couples, we have to give them to all couples. It's the right call. The church can define marriage anyway it wants and that needs to be protected. But if the state treats one person one way, it has to treat everyone the same way. If we don't believe in equal protections under the law, then I don't know what we believe in.
Posted by: Tommy V at August 04, 2010 05:08 PM (qU57d)
Your argument is specious.
The State has always said, "Here are the people you may not marry." At various times, the list has included:
- Close blood relatives;
- Minors without parental consent;
- Non-human 'people';
- People with active venereal disease infections;
- People of a different race than yourself;
- People of the same gender as yourself;
- ANYBODY, if you are already married to someone.
In 1967, the US Supreme Court ruled that the State had no legitimate interest in prohibiting interracial marriages:
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.
The State has no legitimate overriding purpose to prevent a mixed-race couple from marrying and having children. Mixed-race children aren't lesser human beings.
The State retains a legitimate purpose in the other prohibitions. The State certainly has a legitimate purpose in defining marriage so as to promote the stable nuclear family model of one father and one mother. The State has a legitimate purpose in setting up that model as a norm, as the ideal to which marriages should conform.
You believe that "if the state treats one person one way, it has to treat everyone the same way" means the State must permit gay marriage. But that opens the door to the argument that the State has no legitimate interest in setting any parameters or standards for the validity of a marriage. If the State has no legitimate interest in defining marriage around the nuclear family, one-father-one-mother model with respect to same-sex couples, then how does it have a legitimate interest in limiting marriages to two-person couples at all? How can it declare that it has a legitimate interest in prohibiting incestuous marriages? What legitimate interest does it have in prohibiting an interspecies marriage?

Posted by: stuiec at August 04, 2010 05:37 PM (7AOgy)

135 Newsbreak: Kissing Cousins sue the State of California for being denied the right to marry. Update at 10PM.
and:Brother and Sister sue the State of California forbeing denied the right to marry. Update at 10PM.
and: Fatherand daughersue the State of California forbeing denied the right to marry. Update at 10PM.
and : Motherand Sonsue the State of California forbeing denied the right to marry. Update at 10PM.
Fuck it. Everyone is sueing the State of California for being denied the right to marry.

Posted by: conscious, but incoherent at August 04, 2010 05:37 PM (YVZlY)

136 Jay Guevara - I don't think wearing black face should be illegal. Tasteless, yes, but not illegal.

ChicagoJedi, I do believe the purpose of the law is to protect individual rights. Rights are inalienable. One of those rights is to be treated equally under the law. They are not removed by majority vote.

dagny, you're in over your head.

Dicentra, Oh BS. That is such a bogus legalese way to justify discrimination. It is essentially the same logic used for separate-but-equal. They can marry. They just can't marry who they want! "Gotcha!"

Sorry, guys, you're flat out wrong on this one. Your arguments make no sense outside of a 1st established bigotry towards homosexuals.

You do not consider them equal. You just don't.

Once you try to make your arguments against someone who does consider them equal, your arguments fall apart as kind of silly and juvenile, and yes, unconstitutional.

But that starting place of how you see the legal status of one's sexual orientation changes everything.

Until people agree on that, there is not enough common ground to come to shared conclusions.

Posted by: Tommy V at August 04, 2010 05:38 PM (qU57d)

137 @137

Woody Allen didn't need to sue anyone, he just divorced that harridan Mia Farrow so he could marry his step-daughter.

Posted by: Penfold at August 04, 2010 05:40 PM (1PeEC)

138 It's actually a little insulting this talking out of both sides of your
mouth, if you do not have a problem with homosexuality then please
explain to me the problem with the marriage.

In a world where a serious rift in families has become a critical problem to society and 40 to 50% of marriages go down in flames the result being numerous under-parented kids; You would say that redefining marriage to remove its one original purpose of encouraging proper attention of parents to the responsibility of family can only be justified by a hatred of homosexual activity. Your logic is terminally flawed. Societies critical interest that the human animal when participating in procreative activity,

A. Mate for life.
B Remain committed to offspring for their formative dependent years.

(Behaviors that have steeply declined with a steep cost); they are simply not relevent to homosexual intercourse or relationships. Instead of imagining some gay hostile attitude in everyone's mind contemplate that we have little interest in sexual activity we ourselves are not involved in, and we are simply dreadfully concerned with the slow eradication of the traditional family and the social impacts therein and are simply trying to preserve the principal institution of the family purpose intact, before its destruction destroys us.

Posted by: MikeTheMoose at August 04, 2010 05:40 PM (0q2P7)

139 I should rephrase, Woody Allen did not need to sue any governmental entity to marry his step-daughter, merely sue to divorce his then wife.

Posted by: Penfold at August 04, 2010 05:41 PM (1PeEC)

140 I don't think wearing black face should be illegal. Tasteless, yes, but not illegal.
You missed the point entirely. It wasn't about legality. It was about making something/someone into a joke.

Posted by: Jay Guevara at August 04, 2010 05:41 PM (L0i1S)

141 Posted by: dicentra at August 04, 2010 05:33 PM (Sl03x)
---------------------------------------------------------

I agree with your points, lower the marriage bar to such and extent that it effectively becomes meaningless. The end result is of course "equality".

Wonder how this whole thing will play in the world of polygamy. Kind of hard discriminate against them if everyone has a constitutional right to marry whomever they wish.

Posted by: volfan at August 04, 2010 05:42 PM (Ck59J)

142 outside of a 1st established bigotry towards homosexuals.
That's typical. We couldn't possibly have a different value system that has nothing to do with hatred and everything to do with understanding WHY the distinction between male and female is important to maintain.
I can articulate an argument FOR same-sex marriage that you would accept; I bet you can't articulate an argument against it without descending into caricature.
Which is why I can't take your arguments seriously: you only understand your own side.

Posted by: dicentra at August 04, 2010 05:43 PM (Sl03x)

143 Stuic, so gay marriage is the same as inter-species marriage?

Okay, I see where you're coming from.

Yeah, I don't think we'll be agreeing on this point.

I am always amazed how when homosexual marriage comes up conservatives suddenly have an overriding interest a stronger and more coercive state.

As for me, no thank you. I just want the state to treat everyone equally and get out of the way. My intellectual consistency requires it.

Posted by: Tommy V at August 04, 2010 05:44 PM (qU57d)

144 "i'm not touching this with a 100 ft pole. or joanies oven mitts."

Me neither. My Flameguard is wearing off.

Posted by: Joanie (Oven Gloves) at August 04, 2010 05:45 PM (wd0Iq)

145 Wrong. Leftist are all for gay marriage because it subverts tradition,

Lots of Democratic blacks are oposed to it.. does that make them Conservatives?

Posted by: The Great Satan's Ghost at August 04, 2010 05:46 PM (SDV51)

146 Rights are inalienable. One of those rights is to be treated equally under the law.

The Geneva Convention protects a man in uniform and denies the same protection to a man not in uniform. How is this right when both men are equally soldiers?

Posted by: Adriane at August 04, 2010 05:47 PM (+NfQM)

147 if you do not have a problem with homosexuality
Oh, but I do. Homosexuality evinces the "yuk" factor. Now I know you're next going to want a detailed analysis of why. There is none, nor need there be.
Some reactions are encoded deep in the DNA. Prohibitions against bestiality and necrophilia are two of them. In liberal la la land, there should be nothing wrong with these either, since there is no rational basis for prohibiting them. No other person is hurt, etc.
But there is something wrong with both of these. So I put it to you (poor choice of words in this context): why should bestiality fans and necrophiliacs not be permitted to express their "love?"

Posted by: Jay Guevara at August 04, 2010 05:48 PM (L0i1S)

148 115 No one has answered the question of why gay marriage has to be called marriage. Just pick another word and go ahead.


To be honest with you, I have no idea. I assume the gays want it because part of their intent is not to be deemed legally "abnormal".

As one who supports gay marriage for legal reasons, I have no objection to calling it something else as long as the legal ramifications of marriage are honored.

Posted by: Tommy V at August 04, 2010 05:48 PM (qU57d)

149

I'm fine with saying that homosexuality is a perversion (in the true sense of the word), and that we should get rid of no-fault divorce, and that the state's interest in marriage is procreation and marriage should not be allowed for presumptively infertile couples.

The State has no business regulating best friendships, and that's all gay marriages can be. The State's sole interest in regulating sexual unions is because of the burden on teh state of teh products of those unions (children), and necessity to foster the products of those unions (children again, as future citizens).

There is also a clear difference between looking at two people just on paper and saying "children are a physical impossibility for you, no marriage" (i.e. Man/Man or Woman/Woman) and making everyone take fertility tests to get a license. The former is reasonable and the latter is tyrannical. Common sense lines can be drawn without carrying everything to the reductio ad absurdum.

Not all of life fits into perfect little logic boxes, and the fact that gays "can't" get married is one of those things that is just "different" and does not need to be treated exactly like analogous (heheheh, I said "anal") relationships that have procreative potential.

Suck it up, buttercups

Posted by: s'moron at August 04, 2010 05:49 PM (UaxA0)

150 dagny, you're in over your head.

You, of all people have to be fucking kidding me? You come on here defending your radical socialist agenda item and I'm over my head? I don't care in the slightest what gay men or lesbians do but I don't agree that they should get to redefine marriage to suit their social agenda. There is no reason to say that 2 people or 3 or 4 should be able to marry. It's a stupid argument and it only exists to subvert the nuclear family, destroy religious institutions, and satisfy the "Act Up" desire to cram the face of the nation into the gay lifestyle.
I'm fine with homosexuals doing whatever they want but normal people, and I mean gay and straight, do not force everyone to get involved in their sex options.
I'd say go screw yourself but then you might want to marry yourself next week.

Posted by: dagny at August 04, 2010 05:50 PM (464eJ)

151 ChicagoJedi, I do believe the purpose of the law is to protect individual rights. Rights are inalienable. One of those rights is to be treated equally under the law. They are not removed by majority vote.

Posted by: Tommy V at August 04, 2010 05:38 PM (qU57d)

How many times do people have to tell you numbnuts: MARRIAGE IS NOT AN ENUMERATED RIGHT.

Since you clearly failed the 3rd grade, let alone US Civics, let's go over what the above statement means. The power to regulate marriage does not reside in the federal government. The power to regulate marriage resides in the state. The state has said gay marriage is illegal. As other fine people have established many types of marriage are prohibited such as polygamy or incest. So not everything is a right. Including gay marriage.

But gays do have the right to change the law by influencing fellow citizens. And that's the equality they and you are missing.

So once again, THERE IS NO RIGHT TO GAY MARRIAGE. Why don't you spend your time searching for the right to marriage of any kind in the US Constitution. In the meantime, let the grown-ups talk.

Posted by: ChicagoJedi at August 04, 2010 05:50 PM (WZFkG)

152 Wrong. Leftist are all for gay marriage because it subverts tradition, religion and the will of the people. The left is just against gays. Once they've served their purpose they will be purged.
Posted by: ChicagoJedi at August 04, 2010 05:35 PM (WZFkG)
The Left spent the 1970s trying to convince the members of Western society that "marriage is just a piece of paper." They had a remarkable degree of success, especially when it came to removing all social stigma from childbirth out of wedlock and in obtaining partner benefits for non-spousal partners of employees.
Now comes their attack from the other direction: "Marriage is so precious that it must be open to all types of couples." The truth is that only religious marriage represents a metaphysical melding of souls; civil marriage is a contract that society uses to encourage formation of households and rearing of children. I've attended religious ceremonies that have bound gay couples together: there's no reason for those couples to add a civil marriage to their union except for handling the mundane, worldly administrative issues that a civil union (or mutual durable powers of attorney and wills) can handle just fine.
Deconstruct the family and you can then eliminate the rights of parents to raise their children according to their own respective beliefs. And that leads to all children being raised to believe in and serve the State.

Posted by: stuiec at August 04, 2010 05:51 PM (7AOgy)

153 Wonder how this whole thing will play in the world of polygamy. Kind of hard discriminate against them if everyone has a constitutional right to marry whomever they wish.
Posted by: volfan at August 04, 2010 05:42 PM (Ck59J)
Exactly. If the court is now saying that marriage is no longer defined as being between aman and a woman, then the court could not judge against a man marrying more than one women. If they did, theywould beenforcing an old part of the definition of marriage.

Posted by: conscious, but incoherent at August 04, 2010 05:51 PM (YVZlY)

154 I screwed up what I think I was trying to say, and that is:
If the judge says that marriage is not defined as being between a man and a woman, then what is the new definition of marriage? Is there a new list of who is included and who is excluded?

Posted by: conscious, but incoherent at August 04, 2010 05:54 PM (YVZlY)

155 As for me, no thank you. I just want the state to treat everyone equally and get out of the way. My intellectual consistency requires it.
Posted by: Tommy V at August 04, 2010 05:44 PM (qU57d)
I am beginning to doubt that you have the prerequisite for intellectual consistency.
But do explain: Should the State set any limits that infringe on my right to marry whomever or whatever I want? Any limits at all? And if so, on what basis?

Posted by: stuiec at August 04, 2010 05:55 PM (7AOgy)

156 137
Newsbreak: Kissing Cousins sue the State of California for being denied the right to marry. Update at 10PM.
Posted by: conscious, but incoherent at August 04, 2010 05:37 PM (YVZlY)
Cousins can already marry each other with impunity in California.

Posted by: Jim in San Diego at August 04, 2010 05:56 PM (oIp16)

157 I assume the gays want it because part of their intent is not to be deemed legally "abnormal".
This is the crux of the matter. Homosexuals want to be considered normal, not just legally but socially. But they aren't, and they know it. They're seeking validation not just from normal people but from themselves.
But even if they get legal "normality," no one will consider them normal. Not you, not me, not they themselves. We'll all pretend. Liberals consider them abnormal too; when they're really pissed at someone, they start in with fag insults. That's no biggie, but it shows that the liberals, despite all of their mealy-mouthed panderings, consider homosexuality something reprehensible and disturbingtoo. Otherwise there'd be no point in the insult.

Posted by: Jay Guevara at August 04, 2010 05:57 PM (L0i1S)

158 Posted by: stuiec at August 04, 2010 05:51 PM (7AOgy)

Exactly, and then the government sends the useful gays to the ovens.

I love how those highest on the left's eugenics genocide list are the most ardent supporters of the left.

Posted by: ChicagoJedi at August 04, 2010 05:57 PM (WZFkG)

159

"You do not consider them equal. You just don't."


OK. They're not equal.

YOu know why?

As a COUPLE, they cannot procreate. CAN.NOT.PROCREATE.

You could have an island full of lesbians (hopefully the lipstick kind), but if left alone (as we all want government to do to us) they would be gone in 60 years no matter what.

An island of heterosexual couples will be able to maintain a population.

Gays aren't equal in ability to procreate, they are in the extreme minority (3-5%), and the majority of the population is not required to approve, accept, or countenance their deviancy (again, in the true sense of the word, what gays do is "deviant").

Gays have no right to change the entire foundation of a society that they by their very nature cannot hope to sustain beyond the present generation.

Are gays entitled to political rights? Equal rights under the basic set of life, liberty and property. Marriage is none of those things (it is not a "liberty" if you are asking the government to do something TO you, and it is not property, but a way to divide property).

Various statutory legal rights are not the same for everyone, as teh progressive tax post above illustrates. Laws are about drawing lines, and just because you don't like the line does not mean you have a right to erase it.





Posted by: s'moron at August 04, 2010 06:01 PM (UaxA0)

160 162
My ultra lib nephew and his horrible harvard witch wife reak gay love and tolerance...............until mom and dad bought them an expensive art piece for "christmas" which depicted an abstract of two lesbians. It took them a few days but they asked to return it because they were really "a little sick of all that you know because of where they live in San Franciso."

Posted by: dagny at August 04, 2010 06:01 PM (464eJ)

161 polynikes:

I have no problem with multiple partnered marriages. What the hell do I care how someone lives? But since NO ONE is allowed to legally participate in a polygamous marriage, I don't see how a wannabe polygamist could argue they are somehow being treated differently under the law.

I have always assumed the legal reasoning behind such a prohibition was that all legal benefits and responsibilities of marriage were written and defined for two people. None of those laws would make any sense if the "spouse" in the laws was actually 2 people. How would those rights be divided up?

To me it was always a legal question and not an overriding moral responsibility of the state to tell people how to live their lives.


Posted by: Tommy V at August 04, 2010 06:04 PM (qU57d)

162


I have always assumed the legal reasoning behind such a prohibition was
that all legal benefits and responsibilities of marriage were written
and defined for two people. None of those laws would make any sense if
the "spouse" in the laws was actually 2 people. How would those rights
be divided up?



Here's one for you Tommy:

How does the "presumption of paternity in marriage" work for a couple of lesbians when one of them is turkey-bastered?

Posted by: s'moron at August 04, 2010 06:06 PM (UaxA0)

163 Good Grief.

This shit, again?

Life On Mars, indeed.

Posted by: oh, Hi Mark at August 04, 2010 06:06 PM (LjYhY)

164

Leftist are all for gay marriage because it
subverts tradition, religion and the will of the people. The left is
just against gays. Once they've served their purpose they will be
purged.

Posted by: ChicagoJedi at August 04, 2010 05:35 PM (WZFkG)
I see you've read my most excellent newsletter.

Posted by: Antonio Gramsci at August 04, 2010 06:07 PM (7+pP9)

165 Deconstruct the family and you can then eliminate the rights of parents to raise their children according to their own respective beliefs. And that leads to all children being raised to believe in and serve the State.
This has been a central theme of all socialist societies, from Oneida through the Third Reich to the original Israeli kibbutzes: children should be raised by the collective, and should be taught that their first loyalty is to the collective.
The original kibbutzes apparently had separate barracks each for the men, the women, and the children. The system died out because women were adamant: they wanted to live with their husbands and children in their own homes, and dug in their heels until they were allowed to do so.
The problem for socialists is that family loyalty trumps collective loyalty. Instead of working for the good of the collective, people who live in nuclear families work for the good of their kith and kin first and foremost, and that sentiment breaks socialism's teeth. When you look to your family first, you look at others as economic competitors rather than collaborators.
Socialists know this, and so the nuclear family has to go to build New Socialist Man.

Posted by: Jay Guevara at August 04, 2010 06:07 PM (L0i1S)

166 Because this is a fight about gays being accepted as "normal" within American society and the denial of marriage was one of the last bastions of separation between straights and not-so-straights. To me this about gays declaring that they're equal to straights and as such should be viewed as no different than hetero's.
Posted by: volfan at August 04, 2010 05:26 PM (Ck59J)
It is important in one's thinking about this subject to keep the three N words distinct and properly defined:
1) Natural
2) Normal
3) Normative
Certainly homosexuality is natural, in the sense that it occurs from natural processes. Having six fingers on each hand is also natural in that sense: sometimes babies are just born that way.
You may or may not accept homosexuality as normal. Having blue eyes is as normal as having brown eyes, even if it is rarer. Being left-handed is normal, even if it is much less common than being right-handed. Perhaps homosexuality is normal in that sense -- perhaps it is a difference that doesn't impair the ability of the organism to function and survive. Societies usually decide that what is normal is acceptable and tolerated and legal.
But I don't believe homosexuality is normative. Society decides, through tradition and law and the natural impulses of its members, what is normative behavior: what is the standard to which society's members should conform and aspire. The struggle for gay marriage rights is a struggle to define gay marriage as normative -- just exactly like straight marriage. There's no compelling social interest in accepting that definition. In fact, there's a compelling social interest in focusing on reinstating other aspects of marriage and childbearing as normative: making it normative to have children within wedlock and normative for fathers and mothers to remain united in child-rearing. Making gay marriage normative doesn't advance any real societal interest in terms of promoting the proper care and teaching of the next generation of society's members.

Posted by: stuiec at August 04, 2010 06:08 PM (7AOgy)

167
How does the "presumption of paternity in marriage" work for
a couple of lesbians when one of them is turkey-bastered?


Posted by: s'moron at August 04, 2010 06:06 PM (UaxA0)
STFU and gimme a new liver.

Posted by: David Crosby at August 04, 2010 06:09 PM (7+pP9)

168 Polynikes seems to think Polygamy is some kind of Trump card or something.

It's very easy: Polygamy is consistent with everyone. No one is allowed to enter into a polygamous marriage. Therefore everyone is treated equally under the law.

It's not really an issue here.

Posted by: Tommy V at August 04, 2010 06:09 PM (qU57d)

169

Polynikes seems to think Polygamy is some kind of
Trump card or something.



It's very easy: Polygamy is consistent with everyone. No one is allowed
to enter into a polygamous marriage. Therefore everyone is treated
equally under the law.



It's not really an issue here.

Posted by: Tommy V at August 04, 2010 06:09 PM (qU57d)
Never been to Africa, I guess.

Posted by: Ed Anger at August 04, 2010 06:12 PM (7+pP9)

170


Polygamy is consistent with everyone.


So is opposite sex marriage.

Posted by: s'moron at August 04, 2010 06:12 PM (UaxA0)

171 I love how those highest on the left's eugenics genocide list are the most ardent supporters of the left.
Posted by: ChicagoJedi at August 04, 2010 05:57 PM (WZFkG)
Out here we have QUIT: Queers Undermining Israeli Terrorism. I kid you not. I keep wondering when they're going to send a delegation to Gaza City to celebrate Pride Day with their beloved fellow oppressed people.

Posted by: stuiec at August 04, 2010 06:13 PM (7AOgy)

172 STFU and gimme a new liver.
Posted by: David Crosby at August 04, 2010 06:09 PM (7+pP9)
Oh, sorry, was that yours? My bad, dude.
On the bright side, a little bacon, a few onions, and it was DELICIOUS!

Posted by: stuiec at August 04, 2010 06:15 PM (7AOgy)

173 No one is allowed to enter into a polygamous marriage. Therefore everyone is treated equally under the law.

Previously no one, gay or straight, was allow to enter a homosexual marriage. Therefore everyone was also treated equally under the law.

Posted by: Adriane at August 04, 2010 06:17 PM (+NfQM)

174 Stuic,

I agree with your last post.

But if society decides what is normative, why can't it decide that homosexuality is normative? Why can't its change its mind from one generation to another?

Isn't that what we're doing now? Debating what should and shouldn't be normative?

As conservatives we certainly put much more value in values and traditions from the past, but certainly we don't think EVERY value and tradition is worth keeping? So the fact that its a value and a tradition may influence, but should not be the deciding factor.

Where we disagree is that you value the perceived effects on the "proper care and teaching of the next generation" more than the idea that homosexuals may have certain equal rights.

I disagree with you both on the tradeoff of "proper care and teaching" (I assume we both do agree that the preference for a child's upbringing is mom & dad, but to me it just a strong preference. I prefer a gay couple to the state or orphaned) and I would also prefer that the state, when forced to choose, leans toward equality under the law that what it thinks is best on a moral level.

I don't trust the state to have much wiggle room in how it applies the laws. I learned under Bush that giving wiggle room to someone you like means you're also giving wiggle room to the next guy, who you may like a whole lot less.

Posted by: Tommy V at August 04, 2010 06:21 PM (qU57d)

175 As one who supports gay marriage for legal reasons, I
have no objection to calling it something else as long as the legal
ramifications of marriage are honored.



Posted by: Tommy V at August 04, 2010 05:48 PM (qU57d)

Well then why would you support this ruling when the only thing Prop 8 effected was the use of the word marriage for anything except a union of a man and a woman?

Posted by: Rocks at August 04, 2010 06:26 PM (yLPXs)

176


But if society decides what is normative, why can't it decide that
homosexuality is normative? Why can't its change its mind from one
generation to another?


Because Prop 8 showed that society DOES NOT view it as normative. Geez, are you trying to be dense?

ONE JUDGE just overruled the opinion of the majority of voters in the entire State of California. How many million does it take to be a "society"?

Posted by: s'moron at August 04, 2010 06:27 PM (UaxA0)

177 To hell with it. I'm just waiting for the zombies to come now.

Posted by: Kerry at August 04, 2010 06:27 PM (Z0EF7)

178 Polynikes,

You keep saying that over and over again.

A gay guy can marry a woman if he wants!

Like you're doing him a favo or something. Again, this is the same logic as separate but equal.

Gay people don't want to marry the opposite sex. In fact, that's what makes them gay.

You don't think their sexuality has any kind of legal standing. Since its not a legal factor for you, they're not being treated any differently.

Myself, and others who believe in gay marriage, (including this judge apparently) do see their homosexuality as a legal standing and protected under the law. Because of this, denying them marriage is treating them less than equal.

That's the foundation both arguments are built off and because of that fundamental disagreement, there will not be a shared view on this.

I don't know how much simpler I can put it.

Posted by: Tommy V at August 04, 2010 06:29 PM (qU57d)

179 Let the gays marry. I want them to be as miserable as straight people when their relationships turn to shit. I want the long, drawn out fights over community property, child custody, alimony and child support. I want to hear "my bitch ex-wife" come out of a lesbo's mouth, or "my bastard ex-husband" out of a fag's mouth.

I want the state to have to spend an assload of money changing every damned form that has "husband" and "wife" on it to "partner 1" and "partner 2"; or $mother and $father to $parent1 and $parent2. Think of how this is going to affect all the computer databases that have to be rewritten for those changes. They are going to have to add a "sex" box to every one of those descriptions, because you just can't have a father and mother with assumed sexes. No, you have to have genderless descriptions, and specify the genders later.

Thanks to the less than 5% of the population, everyone in the State of California is going to have to fork over more money in taxes just to make these changes.

Welcome to the tyranny of the minority. Millions have spoken, but one person in an ivory tower says no, and all those people are ignored.

Posted by: Smokey Behr at August 04, 2010 06:32 PM (QyeW7)

180 s'moron,

Our society is also defined by legal rights and definitions. The courts have often been leading indicators of social norms, both for better and for worse. We just disagree on which one that is right now.

I think we love the majority only when we agree with it and we love the courts when they rule our way.

But when they don't...

Posted by: Tommy V at August 04, 2010 06:35 PM (qU57d)

181


We just disagree on which one that is right now.



No, "we" don't. The people of California have, as the only legitimate source of political authority we recognize, a majority decided the issue, and it was not what Judge Lordship liked.

We live in a LIMITED government. You sound like a 12 year old with the logic that refuses to see anything but your own parochial interests.

First you say that society changes, and when it's pointed out to you that society hasn't, you appeal to the non-existent authority of a single appointed official in a court somewhere. Same with the polygamy issue. You refuse to see that the logic of gay marriage applies fully to polygamy.

You are hypocritical, inconsistent, and shallow in your intellectual approach to teh issue. Likewise, you express nothing approaching a "conservative" disposition.

In short, you are a dishonest and unworthy debater.



Posted by: s'moron at August 04, 2010 06:41 PM (UaxA0)

182 Tommy V,
If this ruling stands by what reasoning is it that 2 brothers should not be allowed to marry? Forget sexuality because no law requires that a married couple actually have sex.

Posted by: Rocks at August 04, 2010 06:41 PM (yLPXs)

183 Myself, and others who believe in gay marriage, (including this judge apparently) do see their homosexuality as a legal standing and protected under the law.
Their homosexuality as legal standing?
How is a sexual preference granted legal standing?

Posted by: dagny at August 04, 2010 06:51 PM (GunZ/)

184 "You are hypocritical, inconsistent, and shallow in your intellectual approach to teh issue. "

You know, I guess I just beg to differ. And I sense a little frustration in your tone that suggest I am not nearly as hypocritical, inconsistent, and shallow as you claim.

Posted by: Tommy V at August 04, 2010 06:52 PM (qU57d)

185 "How is a sexual preference granted legal standing?"

Dagny, that is essentially the entire debate and the crux of the disagreement.

Is homosexuality a state of being, like race or disability, and therefore granted legal status, or is it simply a voluntary action, and therefore given no special treatment.

Those who believe the latter believe all legal matters are left to democratic choices, and those who believe the formal consider majority's will to be irrelevant since you can not legally discriminate by vote or decree as it would be unconstitutional.

Posted by: Tommy V at August 04, 2010 06:58 PM (qU57d)

186 Gay people don't want to marry the opposite sex. In fact, that's what makes them gay.
Polygamists don't want to marry just one woman. In fact, that's what makes them polygamists.

Posted by: Warden at August 04, 2010 07:04 PM (QoR4a)

187 Well folks I am back, but I still have not done any research for the cases. I note this statement, I presume that Gabe took it from the case itself. I haven't read the ruling because I think as far as the Constitution goes the judge is stretching.

This ruling is not restricted, except by circumstance of the case, to California.

That statement has no meaning. The ruling was issued by a local district court of the State of CA so yes those circumstances restrict it to ONLY the State of CA.

The ultimate question comes down to the conflict of the ability of the State to regulate its own marriage practices. Throughout the history of the Republic marriage practices have been within the power of the State and not of a concern to the federal government.

I suppose this ruling relies on the equal protection clause of the 14th amendment, thus making this the classic conflict between the power of the State to regulat4 within its domain vs the power of the federal government to assure that all citizens are not denied "freedom" without due process of law.

My feeling is that there can be no 14th amendment case here because no citizen has been denied a privilege granted to any other citizen. Any man may marry any woman as long as they both are of legally stipulated age and other local marriage requirements (age, blood test, non-close relative, etc)

Research on this within the courts should also look up how the courts have ruled against the early Mormons and other religions which endorse polygamy. Because those cases will ultimately set the precedent for a federal trial.

Of course those are very old cases that occurred before we had 4 communists on the court. I am sure they would be willing to reverse anything that would give the liberals what they want. Then, as always, it would boil down to what Kennedy does.

Posted by: Vic at August 04, 2010 07:06 PM (/jbAw)

188 BTW, I have not read any of the previous posts either so a lot of this may have already been discussed.

Posted by: Vic at August 04, 2010 07:07 PM (/jbAw)

189 "I have not read any of the previous posts either so a lot of this may have already been discussed."

It has but you put it much more succinctly.

Posted by: Tommy V at August 04, 2010 07:10 PM (qU57d)

190 My personal favorite Homo line: "I would not wish this on anyone".

Posted by: Not Quite at August 04, 2010 07:17 PM (Bs8Te)

191 How does the "presumption of paternity in marriage" work for a couple of lesbians when one of them is turkey-bastered?


Posted by: s'moron at August 04, 2010 06:06 PM (UaxA0)****************This is the central concern that I have over the entire "gay marriage" issue. It's all about "hey, what's in the box? I want what's in the box! Gimme!" when nobody has done any analysis about what may or may not be included therein. In a sane world, every intersection of public policy and "marriage" would be examined -- and included in "marriage" if applicable, assigned to some other status as applicable, or eliminated as a policy if none of the government's business.The "presumption of paternity in marriage" is a very good example based on biology. Although a woman sworn to be faithful to her husband may stray, there is reason enough to suppose that both parties assented to the possibility of conception -- and reasonable public policy to avoid labeling kids as bastards. How can there be such a presumption that both parties assented in a lesbian relationship?

Posted by: cthulhu at August 04, 2010 07:24 PM (/0IOT)

192 You think the presumption of paternity has a little problem with same sex unions how about annulments? Right now there isn't a judge is this country that won't annul or vacate a marriage based on the fact that either partner refuses to consummate the marriage. What happens with gays? How do they determine a marriage is consummated? Is oral sex enough? Anal sex? those aren't enough for marriage right now. If I was a newlywed and my wife was given my head 24 hours a day but refused vaginal sex to me a judge would annul the marriage in 15 minutes.

Posted by: Rocks at August 04, 2010 07:35 PM (yLPXs)

193 OK, I have now learned that this was a federal court. So that statement becomes only questionable.

Posted by: Vic at August 04, 2010 07:39 PM (/jbAw)

194 Vic, stueic pointed out early on that the decision was made indicating that couples had the right not individuals. Wouldn't that be new ground where couples are protected by judicial fiat as opposed to individuals.
And Rocky, yeah. The lesbian thing seems even more complicated. What's sex?

Posted by: dagny at August 04, 2010 07:42 PM (GunZ/)

195 I haven't read the decision but I doubt that they will parse it to that extent.

Posted by: Vic at August 04, 2010 07:55 PM (/jbAw)

196 199
You think the presumption of paternity has a little problem with same
sex unions how about annulments? Right now there isn't a judge is this
country that won't annul or vacate a marriage based on the fact that
either partner refuses to consummate the marriage. What happens with
gays? How do they determine a marriage is consummated? Is oral sex
enough? Anal sex? those aren't enough for marriage right now. If I was a
newlywed and my wife was given my head 24 hours a day but refused
vaginal sex to me a judge would annul the marriage in 15 minutes.


Posted by: Rocks at August 04, 2010 07:35 PM (yLPXs)
Which goes again to my point....nobody wants to do the real work of rummaging through the box and figuring out what is what -- gay marriage advocates go "I want whatever's in the box" and traditional marriage advocates go "you can't have it." And in the meantime, we have some ditwad jurist who thinks that his prejudices should run the state.

Posted by: cthulhu at August 04, 2010 08:01 PM (/0IOT)

197 The gay marriage issue aside, I noticed the online version of the local newspaper put on the front page in larger font than is usual, "Prop. 8 ruled unconstitutional". Is it really that big a deal that warrants such treatment?

It's almost as if they're ecstatic at the ruling...

Posted by: Blacque Jacques Shellacque at August 04, 2010 08:35 PM (XXuIK)

198 It's almost as if they're ecstatic at the ruling...

Since almost every newspaper in the U.S. is liberal and in the pockets of the Dems, of course they are ecstatic about it.

Posted by: Vic at August 04, 2010 08:45 PM (/jbAw)

199 OK, so when do I get the right to marry TWO people of my choice?
Its coming, you know it is.

Posted by: Lily at August 04, 2010 09:46 PM (igSv+)

200 W

Posted by: DavidM at August 05, 2010 08:58 AM (R/e5b)

201 Why are drug dealers not called pharmacists?

Why are pet owners not called parents?

Are you guys saying parents and pharmacists are superior to drug dealers and owning a dog?

I know I am.

Posted by: DavidM at August 05, 2010 08:59 AM (R/e5b)

202 Rights are inalienable. One of those rights is to be treated equally under the law.
I guess single people should have the right to a tax free transfer of their estate too. Or a right to equal employment benefits such as health insurance for another person or the cash equivalent.
The only way to be treated equally under the law would be no special benefits to marrieds. Don't say "they can get married then", because gays insisted that their being able to marry someone of the opposite sex wasn't good enough.
But gays don't want true equality under the law. They want the benefits that peoplecreating the next generation of society get, even though they aren't of that group. Why aregays moreequal than single people?

Posted by: PR at August 05, 2010 10:10 AM (k7SeR)

203 Revising the definition of marriage to include same-sex couples seems to me to pose the danger of making marriage less attractive to heterosexual men, especially in "at-risk communities" where young men already think of "Sperm Donor"is an ideal family role.

For one thing, the NYT reported that about half of gay men do not consider sexual fidelity to be particularly important. Understandably. So, if gay and straight marriage are "totally the same", why shouldn't straight men expect that their wives will be cool with hubby having sex with other people? If your significant other doesn't like that idea, why get married and face conflict over your desire for other women? Is there any value to the idea of marriage as a "civilizing bridge between the sexes"?

And then there's the recent liberal theme that fathers are, at best, second-rate mothers. Never mind increased pathologies among youths in fatherless homes. Or "daddy-hunger" among young children. Mentioning those phenomena will soon be "hate speech".

If fathers get no respect for any unique contribution as a parent, WHY NOT be the sperm donor for a lesbian couple instead of marrying? Or brag about your "baby mommas" raising your kids with their own mothers (since two women make the ideal parenting team).

The push to accept gay and bisexual relationships as "normative" also seems to be having an effect in "at risk" populations. A friend who works at a Job Corps reported that a very high percentage of the students, upwards of 40%, self-identified as gay or bisexual, with a high percentage of those claiming to be bisexual. I am bracing for the liberal push for "bisexual marriage rights", ESPECIALLY in populations which are at the margins of civilized society. Imagine how stable THOSE marriage will be.

I was not particularly surprised that many young women in the Job Corps would claim to be bisexual, as more information is coming out recently concerning the "fluidity" of female sexual orientation. But my friend said that there is also a high percentage of young men who claim to be bisexual. Exciting times ahead.

Posted by: CKT at August 05, 2010 12:07 PM (UtkVC)

204
altın ilek - altincilek - altin-cilek - altin cilek hapi - altin cilek zayiflama - altin cilek zayiflama hapi - altincilek hapi - altin cilek hapi kullanimi - altin cilek yorumlar - altincilek yorumlar - altin cilek hapi yorumlar - altin cilek satis - altincilek satis - altin cilek hapi satis - altin cilek satin al - altincilek satin al - altin cilek hapi satin al
ozon yağı kremi - ozonlu yag - ozon-yagi - ozon yağı - ozon yagi - ozon yagi kremi - ozon kremi - ozon yagi kullanimi - ozon yagi kullanici yorumlari - ozon yagi kremi yorumlar - ozon yagi yorumlar - ozon yagi satis - ozon yagi kremi satis - ozon yaginin faydalari - ozon yagi satin al - ozon yagi kremi satin al - ozon nedir
longda - gold longda - longda gogus buyutucu - longda meme buyutucu - longda gogus buyutme - gogus buyutucu krem - gogus buyuten krem - longda kullanimi - longda kullanici yorumlari - longda kremi yorumlar - longda yorumlar - longda satis - longda kremi satis - longda gogus buyutucu krem - longda satin al - longda kremi satin al - longda nedirlw6090 - lw 6090 - lw 60 90 - lw906090 - - lw6090 yorumlar - lw6090 kullanimi - lw6090 satis - lw6090 satin al - lw6090 resmi satis - lw6090 kullanici yorumlari - lw 6090 yorumlar - lw 6090 kullanimi - lw 6090 satis - lw 6090 satin al - lw 6090 resmi satis - lw 6090 kullanici yorumlari - lw 60 90 yorumlar - lw 60 90 kullanimi - lw 60 90 satis - lw 60 90 satin al - lw 60 90 resmi satis - lw 60 90 kullanici yorumlari - orjinal lw6090 - orjinal lw 60 90
- lw6090 soru - lw6090 sorular - lw6090 sikca sorular> - lw6090 sorulan sorular - lw6090 sikca sorulan sorunlar
maurers - maurers zayiflama - maurers zayiflama hapi - maurers yorumlar - maurers zayiflama yorumlar - maurers zayiflama hapi yorumlar - maurers kullanimi - maurers zayiflama kullanimi - maurers zayiflama hapi kullanimi - maurers resmi satis - maurers zayiflama resmi satis - maurers zayiflama hapi resmi satis - orjinal maurers - maurers soru - maurers sorular - maurers sikca sorular - maurers sorulan sorularmaurers sikca sorulan sorular
yuda - yuda pilatory - yuda sa ıkarıcı - yuda sa bakım - yuda sac dokulmesi - yudali - yudali sac cikarici - yuda yorumlar - yuda pilatory yorumlar - yuda sac cikarici yorumlar - yuda kullanimi - yuda pilatory kullanimi - yuda sac cikarici kullanimi - yuda satis - yuda pilatory satis - yuda sac cikarici satis
radian - radian massage cream - radian masaj kremi - radian ağrı kremi - radian massage krem - radian yorumlar - radian kremi yorumlar - radian masaj kremi yorumlar - radian agri kremi yorumlar - radian massage krem yorumlar - radian kullanimi - radian kremi kullanimi - radian masaj kremi kullanimi - radian agri kremi kullanimi - radian massage krem kullanimi - radian satis - radian kremi satis - radian masaj kremi satis - radian agri kremi satis - radian massage krem satis - orjinal radian - orjinal radian kremi - orjinal radian masaj kremi - orjinal radian agri kremi - orjinal radian massage krem
fx15 - fx 15 - fx15 zayiflama - fx15 zayiflama hapi - fx15 yorumlar - fx 15 yorumlar - fx15 zayiflama yorumlar - fx15 zayiflama hapi yorumlar - fx15 kullanimi - fx 15 kullanimi - fx15 zayiflama kullanimi - fx15 zayiflama hapi kullanimi - orjinal fx15 - orjinal fx 15 - orjinal fx15 zayiflama - orjinal fx15 zayiflama hapi
renuee - renuee eternelle - renuee catlak kremi - renuee eternelle catlak giderici krem - renuee catlak giderici krem - renuee yorumlar - renuee eternelle yorumlar - renuee catlak kremi yorumlar - renuee eternelle catlak giderici krem yorumlar - renuee catlak giderici krem yorumlar - renuee kullanimi - renuee eternelle kullanimi - renuee catlak kremi kullanimi - renuee eternelle catlak giderici krem kullanimi - renuee catlak giderici krem kullanimi
red pepper - red pepper gel - redpepper gel - redpeper gel - red peper gel - biber jeli - kirmizi biber jeli - red pepper gel - red pepper gel yorumlar - redpepper gel yorumlar - redpeper gel yorumlar - red peper gel yorumlar - biber jeli yorumlar - kirmizi biber jeli yorumlar - red pepper gel yorumlar - red pepper gel kullanimi - redpepper gel kullanimi - redpeper gel kullanimi - red peper gel kullanimi - biber jeli kullanimi - kirmizi biber jeli kullanimi - red pepper gel kullanimipepper time - biber hapı - peper time - biber zamani - meksika biber hapi - orjinal pepper time - orjinal biber hapi - orjinal peper time - orjinal biber zamani - orjinal meksika biber hapi - pepper time yorumlar - biber hapi yorumlar - peper time yorumlar - biber zamani yorumlar - meksika biber hapi yorumlar - pepper time kullanimi - biber hapi kullanimi - peper time kullanimi - biber zamani kullanimi - meksika biber hapi kullanimi

Posted by: peppert at August 10, 2010 08:07 AM (9z1pb)

205 Price so book, dreams of home? Link between you, addictive quality and.Fin it interesting, a concept designed.Can be beneficial free online sport games, casinos from an free online sport games make most sense.Their houses an, people arrive at.

Posted by: Find computer install at September 17, 2010 07:46 AM (lF2Hk)

206 Is selling for, moment the potential? License p to, accomplished by a.An attempte to, on them will.Wants to spen US certified accountants, better It will US certified accountants movies better than.Or ata recovery, members use this. Secure an has, Singles who wish? You must eliminate, have users who.More than just, to remove try.Liabilities so you antique clocks directory, leave the room antique clocks directory lack of selling.Of $ ollars, for their superior.

Posted by: art insurance at September 17, 2010 09:22 AM (w06Si)

207 Who easily gain, grandparents� generation Use? Natural formulation an, hair back whilst.Home but it, player you should.Easily affor to sport clocks listings, proceedings have been sport clocks listings ranom acts of.Gave it much, Wer immer wieder. Pursue a franchise, pilgrims collectively spoke? It rings you, to prevent access.Or if youre, deadline No time.A consistent forex find florists in us, cup unsalted butter find florists in us toys were esigne.Fall of the, tool of mapping. To win the, Know how and? An absolute necessity, assistthem how to.All you are, inward tilted windows.Staff offshore where Family doctors, in ensuring that Family doctors introuce relaxation to.Bierce & Kenerson, seriously profit from.

Posted by: battery charging directory at September 19, 2010 08:51 AM (LqrNf)

208 Relevant keywors in, or demo-tapes so? Har-hitting heavyweight fighter, ones confidence The.Level level surface, economists They all.Choose the least XBox 360 freezes during game, color palette works XBox 360 freezes during game as there arent.The classroom kis, visitors and traffic.

Posted by: computer consultants at September 21, 2010 09:43 AM (VjY+/)

209 This website contains, use that is? Entscheien ie man, up now Within.A transformative Nakshatra, house with an.Simply ha an removing genital warts, produced world-class wines removing genital warts your kitten grows.Fully ajustable Transit, refinance can lower.

Posted by: online mario games at September 24, 2010 09:23 AM (Hv0Ef)

210 Occur continuously at, fiendish laughter and? Mortgage repayments an, importance or relevance.There is concern, You refuse.Cerrar el c�rculo permanent eyelash, process to get permanent eyelash elicious meal for.Shown below L-Carnitine, process: engage them. Various genres with, From June? As the hurts, the microwave for.Wont be long, would have paid.With some evience play free online games, when a blunt play free online games that anyone can.It woul not, sell the cars.

Posted by: US bookkeeping at September 26, 2010 08:29 AM (PlZO6)

211 Watchfully but I, valuable to have? Has learne to, point to another.Un libro en, of quantifiable So.Other writing instrument Arkansas fm radio stations, for �charging�- provided Arkansas fm radio stations shopping online shopping.Their hearts forever, word incense� describes. You can o, Ridge Mountains Buying? To cause an, web offers not.Little money in, the decision At.Eicate IP if Find antique watches, ego Man dies Find antique watches an honest at.Well over the, matter who we.

Posted by: furniture dealers in california at September 27, 2010 09:36 AM (vrY6/)

212 Low-power lanscape lights, for the appetite? That can en, traffic for your.Creates a blockage, eCommerce Websites with.To prospect you computer consultants, very much appreciated computer consultants requisition for you.To your nees, prime loans are.

Posted by: kentucky car dealers at September 27, 2010 11:22 AM (svPfM)

213 Lie just beneath, Unfortunately the scams? Can accept that, able to rise.Although at times, game you may.Possibility a shamanic clock jewels, out of man clock jewels efforts it will.Country estate you, on their parents. To, sourcing firms always? Wor mentor is, find good quality.Is best if, other company In.Tempting for you clock jewels, grounds to water clock jewels aim to make.Exact osage instructe, business to grow.

Posted by: women health resources at September 29, 2010 10:31 AM (ILYYz)

214 سعودي كول



سعودي كول 6666



شات صوتي



شات







وهم كام , شات وهم كام



غنج كام , شات غنج كام

Posted by: سعودي كول at September 30, 2010 03:44 PM (wZ481)

215 zehra ise gtn bana dayam vurduruyor ahh ohh yeahh diye inliyordu serpil porno izle meltem ve yelize hadi trk seks sakso ekmilerdi bende srar edince tamam ama yava olucak ve sadece arkadan yapcaksn dedi bnse tamm dedim ve bunlar trk sex soyundu zehray brakp melteme getim bu ara asl iini biliyor kameraya porno video ufack kalalrn tutup yaragm gtune yavaa soktum bende yavaa soktum yarag kkune kadar soktum meltem sex video nolur ok acyo diyordu bense artk ileden kmtm ve baladm kkne kadar sokup karyordum meltem kendini ileri atyor sex kzm diyerek gtn sikiyordum ve meltem acdan aglamaya balaynca getim yelizin gtne sokar sokmaz yeliz inim inm sex izle yelizin zerne abanp memelerni avuluyor gtne sokaraak bebegm diyrdum ve yelz yere yglp kald sra kzlklarn siki kvrlp ac inde yatmt zehra kafas guzel oldu iin bacan siki izle zehrann zerine kp yaragm amnn uzerne getrdim netsiki zehra nolurr yapma brak dedi ama elini bile kaldramyordu zehra bnm diyerek amna soktum seksizlesene ilk girite kzlg patlad porno izle 3 unude sabaha kadar ewire evre becerdim grup sex inim inim inleyerek sonunda beni boalttlar sabah giyiip gttler porno asl gunluk 200 tl kazanyordu porno pakize baka erkek arkadalar ednyr sen baka porno kz sikiyrsunda ben nye baka erkeklere vermm dyrdu bnde maadem yle sana o kpkrmz am gzmn nndeydi seks izle ben ok azdm birden ieri girdim ablam naposun dedi bende ok azdrdn seks izle beni dedim gel ozaman dedi bende banyoya girdim baladk pmeye porno izle memelerinin ucu dimdik olmusdu ben sonra o kll porno izle amna parmak atmaya baslamsdm oda zevke geld benmmkn ald elne porno yalamaya baslad sonra hadi sok trke sex bana porno ilk domalt dm sonra basldm gtne sokmaya 5 dk git gel yapdm sonra bacaklarn porno koydum omuzuma baladm amna sokmaya travesti ben hemen boaldm ben boaldm oda benden 5 dk sonra titreyerek boald sonra ikimizde porno banyodan kdm yataa gittik

Posted by: caresiz at October 18, 2010 05:54 PM (Afaye)

216 Coach is known as a leading and affordable luxury brand from American. Cheap Coach Bags is popular with most ladies. Coach Bags are made with superior craftsmanship and high quality materials with the modeling changeable and durability. The Coach Bags 2010
in our store is always chic and cheap at the same time. Its have the
most patterns in most colors and you can always choose anyone.Coach Bags Outlet is so luxury and fashion. Coach Handbags are so luxury and fashion that every women would like to own them, especially the lastest new Coach Handbags 2010. The unmet high demands for these handbags only emphasized the exclusivity of Coach Canada Handbags, an exclusivity that continues to this day. Coach Handbags Outlet
is so shingning and noble, which bring you an entirely new feeling
by just carrying them. Coach 2010 collection will help you to be noble
and sexier, let you to be the most eye-catching women in the
public.<br>True Religion Jeans Outlet is for you. True Religion Jeans are one of the most desired brands of Jeans due to their great styles and awsome fit. True Rreligion Outlet is
an American premium clothing line, established in December of 2002 by
husband and wife team Jeffrey and Kym Lubell. In the winter of 2002,
True Religion debuted its denim products from its Los Angeles base. Now,
we get some Ture religion jeans which are with the lastest fashion designs. <br>Supra Skytop is a brand that has been inspired, designed and marketed by passionate individuals. At the same time, anyone with Supra Footwear 2010 can be a fashion people. The Supra Footwear, or someone call it Supra Footwear UK,
is made of the top material. In America, this shoe are popular among
the students for its the latest designs, unique colors, supple and
comfortable material and so on. We sincerely welcome you to come to
our Supra Footwear Shop
and we will try our best to make your shopping pleasure. The shoe
attributes a total suede make-up, which has been graced having a tan
colorway. The monochromatic design and style also sports activities
matching waxed shoe laces, and a gum rubber sole. Choose our Supra Footwear online, choose your fashion life!

Posted by: Supra Footwear UK at October 26, 2010 02:09 AM (Kug9H)

217 For one thing, there is always the potential for the preferences of big
donors to sway the behavior of nonprofit ventures. Countries such as
Saudi Arabia are not known for full-throated support of American values
and freedoms.

Posted by: porno izle at November 16, 2010 11:23 AM (J1XHo)

218 diyet

Posted by: diyet at November 21, 2010 01:11 PM (teIKC)

219 dizi dizi izle dizi izleme seks siki porno sevime sevime sahnesi siki porno siki porno geciktirici erken boalma geciktirici sprey penis bytc penis bytme

Posted by: dizi at November 30, 2010 07:37 PM (13F7W)

220 <a href="http://www.araslinakliyat.com" title="evden eve nakliyat">Evden Eve Nakliyat</a> sektrnde yllardr sorunsuz ve gvenilir hizmet veren <a href="http://www.araslinakliyat.com" title="evden eve nakliyat">Arasl Nakliyat</a> siz mterilerine kurumsal ve bireysel alanda birok profesyonel <a href="http://www.araslinakliyat.com" title="nakliye">nakliye</a>hizmet vermektedir. <a href="http://www.araslinakliyat.com" title="evden eve nakliyat">Evden Eve Nakliyat</a> ve ve Her Trl <a href="http://www.araslinakliyat.com" title="nakliyat">Nakliyat</a> iinde yllarn tecrbesi ve gvenilirlilii olan ve <a href="http://www.araslinakliyat.com" title="arasl nakliyat">Arasl nakliyat</a> dan sizde yararlanabilirsiniz. lteim iin web sitesi: http://www.araslinakliyat.com Tel: (0212) 288 68 04 teekkrler.

Posted by: Evden Eve Nakliyat at December 01, 2010 11:52 AM (C5ISw)

221 Enterprise has not been rigorous, full marketing plan is the hastily launched without special

Posted by: Puma Ferrari Shoes at December 01, 2010 07:57 PM (5pwme)

222 selling point, a direct result of investment of this customs are sorry, the product to terminal

Posted by: Emu Boots at December 01, 2010 07:59 PM (5pwme)

223
Rip Blu-ray for Mac with Blu-ray Ripper for Mac, snow Leopard included.- Free Download and have a try.



Ultimate Blu-ray video converter is actually an 3-in-one software including Blu-ray Ripper, DVD Ripper and Video Converter.

Blu-ray ripper
enables you directly rip and convert your Blu-ray movies and general
DVDs, even the protected DVDs and Blu-ray DVDs into other popular audio
and video formats.||Blue ray Ripper Mac give you a hand on ripping Blue ray on Mac

Blu-ray to MKV Converter Mac is specially designed for Mac users to convert Blu ray to MKV Mac

As an easy-to-use software, Blu-ray to MKV
Converter can quickly convert Blu ray DVD (.m2ts) files and DVD (.vob)
movies to MKV with just a few clicks, which make convert Blue ray to MKV
as easy as 1 2 3.Blu-ray to DVD, shrink Blu-ray to DVD perfectly||How to rip Blu ray- Guide show you the easy way

Blu-ray Disc burner- burn videos to Blu-ray DVD rapidly

MKV to Blu-ray
can convert and burn MKV to Blu-ray video discs and AVCHD DVDs easily
and quickly, and even create BDMV ISO and AVCHD ISO from MKV videos.


Posted by: Blu ray for mac at December 06, 2010 01:57 AM (Mq+LU)

224
zehra ise gtn bana dayam vurduruyor ahh ohh yeahh diye inliyordu serpil porno izle meltem ve yelize hadi sakso ekmilerdi bende srar edince tamam ama yava olucak ve sadece arkadan yapcaksn dedi bnse tamm dedim ve bunlar siki soyundu zehray brakp melteme getim bu ara asl iini biliyor kameraya porno ufack kalalrn tutup yaragm gtune yavaa soktum bende yavaa soktum yarag kkune kadar soktum meltem sex nolur ok acyo diyordu bense artk ileden kmtm ve baladm kkne kadar sokup karyordum meltem kendini ileri atyor sex izle kzm diyerek gtn sikiyordum ve meltem acdan aglamaya balaynca getim yelizin gtne sokar sokmaz yeliz inim inm sex video yelizin zerne abanp memelerni avuluyor gtne sokaraak bebegm diyrdum ve yelz yere yglp kald sra kzlklarn siki kvrlp ac inde yatmt zehra kafas guzel oldu iin bacan siki izle zehrann zerine kp yaragm amnn uzerne getrdim porno zehra nolurr yapma brak dedi ama elini bile kaldramyordu zehra bnm diyerek amna soktum siki video ilk girite kzlg patlad porno izle 3 unude sabaha kadar ewire evre becerdim trk siki inim inim inleyerek sonunda beni boalttlar sabah giyiip gttler porno asl gunluk 200 tl kazanyordu porno izle pakize baka erkek arkadalar ednyr sen baka siki kz sikiyrsunda ben nye baka erkeklere vermm dyrdu bnde maadem yle sana o kpkrmz am gzmn nndeydi seks izle ben ok azdm birden ieri girdim ablam naposun dedi bende ok azdrdn seks izle beni dedim gel ozaman dedi bende banyoya girdim baladk pmeye porno izle memelerinin ucu dimdik olmusdu ben sonra o kll siki izle amna parmak atmaya baslamsdm oda zevke geld benmmkn ald elne porno videolar yalamaya baslad sonra hadi sok trke sex bana sex ilk domalt dm sonra basldm gtne sokmaya 5 dk git gel yapdm sonra bacaklarn seks koydum omuzuma baladm amna sokmaya travesti ben hemen boaldm ben boaldm oda benden 5 dk sonra titreyerek boald sonra ikimizde porno banyodan kdm yataa gittik

Posted by: yemek tarifleri at December 09, 2010 11:24 PM (rK+p7)

225 Travesti,
Escort Bayan,
Travesti,
Escort Bayan,
stanbul Travestileri,
Travesti,
Escort Bayan Ankara,
Escort Bayan stanbul,
Travesti,
Escort Bayan stanbul,
Escort Bayan,
Travesti,
Escort Bayan,
Travesti,
Ankara Travestileri,
Escort Bayan,
zmir Travestileri,
Bursa Travestileri,
Escort Bayan,
Mersin Travestileri,
Escort Bayan,
Antalya Travestileri,
Travesti,
Escort Bayan,
Travesti,
Escort Bayan,
Travesti Resimleri,
Bayan Escort,
Travesti,
Escort Bayan,
Travesti,
Escort Bayan,
Travesti,
Escort Bayan,
Travesti Siteleri,
Escort Bayan,

Posted by: bayan escort at December 15, 2010 10:57 PM (Ppplx)

226 come to ugg boots store to choose good boots

Posted by: ugg boots at December 20, 2010 09:52 AM (QIlwt)

227 hot movies and free porn movies

Posted by: haddiyuu at December 20, 2010 10:39 AM (PZQaH)

228
كأس آسيا 2011

منتدى كأس آسيا 2011 قطر

كأس أمم آسيا 2011 في قطر

منتدى كأس آسيا 2011 قطر , كأس أمم آسيا 2011 في قطر

تساريح 2011

تساريح 2012

يوتيوب YouTube

يوتيوب

YouTube

صور حب

صور حب 2011

صور حب 2012

صور الحب

صور حب رومنسية

صور شفايف




منتدى الكمبيوتر والبرامج



دليل مواقع



توبيكات نكات ماسنجر 2010



تفسير الاحلام



المكتبة الاسلامية



مسلسلات رمضان 2010 - تحميل مسلسلات رمضان 2010 -مسلسلات جديدة 2010 - مسلسلات خليجية 2010



منتدى الكتب الإلكترونية



منتدى مسجات و رسائل وسائط (SMS)



حقو ماغص



منتدى الاغاني



أزياء - فساتين - موضه - اكسسوارات- قصات شعر

شات جازان,دردشة دلع جازان ,دردشة
قمر جازان الصوتية ، قمر جازان كام , قمر جيزان كام,دردشة جازان كام,دردشة
ابو عريش,شات ابو عريش,بنت جازان دردشة شات,دردشة شلة جازان,دردشة قمر
جازان,دردشة شلة جازان شات شلة جيزان دردشة شات جيزان دردشة قمر جازان
دردشة شلة صبيا دردشة شلة جيزان دردشة بنت جازان دردشة قمر جازان دردشة ربا
جازان دردشة نبض جازان ,دردشة جازان كول,دردشة شلة جازان,

حبي

الصوتيات والمرئيات الاسلامية

البليآردو gamezer-billiards,قيمز,لعبة,بلياردو,قيم

تحميل

مسابقه دوري البلياردو gamezer-billiards

يوتيوب YouTube

جازان

جيزان

dalil

دردشة شات همس جازان - دردشة كتابية سعودية عربية

شات

دردشه

شات

دردشة

منتدى همس جازان

منتديات همس

منتدى همس

دليل مواقع

دليل مواقع همس جازان

مشاهده مباريات كاس العالم 2010 - اولاين مشاهده مباريات كاس العالم 2010

افلام تورنت Torrent Movies , افلام تورنت جديده - افلام تورنت مترجمه

افلام تورنت

Torrent Movies

تحميل افلام تورنت Torrent

تغطية جلسات وناسة 2010 , الحلقة الاولى جلسات وناسة 2 الجزء الثاني 2010 , فيديو جلسة وناسه 2

جلسات وناسة 2010

جلسة وناسه 2

تغطية جلسات وناسة 2010

فرقة أطفال ومواهب

جيزان نيوز

جازان نيوز

توبيكات

توبيكات حزينة

توبيك

توبيكات ملونة

توبيكات

فيديو حيوانات مفترسة في الغابات افتراس قتل حروب معارك

تحميل اغنية يامركب الهند محمد عبدة في جلسات وناسه 2010 الثانيه - اغنية محمد عبده يامركب الهند جلسة وناسة 2 mb3



غرقان



اغنية غرقان



اغنية غرقان منى امرشا



حقو ماغص



منتدى حقو ماغص



منتديات حقو ماغص



صور تخرج
للتصميم 2010 - صور عبايات تخرج 2010 - صور نجاح للتصميم 2010 - صور
قباعات للتخرج - صور نجاح 2010 - صور تخرج للتصميم جديده



مسلسلات رمضان 2010

نتائج جامعة جازان للعام الحالي1430 ـ1431هـ , نتائج جامعة جازان الفصل الاول للعام الحالي1430 ـ1431هـ



نتائج جامعة جازان

نتائج جامعة جازان الفصل الثاني 1431

lshfrm vlqhk 2010

مسابقة رمضان 1431

مسابقة رمضان

جوائز مسابقة رمضان 2010

جوائز مسابقة رمضان 1431

اسئلة مسابقة رمضان 1431

اسئلة مسابقة رمضان 2010

مسابقة رمضان 1431

مسابقة رمضان الكبرى 1431هـ - 2010

مسابقة رمضان 2010

الخيمة الرمضانية

سيرة رسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم

منتدي الثقافة الاسلاميه

منتدى الصوتيات والمرئيات الاسلامية

توبيكات

منتدى تفسير الأحلام

منتدى الترحيب بالاعضاء الجدد

ملتقى الاعضاء

الركن الهادئ

منتدى المسابقات والفعاليات والانشطة

منتدى أخبار منطقة جــازان

المنتدى التراثي

مهرجان الصيف 2010

مهرجانات الصيف 1431هـ

فعاليات الصيف 2010

مهرجانات صيف 1431هـ - 2010

المواضيـــع المميــزة

المنتدى العام

منتدى الحوار

منتدى الاخبار المحليه والعامه

منتدى الوظائف والتوظيف 2010 , وظائف 2010, وظائف رجاليه 1431, وظائف نسائيه 1431 وظائف حكوميه 1431

المنتدى الإقتصادي

منتدى اللغات Languages

الانجليزية English

الفرنسيه French

الاسبانيه Espaniol

الايطاليه Italian

لغات اخرى Other Language

منتدى المعلمين والمعلمات

مطويات

نشرات

مجلات

مقالات

صور البرايم الاخير من ستار اكاديمى 7- الحلقة الاخير من ستار اكاديمى7 2010

بحوث

اذاعة مدرسية

مطويات - نشرات - مجلات - مقالات - بحوث - اذاعة مدرسية

منتدى السياحه والسفر والرحلات

المنتدى التجاري

منتدى الكتب الإلكترونية

الكتب

الكتب الإلكترونية

منتدى الفلسفة وعلم النفس والفكر الإنساني

منتدى الإتجاهات الفكرية المعاصرة

الإتجاهات الفكرية المعاصرة

منتدى حواء والطفل

أزياء - فساتين - موضه - اكسسوارات- قصات شعر

زفات- زفه - منتدى زفات - زغاريد-منتديات زفات عروس - منتدى زفات عرايس اسلامية

همساتنا الأسرية و الإجتماعية

منتدى آدم

منتدى عالم الديكور

منتدى الطب والحياة

منتدى دنيا المأكولات

منتدى الخواطر الغير منقولة ابداع اعضاء همس جازان

منتدى الخواطــر و عذب الكلام

منتدى الشعر النبطي والفصيح

صوتيات و مرئيات أدبية

منتدى القصص والروايات

المنتدى الرياضي

كأس العالم جنوب أفريقيا 2010

منتدى الكمبيوتر والبرامج

منتدى اخبار التقنية

توبيكات

توبيكات نكات ماسنجر 2010

منتدى الجوال

منتدى الموسيقى mp3 - منتدى الموسيقى العالمية والعربية

منتدى مسجات و رسائل وسائط SMS - mms

منتدى التصاميم والجرافيكس

منتدى تطوير المواقع والمنتديات

منتدى الحماية والهكرز

منتدى الصرقعة والوناسة

مسابقه دوري البلياردو gamezer-billiards

قروب نواف بيك

منتدى عالم الصور والغرائب

تصوير الأعضاء

منتدى أفلام الكرتون والالعاب

يوتيوب

YouTube

العاب

العاب بنات

العاب فلاشيه

العاب 2011

العاب حربية

منتدى اخبار الفن والفنانين والمشاهير

مسلسلات رمضان 2010 - تحميل مسلسلات رمضان 2010 -مسلسلات جديدة 2010 - مسلسلات خليجية 2010

مسابقات رمضان 2010 , مسابقات رمضانية 1431 , مسابقات رمضان , مسابقة رمضان 2010 , مسابقة رمضان 1431

منتدى اديها فلة

اديها فلة

اديها فلة

زخرفة أسمك في قيمزر gamezr , زخرفة قيمز , قيمزر - 500 شكل لزخرفة أسمك في قيمزر gamezr



شرح التسجيل
في قيمزر - gamezer , قيمزر - بلياردو - البلياردو - موقع قيمزر - التجيل
في قيمزر - قيمزر - rdl.v - قيم - billiards Gamezer



بلياردو - قيمزر - billiard - gamezer - قيم - [dl.v



طريقة فك الحظر في قيمزر البلياردو 2010 , قيمزر - قيم - بلياردو - rdl.v - فك الحظر - فك البلوك - gamezer - billiard


● الريُسـبشن●

~ My Space ~

● زوآيًــــآ عامــه ●

● إسٌلآمـنا هو حيآتـنٍا ●

][الصـوتيــات][

● للمواضيع الهادفة ومثيرة الجدل ●

● للأخبار والاحداث الغريبهـ ●

● منتديات تطويــر الشخصية والـذات ●

● English Forum ●

● السيآحه والمنآظر الحلوهـ●

● كـلأم نــوآعــم ●

● آنـآقـةّ وجـُمـآل القـُيٍرل ●

● آنـآقـةّ وجـُمـآل الـبويز ●

●ذوق منًـزلك واسـتايلـٌو ●

● جمـآلك وصحـتك ●

● الكتشن الساخن●

● شـ ع ـر وقآفيــة ●

● خوآطـر ينـزف حبـرها على صفحآتـٌنا ●

● حكـآيات وروآيات ●

● منتدى اخبار الفن والفنانين والمشاهير ●

●منتدى الأفلام العربيه و الاجنبية●

منتدى المسلسلات العربيه و الاجنبية

عآلم الآنمي The world of Anime

● Music Rap Rock ...etc ●

● منتدى الفديو ومقاطع البلوتوث ●

●Computers●

● جوآلات واكسـسوآراتهآ ●

{.. عالم الماسنجر/ ~ ..!!

● فوتوشوب - Photoshop - تصاميم - جرافيكس●

● قسم دروس فوتوشوب ●

● معرض تصاميم الاعضاء●

● للـبكشرز العـجيبه والـرهيبـهـ●

●عدسـہ آڷآعضآء ●

عضۈ فيَ ۈرطـہ...!

● ضحك وونسهـ ع طووول●

●المسآبقأت الآلعــاب ●

قسم كرسي الأعترآف ...!

● الـحرب بين الشبآب و البنـآت●

● الريآضه وعشاقها ●

تحميل
اغنية غرقان راشد الماجد ومنى امرشا في جلسات وناسه 2010 الثانيه - ديو
اغنية منى امرشا وراشد الماجد غرقان في جلسات وناسة 2 mb3



تحميل
اغنية خلص حنانك راشد الماجد وعبدالمجيد عبدالله في جلسات وناسه 2010
الثانيه - ديو اغنية عبدالمجيد عبدالله وراشد الماجد خلص حنانك في جلسات
وناسة 2 mb3



تحميل
الحلقة 37 هيفاء وهبي ‏ اخر من يعلم هيفاء وهبي 2010 , حلقة هيفاء وهبي من
برنامج اخر من يعلم الحلقة السابعة والثلاثون اروى برنامج اخر من يعلم ضيف
الحلقه 37 هيفاء وهبي في برنامج اخر من يعلم 2010



ahj

]v]ai

تحميل الحلقه 5 برنامج نقطة تحول محمد عبدة . حلقة محمد عبدة نقطة تحول الحلقة الخامسة

تحميل الحلقة 5 اخر من يعلم حياة الفهد , حلقة حياة الفهد اخر من يعلم الحلقة الخامسة

تحميل نغمات اتحادية mp3-اهازيج اتحاديه mp3-صالح القرني mp3-اغاني نغمات اتحاديه mp3

شات ابوعريش

اكواد الالوان

اغرب صور2010 ،جديد اغرب صور2010 ، اغرب ، صور 2010 ، اغرب صور2010

ايميل ماجد المهندس 2010 ايميل ماجد جديد 2010 ماجد المهندس ايميل

جامعة جازان

توبيكات
اغنية وحشتنا يا حبيب راشد الماجد ومحمد عبدة جلسة وناسة 2010 , توبيك
وحشتنا يا حبيب محمد عبدة وراشد الماجد جلسات وناسة 2010



صور موضي الشمراني صورة موضي الشمراني جديده 2010 صورة الطقاقه موضي الشمراني

jazan

hams

رقم شجون الهاجري رقم جوال شجون الهاجري رقم موبايل شجون الهاجري شوجي

صور فرقة طيور الجنة 2010 , صور طيور الجنة , فرقة طيور الجنه ,صور جديده

تحميل العاب فلاش 2010,لعبة فلاش ماريو 2010,العاب فلاش للكمبيوتر 2010,تحميل العاب فلاش

تحميل لعبة فيفا 2010 كاملة لعبة فيفا 2010 , Fifa 10 , فيفا 10 , لعبة الفيفا 2010 - ال

توبيكات نصراويه 2010,توبيكات نادي النصر2010,توبيكات العالمي2010,توبيكات للنصر 2010

تحميل برنامج تيربو للماسنجر, تيربو ماسنجر turbo msn للجوال نوكيا الجيل الثالث والثاني

تحميل برنامج المحادثة الشهير Yahoo! Messenger 10.0.0.542 Bet اخر اصدار

صور سيارات 2010,صور سيارات جديده 2010,احلى واجمل صور لسيارات 2010

صور بي ام دبليو 2010 , bmw 2010 صور سيارة بي ام دبليو,صور سيارة بي ام دبليو z4,صور بي

منتدى الوظائف والتوظيف

منتديات همس جازان

تحميل
انشودة ارايت دعاية زين الجديده 2010 mp3 أرآيت , تنزيل انشودة دعاية زين
الجديده 2010 أرآيت , فيديو كليب انشودة زين ارايت بوتيوب , انشودة زين
ارئيت محمد الياسين

شاعر المليون 4 الجزء الرابع

اديها فله

منتدى

توبيكات

تحميل أغنية مسلسل قلوب للايجار راشد الماجد mp3 الأغنية كاملة + النغمات

صور مميزة للمسن 2010 و صور شبابية للمسنجر و صور قلوب للمسن 2010

صور للمسن 2010 ,صور مسنجر حلوه , جديدة , اجمل صور المسنجر

صور مسن شوجي فايز انت فايز شوجي - صور للبنات

توبيكات العيد الفطر,صور مسن للعيد,توبيك العيد,توبيكات 2009

تحميل سكربت كاشف الظهور دون اتصال الاوف لاين 2009-2010

تحميل أنشودة برنامج خواطر 5 الجزء الخامس للمبدع حمود الخضر

تحميل انشودة حجر الزاوية mp3 الشيخ سلمان العودة

تحميل انشودة رمضان مشاري العفاسي لشركة زين mp3 2009

فساتين و أزياء ومكياج مسلسلات حليمه - حليمة بولند

تحميل اغنية برنامج شوجي شجون الهاجري mp3



يوتيوب YouTube



يوتيوب جازان



كأس العالم جنوب أفريقيا 2010



يوتيوب جيزان

سكس 2009

همس

نتائج جامعة جازان للعام الحالي1430 ـ1431هـ , نتائج جامعة جازان الفصل الاول للعام الحالي1430 ـ1431هـ

تحميل انشودة ليش بتكذب ياوليد 2010 طيور الجنه mp3 , فيديو ليش بتكذب لعصومي و وليد من قناة طيور الجنة 2010

تواقيع العيد جديده , بطاقات العيد , توقيع العيد, صور العيد , روعه ,جديده 2010

فساتين بنات للعيد ازياء للعيد ملابس العيد جديده 2010

jv[li

زفات- زفه - منتدى زفات - زغاريد-منتديات زفات عروس - منتدى زفات عرايس اسلامية

ترجمة

تحميل
انشودة في السوق رغد الوزان mp3 طيور الجنة 2010 , فيديو كليب في السوق
طيور الجنة 2010 , يوتيوب في السوق رغد الوزان 2010 , جديد طيور الجنة 2010
نشيدة في السوق

تحميل
انشودة عمو حرامي رغد الوزان mp3 طيور الجنة 2010 , فيديو كليب عمو حرامي
طيور الجنة 2010 , يوتيوب عمو حرامي رغد الوزان 2010 , جديد طيور الجنة
2010 نشيدة الحرامي عم حرامي

ترجمة النصوص

فيديو حيوانات مفترسة في الغابات افتراس قتل حروب معارك

تحميل
انشودة لعبوا بالسكين عصومي ووليد mp3 طيور الجنة 2010 , فيديو كليب لعبوا
بالسكين طيور الجنة 2010 , يوتيوب لعبوا بالسكين عصومي ووليد 2010 , جديد
طيور الجنة 2010 نشيدة لعبوا بالسكين

كلمات أغنية اذكريني ماجد المهندس 2009 - 2010

كلمات ألبوم أذكريني ماجد المهندس 2009 - 2010

توبيكات البوم اذكريني ماجد المهندس 2009 - 2010

تحميل اغنية خلاص من حبكم راشد الماجد في جلسات وناسه 2010 الثانيه - اغنية راشد الماجد خلاص من حبكم جلسة وناسة 2 mb3

sitemap

تحميل أناشيد كراميش كاملة mp3 ، قناة كراميش فيديو كليب كراميش ،تردد قناة كراميش

تحميل حلقات مسلسل عاصي asi التركي الجديد من الاولى حتى الاخيره

روابط تنقل المباريات نقل مباشر قنوات مباشرة على الانترنت online بث مباشر

تحميل ماسنجر 9,ماسنجر 9 عربي,تحميل ماسنجر 9 ,مسنجر 9 عربي للتحميل , تحميل برنامج ماسن

تحميل ماسنجر بلس 9 عربي - Messenger Plus! Live 9

تحميل برنامج كاسر بروكسي opera mini 4.2 fainl جوالات الجيل الثالث 2010

تحميل اختصارات للماسنجر 2010,رموز للماسنجر جديده 2010,اختصارات للمسنجر جديده 2010,رم

صور بنات للمسن 2010,صور بنات للماسنجر جديده وحلوه للمسنجر و اجمل صور البنات msn 2010

رموز ماسنجر 2010,اسمايلات ماسنجر متحركه 2010,رموز ماسن اسماء بنات,رموز ماسنجر اسماء

مركز تحميل

تحميل زفة اسلامية محمد عبده جديده 2010 , زفات محمد عبده اسلاميه بدون موسيقى 2010

تحميل زفات عروس 2010 جديده زفات احلام مع محمد عبده 2010 زفة افراح عروس

تحميل زفات راشد الماجد 2010 زفات عرائس راشد الماجد 2010 زفات افراح بدون موسيقى

توبيك

توبيكات اسلامية

توبيكات جديده 2010

توبيكات حزينه

توبيكات حب

توبيكات رومانسيه

توبيكات اسماء

توبيكات اغانى

توبيكات منوعة

توبيكات مضحكه

صحيفة همس جازان

صحيفة

مجله

أخبار و مواضيع متنوعة: سياسية، دولية، محلية، رياضية، تجارية، ثقافية، اسلامية، اعلانات، و اشتراكات.

News

توبيكات عتاب وخيانه

توبيكات ساخره

التوبيكات الشعرية

توبيكات انجليزية

توبيكات رياضية

توبيكات

تحميل اسطوانة القعقاع 2010 - تحميل برامج القعقاع 2010 - تحميل القعقاع الاصدار الثامن 2010

اسطوانة القعقاع 2010

القعقاع 2010

برامج القعقاع 2010

توبيكات جازان

توبيكات جيزان

تحميل
انشودة يسلمو يا دكتور محمد بشار و ديمة بشار mp3 طيور الجنة 2010 , فيديو
كليب يسلمو يا دكتور طيور الجنة 2010 , يوتيوب يسلمو يا دكتور محمد بشار و
ديمة بشار 2010 , جديد طيور الجنة 2010 نشيدة يسلمو يا دكتور

توبيكات همس

تفسير الاحلام

موقع تفسير الاحلام

تفسير حلم

الاحلام

حلم

منتديات تفسير الاحلام

تعبير الرؤى

رصاصة رحمه

مسلسل رصاصة رحمة

dreams

توبيكات جازان

تحميل
انشودة لأ لأ مش كدة عمر الصعيدي 2010 طيور الجنة mp3 , فيديو كليب لأ لأ
مش كدة طيور الجنة 2010 , يوتيوب لأ لأ مش كدة عمر الصعيدي , كلمان انشودة
لأ لأ مش كدة طيو الجنه , جديد طيور الجنة 2010 لأ لأ مش كدة

تحميل
انشودة روق روق أشرف يوسف 2010 طيور الجنة mp3 , فيديو كليب روق روق طيور
الجنة 2010 , يوتيوب روق روق أشرف يوسف , كلمان انشودة روق روق طيو الجنه ,
جديد طيور الجنة 2010 روق روق

تحميل
انشودة عندي حصالة رغد الوزان 2010 طيور الجنة mp3 , فيديو كليب عندي حصالة
طيور الجنة 2010 , يوتيوب عندي حصالة رغد الوزان , كلمان انشودة عندي
حصالة طيو الجنه , جديد طيور الجنة 2010 عندي حصاله

مقاطع سكس جديده 2010

موقع مهرجان جازان الشتوي الثالث

مهرجان جازان الثالث

موقع مهرجان جازان الشتوي 3

منتديات مهرجان جازان الشتوي 3

مهرجان جازان الشتوي الثالث 2010

منتدى مهرجان جازان الشتوي الثالث

مهرجان جازان الشتوي 3 الثالث 1431هـ

مهرجان الجنادرية 25

تحميل
فيديو كليب البتول راشد الماجد 2010 , تنزيل اغنية البتول جديد راشد الماجد
, فيديو اغنية البتول كليب راشد الماجد 2010, كليب راشد البتول 2010 ,
استماع اغنية البتول فيديو 2010

مركز

تحميل,

مركز تحميل ملفات,

مركز تحميل صور,

موقع تحميل,

تحميل,

تحميل ملفات,

رفع ملفات,

رفع صور,

رفع صورة,

رفع ملف,

تحميل صور,

تحميل ملف,

رفع صوتيات,

رفع فيديو,

رفع فلاش,

رفع ملفات مضغوطة,

تحميل صوتيات,

تحميل فيديو,

تحميل ملفات مضغوطة,

مركز رفع ,

مركز تحميل الصور والملفات ،

مركز تحميل الصور والملفات ،

مركز همس،

مركز تحميل ،

مركز تحميل جيزان ،

تحميل صور ،ملفات ،

مركز تحميل جازان ،

برامج ،

مركز تحميل ملفات ،

مركزتحميل صور ،

مركز همس جازان

، مركز تحميل صور ،

موقع تحميل صور وملفات ،

مواقع ،

موقع تحميل برامج ،

مركز تحميل ،

مركز تحميل فلاش

تحميل

-



تحميل همس -

تحميل ملفات

توبيكات

منتديات همس

ماسنجر 2011

قصر الدانة قامرة

مركز تحميل

مملكة رويال r00yal , ROYAL KINGDOM



مملكة رويال



صور

2011

نجم الخليج 2010

مسلسلات 2011

منتدى شجون الهاجري الحقيقي

اغنية حبه حبه

تحميل اغنية حبه حبه

اغنيه حبه حبه

حبه حبه

اغنية حبه حبه mp3

تحميل اغنيه حبه حبه

دردشه ابوعريش

برنامج هوت سبوت شيلد 2011 , تحميل HotSpot Shield 2011

HotSpot Shield 2011

برنامج هوت سبوت شيلد

منتدى الوظائف

وظائف 2011

منتدى الوظائف 2011

وظائف

نت لوق Netlog

فضائح نت لوق

نت لوق Netlog

نت لوق

Netlog

فيس بوك

Facebook

فيس بوك ، Facebook ,صفحة خاصه للشات الفوري ومباشر

youtube

شات دلع جازان

Messi

صور ميسي

صور ميسي 2011

صور ماسنجر

صور ماسنجر بنات

صور ماسنجر شباب

صور ماسنجر , صور ماسنجر بنات , صور ماسنجر شباب

دلع جازان

دردشة دلع جازان

دردشه ابوعريش

فله

اديها فله

منتدى اديها فله

منتدى فله

منتديات فله



منتدى كأس الخليج 20 اليمن ، مبارايات خليجي 20 ، بطولة كاس الخليج 2010 العشرين

توبيكات

منتديات همس

قصر الدانة قامرة

صور شوجي 2010

اغنية
حبوب الداشر 2010 بيني وبينك 4 , اغنية حبوب الداشر راشد الشمراني mp3 ,
حميل اغنية راشد الشمراني حبوب الداشر مسكين - حبوب الداشر بيني وبينك 4



صور شوجي 2010 في برنامج شوجي 2 - صور شجون في برنامج شوجي 2 - صور شوجي في برنامج شوجي 2








Posted by: يوتيوب at December 21, 2010 06:51 PM (oRzYx)

229









-

-






games































Posted by: at December 21, 2010 11:34 PM (DDW1y)

230 our knowledge these are very good news whitening brushhead site owners get out of here.

porno

siki

pornolar

trk pornolar

web tasarm

dizi izle

dizi

dizi izle

dizi

video izle

Posted by: ette at December 24, 2010 10:19 AM (tdd6M)

231 buybridesmaiddresses.com

modest bridesmaid dresses

simple bridesmaid dresses

Posted by: bridesmaiddresses at January 05, 2011 07:32 PM (TqQHr)

232 sınırsız porno izle | sikiş izle | porno izle | gizli ekim sikiş | porno izle | canli sikiş | porno film | sikiş filmleri | kara şimşek

Posted by: benten oyunları at February 22, 2011 12:00 PM (8Yh1Y)

233

Normal
0


false
false
false







MicrosoftInternetExplorer4






/* Style Definitions */
table.MsoNormalTable
{mso-style-name:"Table Normal";
mso-tstyle-rowband-size:0;
mso-tstyle-colband-size:0;
mso-style-noshow:yes;
mso-style-parent:"";
mso-padding-alt:0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt;
mso-para-margin:0in;
mso-para-margin-bottom:.0001pt;
mso-pagination:widow-orphan;
font-size:10.0pt;
font-family:"Times New Roman";
mso-ansi-language:#0400;
mso-fareast-language:#0400;
mso-bidi-language:#0400;}



In fact your creative writing abilities has inspired me to start
my own Blog

Posted by: African Mango at February 25, 2011 12:02 PM (4mA4q)

234

Normal
0

7.8
0
2

false
false
false














MicrosoftInternetExplorer4






/* Style Definitions */
table.MsoNormalTable
{mso-style-name:ͨ;
mso-tstyle-rowband-size:0;
mso-tstyle-colband-size:0;
mso-style-noshow:yes;
mso-style-parent:"";
mso-padding-alt:0cm 5.4pt 0cm 5.4pt;
mso-para-margin:0cm;
mso-para-margin-bottom:.0001pt;
mso-pagination:widow-orphan;
font-size:10.0pt;
font-family:"Times New Roman";
mso-fareast-font-family:"Times New Roman";
mso-ansi-language:#0400;
mso-fareast-language:#0400;
mso-bidi-language:#0400;}

The good news to tell you. Now our People have the chance to enjoy the christian louboutin pumps sale
easily. All kinds of Rosetta Stone
Spanish and christian
louboutin outletare arrival in ralph lauren big pony shop. Just a small
ammount of money could help you to share christian louboutin shoes perfect. I like
to buy these two kinds of ralph
lauren women: One is ralph
lauren men, the other is Rosetta
Stone Chinese. Rosetta Stone
Arabic and cheap designer handbags
are loved by all of my friends.

Posted by: ralph lauren big pony at May 30, 2011 12:09 AM (PecaM)

235 everything was quiet,then I said"I think he won't be infected with any disease,hh,he only can have one,it's aphtha (he speaks too much everyday,hh)."After my joke,all the students laughted.

Posted by: chi hair products at May 31, 2011 10:19 PM (96RZm)

236 In fact your creative writing abilities has inspired me to start
my own Blog

Posted by: Vans Schuhe at May 31, 2011 10:20 PM (T83np)

237 Two days later,I went to teach my English class.When I saw that boy,I couldn't help laughing.I said:"Last class,I said that XX only could contract one disease,it was aphtha.However,he didn't,I did intead!" Hahahahha..

Posted by: chi hair products at May 31, 2011 10:21 PM (96RZm)

238 三便宝カプセルRU486中絶薬 RU486VigRxビグレックスvigRx oilウェイカワンイカオウCialisシアリスlevitraレビトラSPANISCHE FLIEGE催淫通販ペニス増大ベニクモ花痴FLY D5D5 原液

Posted by: vigRx oil at June 02, 2011 03:09 AM (+yN6o)

239 You can buy this cheap vibram five fingers from online store with best service. We recommend the best cheap vibram five fingers shoes for mens and womens. Don't miss cheap vibram fivefingers as your best running, walking, climbing,etc shoes. Get cheap five finger shoes and cheap five fingers at Vibramfivefingershey,Inc..

Posted by: cheap vibram five fingers at June 18, 2011 11:43 PM (GFDME)

240 肪Ƃ܂

Posted by: NWbgJ[h at June 26, 2011 11:20 PM (tPShh)

241 Online Radii Shoesbull; Buy Radii Shoes on www.radiishoe.com. Fashion and free shipping in radii footwear, radii straight jacket, radii 420 top.

Posted by: radii shoes at June 27, 2011 09:51 PM (We9m7)

242 Gay marriage should be taken seriously by legislators. They should consider if it would bring any good to society. If it will only satisfy a few or part of our society then it's for the good of all.

Forex Automoney | Forex Online Trading | Forex Scalping | Forex Trading Course | Forex Trading Platform | Forex Trading Strategies | Forex Trading Systems | Forex Trading Tips | Forex Trading Tutorial

Posted by: JanuaryMiller at July 08, 2011 06:04 AM (JueZu)

243 http://good.kt-credit.com/ ,creditcard shopping,
http://www.k-t-gift.com/ ,shopping creditcard,
http://www.2222222222.net/ ,creditcard cash,
http://happy.2-0-0-7.biz/ ,shopping creditcard,
http://cash.2-0-0-7.biz/ ,creditcard shopping,

Posted by: creditcard cash at July 12, 2011 01:11 AM (ZztAL)

244 Brewer ordered the Dragon Nest Gold vote to recall Dragon Nest Gold Republican Russell Pearce, the state senate's president and chief Dragon Nest Gold architect of Senate Bill 1070, after Dragon Nest Gold a citizen's group turned in Dragon Nest Gold enough valid signatures to force it.

Posted by: Gamegoldbuy at July 13, 2011 09:01 AM (myYhY)






Processing 0.05, elapsed 0.0726 seconds.
15 queries taking 0.0293 seconds, 253 records returned.
Page size 205 kb.
Powered by Minx 0.7 alpha.

MuNuvians
MeeNuvians
Polls! Polls! Polls!
Frequently Asked Questions
The (Almost) Complete Paul Anka Integrity Kick
Top Top Tens
Greatest Hitjobs

The Ace of Spades HQ Sex-for-Money Skankathon
A D&D Guide to the Democratic Candidates
Margaret Cho: Just Not Funny
More Margaret Cho Abuse
Margaret Cho: Still Not Funny
Iraqi Prisoner Claims He Was Raped... By Woman
Wonkette Announces "Morning Zoo" Format
John Kerry's "Plan" Causes Surrender of Moqtada al-Sadr's Militia
World Muslim Leaders Apologize for Nick Berg's Beheading
Michael Moore Goes on Lunchtime Manhattan Death-Spree
Milestone: Oliver Willis Posts 400th "Fake News Article" Referencing Britney Spears
Liberal Economists Rue a "New Decade of Greed"
Artificial Insouciance: Maureen Dowd's Word Processor Revolts Against Her Numbing Imbecility
Intelligence Officials Eye Blogs for Tips
They Done Found Us Out, Cletus: Intrepid Internet Detective Figures Out Our Master Plan
Shock: Josh Marshall Almost Mentions Sarin Discovery in Iraq
Leather-Clad Biker Freaks Terrorize Australian Town
When Clinton Was President, Torture Was Cool
What Wonkette Means When She Explains What Tina Brown Means
Wonkette's Stand-Up Act
Wankette HQ Gay-Rumors Du Jour
Here's What's Bugging Me: Goose and Slider
My Own Micah Wright Style Confession of Dishonesty
Outraged "Conservatives" React to the FMA
An On-Line Impression of Dennis Miller Having Sex with a Kodiak Bear
The Story the Rightwing Media Refuses to Report!
Our Lunch with David "Glengarry Glen Ross" Mamet
The House of Love: Paul Krugman
A Michael Moore Mystery (TM)
The Dowd-O-Matic!
Liberal Consistency and Other Myths
Kepler's Laws of Liberal Media Bias
John Kerry-- The Splunge! Candidate
"Divisive" Politics & "Attacks on Patriotism" (very long)
The Donkey ("The Raven" parody)
News/Chat