Poll: Few Favor Same-Sex Marriage (new spin,trying to say should not be part of election)

(CBS) Americans continue to oppose the idea of same-sex marriage and would support a constitutional amendment to ban it. Yet most do not feel that the issue should be part of the 2004 Election campaign, or that it is important enough to warrant the effort to change the Constitution – though opponents of same-sex marriage believe that it is.

In fact, opponents are much more likely to view same-sex marriage as an issue that will make a critical difference in how they vote in November, and that group currently supports George W. Bush.

A constitutional amendment that would allow marriage only between a man and a woman has the support of nearly six in ten Americans. 35% oppose such an amendment. In December 55% favored changing the Constitution to prohibit same-sex marriages.

CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENT THAT WOULD ALLOW MARRIAGE ONLY BETWEEN A MAN AND A WOMAN

Many people make a distinction between same-sex marriage and civil unions, which would provide same-sex couples some legal rights. Although fewer than one-fourth of Americans think gay and lesbian people should be allowed to marry, there is larger support for permitting civil unions. All in all, over half of Americans support some type of legal status for same-sex couples who wish to make a long-term commitment. 40% think same-sex couples' relationships ought to have no legal recognition.

SAME-SEX COUPLES SHOULD BE ALLOWED: To legally marry 22% To form civil unions 33% No legal recognition 40

On both these questions - opposition to same-sex marriage and support for a constitutional amendment that would ban it - Republicans and Democrats have different views. 77% of Republicans favor a constitutional ban, while Democrats are more divided on the issue, with 52% in favor and 44% opposed. Most Republicans think there ought to be no legal recognition for gay and lesbian couples, while Democrats are more likely to say either marriages or civil unions should be permitted.

56% of liberals oppose an amendment banning same-sex marriage, while 79% of conservatives favor one. Younger people are more accepting than those age 65 or older of same-sex relationships and same-sex marriage, though a majority in both age groups favor an amendment. 32% of Americans under 30 think gay and lesbian couples ought to be allowed to marry, compared to just 8% of those 65 and older.

In addition, African Americans oppose same-sex marriage and 67% of them favor the constitutional amendment.

Views on same-sex marriage may decide the candidate choice next November for 44% of voters. While 45% say they could vote for someone who disagrees with their position on that issue, almost as many – 44% - say they could NOT vote for a candidate who disagreed with them. This is especially true of voters who back the constitutional amendment, most of whom would not support a candidate who did not share their view.

However, most voters would prefer this issue not be a part of the election campaign. 65% say it should play no part in the contest, and only 14% think it should have a major role. Even 58% of voters who want a constitutional amendment do not think the issue should be part of the campaign.

SHOULD SAME-SEX MARRIAGE BE PART OF ELECTION CAMPAIGN? (Registered voters) Yes, major part 14% Yes, minor part 17% No 65

The President has stated that he wants a constitutional amendment defining marriage to be only between a man and a woman, and he already has the votes of most of those on his side who say it will be a voting issue. Among voters who support a constitutional amendment banning same-sex marriage AND say it’s a voting issue to them, Bush leads Kerry 69% to 22%. Most of these voters are Republicans, so Bush support would be expected. Supporters of an amendment who say it’s not the determining issue in their vote favor Kerry, 49% to 41%.

African-American voters, many of whom say they are concerned about this as a voting issue, still overwhelmingly say they will vote for John Kerry.

This intensity of feeling among supporters of the constitutional amendment is clear when the question is phrased is terms of whether the issue is an “important enough issue to be worth changing the Constitution.” Overall, 56% think defining marriage as only between a man and a woman is not an important enough issue to warrant changing the Constitution. Yet most - 57% - who support the amendment think the issue merits a change to the Constitution.

There is no consensus about the role of government in this issue. 43% think laws regarding same-sex marriage and civil unions ought to be handled at the federal government level, and 44% think those issues are best left to state governments.

Feelings on this run contrary to traditional party ideologies: most Republicans want the matter handled by the federal government, but Democrats are more likely to prefer it be left to the states.

Views on homosexuality shape views on same-sex marriage: those who believe that being gay or lesbian is a choice that one makes, rather than something a person does not choose, oppose same-sex marriage. And those on both sides of the issue are seen as fighting a larger fight about homosexuality itself, rather than just about the rights and the sanctity of marriage.

Americans divide on their view of homosexuality: 43% believe it is a choice that people make, and 41% believe it to be something that people cannot choose.

Of those who believe homosexuality is a choice, only 34% say gays and lesbians should be able to marry or form civil unions while 64% say same-sex couples should have no legal recognition. Among those who believe homosexuality is not a choice, 37% think same-sex couples ought to be permitted to marry, and another 41% think same-sex couples should be allowed to form civil unions, and just 17% say there should be no recognition at all.

Similarly, 77% of those who view homosexuality as a choice support the amendment, while those who think being homosexual is something that cannot be changed oppose it (although by a smaller margin).

Religiosity also plays a large role in how people view same-sex marriage. Three in four people who say religion is extremely important in their lives would favor a constitutional amendment prohibiting same-sex marriage, and three in five think there should be no legal recognition of same-sex relationships. But those who say religion is only somewhat or not important to them are much more accepting of same-sex marriage, and most would oppose a constitutional amendment.

One of the most common reasons given against permitting same-sex marriage is that it will erode the status of traditional marriage. Yet few Americans think that is the real reason that people oppose it.

Asked to describe what they see as the main motivation behind those who oppose same-sex marriage, nearly three quarters of Americans – on both sides of the issue -- say that opponents’ motivations are mainly the belief that homosexuality is wrong, not concern over its impact on marriage.

REASON MOST PEOPLE WHO OPPOSE SAME-SEX MARRIAGE DO SO? Concern about effect on traditional marriage 16% Believe homosexuality is wrong 72%

Views of the motives of supporters of same-sex marriage are more mixed. 37% think supporters back same-sex marriage because they want to see gays and lesbians receive the same legal rights that other married people have. But nearly half – 48% - describe those who support same-sex marriage as striving to get society to approve of the way gays and lesbians live.

REASON MOST PEOPLE WHO FAVOR SAME-SEX MARRIAGE DO SO? To obtain legal rights for gays 37% To get society to approve of gays 482%

The opponents of same-sex marriage are more likely to view those who disagree with them as thinking of this as a general struggle for the acceptance of homosexuality and homosexuals. Among those who support same-sex marriage, 64% think they do so in order for gay and lesbian people to receive the same legal rights as heterosexuals have.

When it comes to the seriousness with which heterosexuals and homosexuals enter into long-term commitments, Americans see little difference. In fact, less than half think most couples of either group expect their arrangement to last forever.

Asked if people who get married expect their marriages to last forever, or expect to someday divorce, 47% said most people enter marriage expecting it to last forever. A different sample was asked this question of same-sex couples, and nearly the same number – 44% - said those same-sex couples expected their relationships to last forever. One-quarter had no opinion.

Nearly half the public knows a gay or lesbian couple that has been together more than a year, a factor that makes a difference in support or opposition to a constitutional amendment limiting marriage. 15% say they know such couples who are raising children. But only 8% of Americans know a same-sex couple who has received some kind of legal recognition of their status.

The notables to the article is the effort to push poll spin this issue as not mattering to voters. They fear voters deciding candidates based on this issue because it will also jeopordize the little local politician democrats. On this issue it makes a local politician running against Bush rather than just a Republican opposition.

The other interesting point, it the 482% which say homosexual marriage is to make homosexuality acceptable. Freudian slip?

For those who have not seen it:
H.J. Res. 56 and S.J. Res. 26
Amendment Text:

Marriage in the United States shall consist only of the union of a man and a woman.
Neither this Constitution or the constitution of any State, nor state or federal law,
shall be construed to require that marital status or the legal incidents thereof be conferred
upon unmarried couples or groups.

convenient how the pollsters never mention it.

I heard something very interesting on CBS radio this morning. The anchor mentioned in connection with this story that Dubya supports a ban on gay marriage and Kerry opposes it. Technically, that's not accurate. Kerry doesn't support the amendment, but he has said that the states should decide and that he favors civil unions, not gay marriage.

I found it curious that CBS would describe this the way they did, which is not good for Kerry when most people oppose gay Marriage -- even those who don't support the amendment. Usually, the network spin doesn't favor Dubya. Maybe somebody goofed at CBS.

This makes no sense.

Americans support a constitutional amendment, yet do not feel it is important enough to warrant changing the Constitution?

CBS reporting at its finest.

Hence the new spin. The "its only religious" who oppose homosexual marriage was not gaining traction. So now the push polling is to allow opposition but not decide your actual vote on it. In other words they are trying to "clinton" marriage from voting.

Its the new talking point "gravitas"

A ban on homosexual marriage violates the First Amendment. As does legalizing homosexual marriage and an elected official performing same-sex marriages in the town hall violates it even more so.

When homosexuals buy car insurance, is there a questionaire that asks what the individual does at home? Can you name whomever you want to be beneficiary of your life insurance? Is it illegal to sell homosexuals health insurance that enables them to provide benefits to another? The cost of the insurance varies from individuals, doesn't it? With or without a ban, with or without legalizing it, as long as we have free will, there will be those who freely choose to do otherwise.

Is a ban, while allowing unions, the best alternative? Anyone watch The Passion yet? What was Jesus' interactions with the Samaritan women at the well? You recall that he told her she had five husbands and that one she was with at the time wasn't her husband. She changed the subject immediately and talked about worshiping on the mountain.

Like it or not, the matter needs to be discussed.

"most do not feel that the issue should be part of the 2004 Election campaign"

Considering that it's a CBS poll (meaning ultra leftist liberal), this line constitutes the demoncRAT way of thinking. Why am I not surprised that CBS and demoncRATS are joined at the hip?

Congress shall make no law respecting the establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof. Inherent in those words is that government will not be hostile to an establishment of religion.

And like it or not, the Bible is clear on the right or wrong of homosexuality. By legalizing marriage between homosexuals, government would be openly taking a hostile stance against the religions that believe homosexuality is wrong. But some religions believe homosexuality is okay. Yes, they do exist. A group calling itself 'Reconciling' (Methodists) among others.

Obviously then, for government to suggest homosexual marriage is okay would be an affront to those whose religion believes it to be wrong, not only because government would be taking a stand hostile to one religion, but because government would be openly endorsing the religion that believes it is okay.

I suggest you use decaff coffee.

Seriously, the amendment does not "ban" anything as much as it says what marriage IS. The amendment also prohibits polygamy and any other form of imposed marriage.

It sounds like you swallowed the HRC old talking point that only religion opposes same sex marrige. Many of us oppose homosexual based marriage on non-religious grounds. No alleged first amendment.

BTW human sacrifice is prohibited in violation of the first amendmentment. Some cults believe in underage sex, a violation of the first amendment.

And just for color, the amendment which states the voting age is 18, BANS 17 years olds from voting in violation of their first amendment rights.

The only way to prevent the perverts from endlessly assaulting us with their neuroses and pathologies is a Constitutional amendment.
Nothing else will shut them up.

In the late seventies they pleaded and whined for understanding and tolerance, that's all. Honest.

They lied.

Too bad.
We have real serious and universal problems to address in the next few decades. Catering to perverts and coddling them is one we can do without.

the amendment does not "ban" anything as much as it says what marriage IS.

Do you need the government to affirm your marriage, assuming you are, have been, or will be? Government's involvement with marriage didn't happen in 1776. People didn't ask government to endorse or deny their marriages. Marriage was between the parties involved.

BTW human sacrifice is prohibited in violation of the first amendmentment. Some cults believe in underage sex, a violation of the first amendment.

Human sacrifice? That went out with the ultimate sacrifice of Jesus' death on the cross. A war memorial cannot take the shape of a cross because of the 1st. Does that outlaw memorials in the shape of a cross? Certainly not.

Americans did not widely support abolition either. The cultural tide cannot be turned. We are witnessing an evolution of our constitution, and no amount of blustery pontificating can make black white. This is very simply a civil rights issue.

Nonsense. There is no right to marriage of someone of the same gender. It is implied neither in the Constitution of the United States nor in those of any of the fifty states.

I honestly do not care one bit if George W Bush's economic policy drives us into the second great depression. So long as marriage is protected from the corrupting sodomite assault we can rebuild the economy later.

George W Bush - economy tanks, marriage preserved, we avoid another 9/11, Iran does not get nukes

John "Backtrack" Kerry - economy doesn't tank as badly, marriage destroyed, we get another 9/11, Iran gets nukes

We can rebuild the economy within a few years. We cannot rebuild the institution of marriage until generations and generations have passed. None of it means anything if the terrorists gain the upper hand in the war.

Vote Bush.

Correct me if I am wrong. I am just making sure I understand you here.

I believe the point of what you are saying is, there are laws in place that place limits on an individual's rights, or even a group's rights because it is good and right for the country. In order for there to be cohesion in our society and the way it is set up these laws must be.

If this is your point, then I agree whole heartedly. We can not allow every Tom, Dick, and Harry do things their way and call it constitutionally protected. To allow this kind of thinking is ultimately erosive to our country and society as a whole. To coin a phrase if I may, under the constitution, all things could be deemed constitutional on a liberal basis, but not all things are not expedient and good for society.

The stench of a leftist spin in this article rises to even the highest levels of heaven itself. What about this 482% figure. Did CBS also poll dead people? The population of the United States is some where around 296 million people, if I am not mistaken. Can you imagine if our population were increased by 482%? Did they actually mean 48.2%? Who knows when the liberal media is involved?

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.