New poll: Majority of Americans support legalising gay marriage

Great Debates
181

Because voters are NOT an accurate reflection of the whole population.
Whereas polls generally are – they are carefully planned according to statistical science to get an accurate reflection of the whole population.

For example, the voting population is:

  • older – young people don’t vote as often, especially when moving around in college, etc.
  • more republican – the people most likely not to vote are more democratic-leaning.
  • wealthier – poor people, and working class, find it harder to vote (transportation, work schedule, etc.)
  • parents – they vote more regularly than non-parents.
  • non-movers – homeowners vote more regularly than renters.

And on this specific issue – gay marriage – several of these factors indicate that the voting population is more likely to be anti-gay marriage than the general population. Being older, more republican, parents, homeowners – all likely to be more conservative.

That’s why candidate-paid polls are careful to get their info from a population of ‘likely voters’ rather than the general population.

182

Great. Now I’m in the mood to find a leather daddy.

183

But sometimes** voters **is what counts. :stuck_out_tongue:

I think geography is still going to play. I mean, let’s say that Texas has a 60 per cent voting rate (high, I know, but for the sake of the argument). Of likely voters, 15 per cent favor same sex marriage. But wouldn’t you think the other 40 per cent that doesn’t bother voting has the same views on social issues?

184

Where does that 15% figure come from? Even among likely Texas voters, that seems incredibly low. I’d say it’s got to be easily in the range of 30%.

It looks like Minnesota will be putting a Constitutional amendment on the ballot in 2012. We’ve certainly got a good chance to win this one. California could put Prop 8 repeal on the ballot in 2012 as well, and it would have a decent chance of passage. I think the Mormon Church was actually taken aback by the negative reaction they got over bankrolling a huge part of the campaign last time, and won’t be as much of a factor this time. I think a couple ballot victories will really get some momentum building.

185

why did california… vote down prop 26 or w.e it was? i mean… gay/lesbian people are like 1-2% of the entire country i really dont care either way… what bothers me is… if steve and gary want to get married at first baptist church b/c thats were steve or gary went 2 church… or it has a nice view or something… and the pastor says no b/c its same sex do they then have the right 2 sue? or what if steve and gary or wendy and mary go to a catholic childrends to adopt orphanage and… the nuns show them the door… do the nuns get sued? or what if said gay/les couple goes 2 St thomas hostpital and want to have some doctor do some werid invetro stuff but the docotr says no b/c his religious views dont agree or he moraly dont agree 2 do it… Does the couple have the right 2 sue? or what if they do adopt and then when the son/daugher is 16 wants have sex with the opposit sex, and finds relgion and is detested by his/her parents way of life? thats a broken family? or what if the kid grows up 2 be confused and Bi… or gay… i mean if its nots there DNA like an adoption… that child will most likely not want 2 be gay, that could be very hard for a young boy to ask his dad advice about a girl or vise versa wouldnt it? and then they adopt insted of adding 2 the gene pool… i mean thats whats happend in china… they kept killing girl babys… or selling them to western couples… and the one child thing… and now u have a huge aged populace that will have to be supported by a smaller and smaller new generation… its like 60/40 male to female… if something really bad were 2 happen then… a hole “race” of people would die…

186

No

Probably not.

Probably not

That’s a pretty hypocritical objection considering if that’s ever happened, it happens orders of magnitude less than the reverse.

There will be less confusion if all sexualities are given the same support.

You’re comparing adoption by same sex couples to the forced one-child policy? Really?

187

no im saying… that adoption does not increase population … and what if one of the couples sued for all the the things you said no 2… i mean some ACLU lawyer gets ahold of it. in this sue happy nation? and california did vote down a law… and cali is like the mecca of gay/les people

188

Wow, FarmerChuck, that’s… really hard to read. Your formatting and writing style make it very difficult to understand what you’re trying to ask, but I’ll do my best.

I’m not sure what proposition you’re referring to. Proposition 26 is a tax thing that doesn’t have anything to do with gay rights. Proposition 8, from 2008, was the proposition that banned gay marriage in California, and it (unfortunately) passed, instead of being voted down.

No, they don’t have the right to sue. The church’s first amendment rights trump any claim a gay couple would have to sue for discrimination.

The orphanage would not be liable for a lawsuit. However, if the orphanage receives state support, then a gay couple could sue the state for violating its own laws, by supporting an organization that discriminates on the basis of sex. On occasion, this has led to some religiously sponsored adoption agencies closing their doors, on the grounds that they can’t afford to function without government support. I’m somewhat leery of these claims, particularly when coming from the Catholic church, as it seems odd to me that they can’t find the money to stay open somewhere, but even taken at face value, it is still the responsibility of the church for deciding they would rather discriminate instead of continuing their charitable work.

In this case, I believe they would have the right to sue, but I’m not entirely certain.

What if a Jewish family has a kid, and he grows up and converts to some extremist form of Christianity that blames Jews for killing Christ? Is that an argument against letting Jews raise kids? Or is that an argument against religious extremism in general? The chance that your kid will grow up to embrace a faith or philosophy that you find repugnant (or that finds you repugnant) is something that faces every family, regardless of their sexuality. It’s not really something that should be factored into one’s support of gay rights.

Bisexuality is not “confused.” It just means that the person is not attracted to just one gender. It’s every bit as valid a sexual orientation as heterosexuality or homosexuality.

I’m… really not sure what you’re asking, here. It generally pretty awkward for any kid to ask his parent for dating advice, regardless of the genders involved. I don’t see why this would be any different for gay parents of a straight child. Probably easier then for straight parents of a gay child, because at least gay parents have spent their lives in a predominently heterosexual world and can still have valid observational advice to offer, even if the advice isn’t “hands on,” so to speak.

I don’t understand the parallel you’re making between gay adoption and China’s “one child” policy. They’re entirely different things. And it’s not like two gay guys are adopting instead of having their own, biological children. If gay adoption were outlawed, gay couples wouldn’t start having biological kids, because they’re still gay, and not interested in having sex with the opposite gender. Instead, you’d just increase the number of unadopted children stuck in the foster care system, which isn’t a good outcome for anyone.

189

The ACLU is one of the foremost organizations in the country when it comes to defending religious liberties. There’s no question in my mind that if someone tried to force a church to recognize gay marriage, the ACLU would be the first group to offer their support to the church.

It does get murkier when a church is also acting as a business entity, or becomes entangled with the government. If a church is acting as a private business, or as an agent of the government, then it has to follow the same rules that apply to both business and government.

190

i support it but I also support polygramy… either that, or every one should just civil union. what right we have to judge? religious belief of marriage should be in church and not enforced by the govt.

191

Nobody “wants” to be gay. It’s not exactly a joyous state of affairs knowing that people will suddenly start hating you because of who you’re attracted to. More importantly, whether or not the kid “wants” to be gay, he will or he won’t. It’s not a choice, unless you think perhaps you could choose to like other guys. Go ahead, give it a try.

That aside, do you seriously think any child has ever gotten useful dating advice from a parent in the whole history of the world? Other than “wear a rubber”, perhaps.

192

Why should religion get to own the word “marriage”? If a church wants its own special terminology, it should create “religious unions” or something like that.

193

everyone is fighting over the term marriage.keep it up and I say let the govt ditch it and they can say they are married in their own term

194

btw i mean they can define marriage for themselves. they have no rights enforcing govt to define marriage(man and woman)

195

To expand on Ludovic’s (and on preview I see others) answers a little more…

Californians voted in favor of Prop 8, which defined marriage as between a man and a woman in the California constitution. I’m sure people had all sorts of reasons, ranging from outright bigotry to being uneasy with same-sex marriage “being taught in schools” (whatever that means. Perhaps some saw a Gay Pride parade and the leather daddies freaked them out.

A number of estimates are a bit higher, but yeah somewhere down below 5%. There was a poll recently, however, that found that more than half of those polled thought that gays were over 20% of the population. Which is rather interesting, although I’m not sure what conclusions to draw from it.

Well, anybody can file whatever foolish lawsuit they want. But churches already have all sorts of requirements that they impose on those wishing to get married. Catholic churches, for example, won’t perform marriages if one partner is divorced (and hasn’t gotten an annulment). In states that have passed legislation to recognize same-sex marriage, the right of churches to refuse has been explicitly mentioned, and perhaps even beefed up beyond the normal right of churches to perform marriages for those they wish. California had same-sex marriage legalized by court order, so there weren’t any special protections for churches. But out of the 18,000 same-sex marriages performed before Prop 8 was enacted, I’m not aware of any that were done by clergy that were unwilling.

There was the case in New Jersey regarding a church owned pavilion that the church denied the use of to a same-sex couple and was successfully sued. That case revolved around whether the pavilion, which was often rented out to the public for a variety of activities, was a public accommodation. And there was a case of a wedding photographer in New Mexico who refused to shoot a same-sex wedding. I have no idea why anyone would want their wedding shot by a photographer who doesn’t want to do it, but I guess someone did, and they won the case.

A few states have made non-discrimination a requirement to receive state money. Massachusetts has gone as far as to require non-discrimination in order to be licensed to provide adoption services. Catholic Charities in the state decided to follow the law, but was overruled by the Archbishop. They no longer provide adoption services in Massachusetts.

Various states have laws granting or forbidding medical providers from exercising their religious views at work. I’ve never heard of a case involving in vitro fertilization, though.

Families have had trouble with religious intolerance of homosexuality before. Most gay people aren’t anti-religion. Also, homosexuality isn’t a way of life. And children raised by same-sex couples are straight. I think I’ve seen some figures showing that they are very slightly more likely to be gay than children raised by opposite-sex couples. Probably just being more willing to be honest about it.

It doesn’t really matter what the child wants. Their sexual orientation isn’t a choice. Children of gay couples If they are gay, and the same gender as the parent then they ought to be able to get relevant advice. Otherwise, well, sex education seems to be pretty much mandatory. And there are other people in the world that can answer these questions.

This doesn’t make any sense. As far as I can tell, this last part is mistaken in so many ways that I can’t figure out how to explain where you went wrong. Your scenario seems to require that straight people stop having kids. I don’t know why you would think that.

196

interesting, so how does the govt handle those who had sex change? according to religion you must marry someone of the opposite sex. well if a man had sex change, he is still married to his wife except he look like a she. or he look like a she and the couple look like a typical marriage. unfair they can do this and not others who do not do sex change

197

“Making sex is like a Chinese dinner: It ain’t over 'til you both get your cookies.” - Alec Baldwin, Outside Providence

Pretty good advice, I always thought.

198

Most state governments refuse to recognize any gender other than what’s printed on the birth certificate. This does create a weird loophole where, for example, a male-to-female transsexual lesbian can legally marry another woman. On the other hand, a male-to-female transsexual who identifies as heterosexual (as in, is attracted to men), cannot get married. Unless she happens to fall in love with a female-to-male transsexual.

Just one of the wacky side effects of discriminatory government policies.

I’m not sure if there are any state governments that will legally recognize a change of gender, or how they handle marriage rights for such people. Presumably, a mtf transsexual in such a state would be allowed to marry a man, and not a woman, same as any other woman. Usually, gay rights is an easier sell than transsexual rights, so I doubt the issue comes up too often.

199

There are various requirements for changing the gender on state issued IDs and birth certificates, as well as federal IDs. I’m pretty sure that it’s not that uncommon for states to have some method. Some require sexual reassignment surgery to be complete, or in progress, while others merely require a physician statement. Sometimes it varies according to which ID. Massachusetts, if I remember correctly, requires a physician statement to change a driver’s license, but SRS to be complete to change a birth certificate.

200

there are cases where a doctor refuse to mention sex on birth certificate until the parent decide what to do with their Hermaphrodite child (who could be biologically a male but is a female on birth certificate)