Constitutional Law, Courts, Politics, Religion, Society

Poll: Over Sixty Percent Of Americans Support Gay Marriage

Wedding_cake_with_pillar_supports,_2009There is good news for those of us who support same-sex marriage (as well as an indication in the remarkable turnaround in public attitude in a relatively short time). According to a new Washington Post-ABC News poll, 6 out of 10 Americans now support same-sex marriage and believe that states should not be allowed to define marriage as only between a man and a woman. That is a record showing for same-sex marriage.

The poll was clearly timed for oral arguments next week on whether state restrictions on same-sex marriage are unconstitutional. I believe that there is likely a fifth vote with Justice Anthony Kennedy to support a ruling in favor of same-sex marriage. Indeed, it will be interesting to watch Chief Justice John Roberts on this issue. Roberts has shown a strong institutional sensitivity and many be the most likely of the remaining justices to feel the pull of history on the issue.

Not surprisingly, the greatest gains have been seen in those under age 30 where support has grown since 2005 from 57 percent to 78 percent. However, even among the historically least supportive group (those 65 and over) support is now at 46 percent (from just 18 percent).

Republicans still oppose at a rate of 6 to 10, however. This creates an interesting dynamic for the Republican primary where some candidates have already shown movement toward greater acceptance. The trend appears in that direction. Moreover, GOP candidates face the classic dilemma of fighting to secure the nomination from the most conservative members of the party while being able to run nationally to appeal to independents and democrats. The social agenda of conservative Republicans has never appealed to as much to independents and libertarians in the general election.

Source: Washington Post

325 thoughts on “Poll: Over Sixty Percent Of Americans Support Gay Marriage”

  1. “Accordingly, with 1.275 million additional women never getting married, nearly 900,000 more children of the next generation would be aborted as a result of their mothers never marrying. This is equal to the entire population of the cities of Sacramento and Atlanta combined.“

  2. More leftist deconstructionism.
    Same sex marriage increases abortions:

    “The metamorphosis of marriage from a gendered to a genderless institution conveys to men (and women) that society no longer needs men to bond to women to form well-functioning families or to raise happy, well-adjusted children. And that message is especially likely to be influential among those on the margins: the poor, the relatively uneducated or others who are highly influenced by cultural messages promoting casual or uncommitted sex.

    The weakening or destruction of these norms would result in fewer marriages, more procreation out of marriage, and a higher percentage of children raised in a home without both parents—usually without a father. The consequences would be stark and disastrous: more childhood poverty; increased psychological and emotional problems; more teenage pregnancy; poorer performance in school; higher amounts of substance abuse; more youth committing crimes; and more girls undergoing abortions.”

  5. My daughters superior in the Navy just married her long time partner. Isn’t love and acceptance in the military grand? Time marches on. Don’t be scared.

  13. @Pogo

    Well, I would settle for that, or for a Craster Prize! Most people don’t know it, but a 19th century poetess named Katherine Craster was the original deconstructionist, and anticipated the problems caused by that way of looking at things! (At least in modern times. See: Zeno’s Achilles and the Tortoise Paradox) As wiki notes, in The Centipede’s Dilemma:

    The Centipede’s Dilemma

    A centipede was happy – quite!
    Until a toad in fun
    Said, “Pray, which leg moves after which?”
    This raised her doubts to such a pitch,
    She fell exhausted in the ditch
    Not knowing how to run.

    The poem, a short rhyme illustrating a solvitur ambulando in reverse, is usually attributed to Katherine Craster (1841–1874)[1] in Pinafore Poems, 1871.[2] By 1881 it had begun appearing in journals such as The Spectator[3] and The Living Age.[4] The poem later appeared in an article by British zoologist E. Ray Lankester, published in the scientific journal Nature on May 23, 1889,[5] which discussed the work of the photographer Eadweard Muybridge in capturing the motion of animals: “For my own part,” wrote Lankester, “I should greatly like to apply Mr. Muybridge’s cameras, or a similar set of batteries, to the investigation of a phenomenon more puzzling even than that of ‘the galloping horse’. I allude to the problem of ‘the running centipede'”. Lankester finished the article on a fanciful note by imagining the “disastrous results in the way of perplexity” that could result from such an investigation, quoting the poem and mentioning that the author was unknown to him or to the friend who sent it to him. It has since been variously attributed to specific authors but without convincing evidence, and often appears under the title “The Centipede’s Dilemma”.

    However, most mainstream deconstructionists haven’t deconstructed their own origins as far down to the atomic level, as I have, and are still unaware of Ms. Craster.

    Squeeky Fromm
    Girl Reporter

  16. BamBam, it WAS a normal question. There is nothing at all wrong with asking for a source. What was not normal was Pogo’s response to me quoting something from his source. You folks sound positively infantile.

  17. Wow, A whole lotta whining going on, what’s the matter? Is the handwriting on the wall regarding SS marriage shake you people up THAT much? Very interesting.

  19. @Pogo

    It is a form of the deconstruction you discussed. If any sexual relationship is as good as any other, then any comment is as good as any other. The tommy gun poo flingers are scared to death of actual discussion of certain issues, and direct questions, and direct answers. The name-calling is necessary because there is nothing solid behind their beliefs. How else can they comment if not to call names, or play victim in some way???

    It’s like little boys who can’t cut it on the football team, sooo they start wearing black Goth stuff and poking fun at the jocks. How else can they participate in football??? Do I win like a Foulcault Trophy or something for that comment???

    Squeeky Fromm
    Girl Reporter

  20. And Pogo. If you feel your opinions have been “destroyed” by me, well… that might indicate your opinions are built on sand. You’re giving me wayyyy to much power. We get to challenge others here. Get it?

Comments are closed.