There 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
No Hijab, no wedding cake.
Who needs Sharia Law when Christians provide the way…
pogo,
The deeply held belief of Jesus was to serve all who enter.
No cake foe me, no cake for Jesus… just sayin’.
Now, who’s forcing whom to do what?
Jesus asks that we treat each other with love.
Turning Jesus away is an act of love?
Again, forcing hate upon their Christ…
Equating anorexia with homosexuality, when does it ever end?”
Inga, you either cannot understand the written word or you are ESL.
Max cited the NEJM: ““A fundamental tenet of all medical care is the acceptance of patients as they are, for who they are, with respect and without prejudice or personal agendas.”
That means we cannot similarly judge people who think they are fat when their BMI is below normal, or men who think they are women, or fat people who think they are healthy.
It can’t be clearer than that.
Either people are who they think they are and facts mean nothing, or facts mean something.
You cannot have it both ways.
Max, can you smell the panic and fear in the air? I can only imagine what these people will do and say after the SC rules in favor of federal gay marriage rights in June.
Annie,
It’s about exposure. The more people know about people in their lives and how society has regularly kept ‘Gates’ locked against their brother, the less likely people will be left grasping onto those keys and instead, open them up. However, it does sadden me that many self professed “Christians” seek to bar their own Christ from entering the Kingdom… Maybe they need to tap into that “personal relationship” a bit deeper to understand that Christ died for ALL of us, not just the rock throwers.
Scott Walker skipped his sisters wedding and showed up at the reception for the free drinks and cake. He claims he had other engagements that prevented him from attending his sister’s wedding… WTF? You sister’s wedding comes second? p.s. his sister is gay.
FYI
If I was his sister, I would have thrown him out for CRASHING the reception for the wedding guests.
Squeenly, you post one inane music video after another, one inane poem after another, speaking of OCD. Take a look in the mirror.
Whatsoever you do (force someone to bake a cake or lose their business) so too you have done to Christ.
@Pogo
I suspect that Max-1 has OCD and has to post something or he will bust a gut. I have tried to tell him that he does better advocating for his position when he just writes and expresses his thoughts, but he insists on carpet bombing links and videos. One or two, and I might watch them, but he will do like 50 of them, and they tend to be repetitious, sooo I just flip to another tab. Like this one! Which is really cool if you like leftish geek film critique. Which, I kind of do. This is like all 17 issues. Which I just downloaded.
http://library.brown.edu/cds/cinetracts/
You have to read stuff like this to do Irish Poems.
Squeeky Fromm
Girl Reporter
Equating anorexia with homosexuality, when does it ever end?
pogo
Leave your straw men for your bone fire you build for gays…
Excellent video Max, speaks to what gay people face daily and their desire for equality. Bravo!
( we know they don’t want to see a human face on gay folks)
Whatsoever you do (stone the sinner) so too you have done to Christ.
Versis
Whatsoever you do (Bake a cake) so too you have done to Christ.
And you did not answer my question.
Does the New England Journal now claim that anorexia is now on the spectrum of normal behavior?
davidm:
You are incorrect. The word “secular” comes from the Latin adjective “saecularis,” which means “worldly” or “of the world.” It does not mean opposed to religion. In the Catholic Church, for example, a secular priest is an ordained priest who is not a member of a religious order (such as the Dominicans, Franciscans or Jesuits), and therefore not subject to the rules of a religious order. Secular music is non-religious music; it does not refer to anti-religious music.
The term in government refers to a legal and political system which is not based upon a system of religious beliefs. The term has been misused by religious conservatives (Dominionists, in particular) who desire to incorporate doctrinal beliefs into positive law. Part of that effort involves mischaracterizing secular government as anti-Christian or atheistic or anti-religious. That is nonsense. Secular government as it exists in this country is not hostile to religion; it is indifferent to it. And it is precisely that indifference which the religious right seeks to eradicate. Thus we must listen incessantly to mindless insistence that there is a “war on Christianity” because many of us aggressively resist the theocratic tendencies which have come to dominate political debate over the last 30 to 40 years.
Mike Appleton, in the dictionary I quoted from (WordWeb), your definition of secular is secondary (numbered 2, 3, 4, etc.). I quoted definition number 1, which is considered its most popular usage.
The word secular has a wide range of meanings. If you were to use the word secular in the manner that you have defined it, fine, but most people use the word secular with the connotation of rejecting religious considerations. The secular humanists in particular regularly refer to our government as a secular government. They clearly do not use the word secular the way you have just defined it. They use the word secular as a rejection of anything religious. See their philosophical alignment at the following link: https://www.secularhumanism.org/index.php/3260.
I do not see the point of repeatedly posting videos like that.
What are you trying to prove here?
Videos are not discussion or even argument.
At best, they smack of propaganda.
pogo hears a Doctor Who?
Annie
Max,
Can’t wait to see the blowback. New Orleans is really going to feel it.
= = =
Blowback?
Umm… that’s not what Piyush seeks.
Isaac, you seem to be unaware of the dangers of a-religion, dys-religion, and anti-religion.
david2575
No, not at all. Not arguing against religion only against religion intruding on those who are not religious. See David, you pervert what other people say to suit your own agenda. This is where it starts. Next, well read the papers. There are plenty of examples out there in the Middle East of religious people run amok.
I believe people should believe what they wish as long as it does not infringe on the common civil rights of others. Those civil rights include being religious as well as not being religious. More importantly they place religion as a subset and not the corner stone of this society.
Now, I know you can twist that around any way you wish. I have read your stuff. That is the danger of religion.