In Poll, Most Oppose Gay Marriage

AP ^ | feb 9, 2004

[george wythe]

A majority of Americans say they don't want laws in their states that would legalize same-sex marriages, according to a poll taken after the Massachusetts Supreme Court ruling in favor of such marriages.

The Massachusetts high court, in an advisory opinion, said last Wednesday that gays are entitled to nothing less than marriage and that civil unions will not suffice. The opinion could set the stage for the nation's first legally sanctioned same-sex weddings by the spring.

In polling conducted by the National Annenberg Election Survey, people said by a 2-1 margin - 60 percent to 31 percent - that they oppose any similar law legalizing same-sex marriage in their states.

Still, they were cool to the idea of a federal constitutional amendment to ban same-sex marriages.

In the poll, 49 percent of those polled were opposed to such an amendment, while 42 percent favored it.

Those results suggest gay marriage could be a tricky issue for candidates this election year.

The White House is still reviewing the issue, President Bush's spokesman said Monday. Some conservative groups have been strongly encouraging the president to get involved.

"If activist judges continue to try to redefine marriage, without regard to the voice of the people, then the only alternative will be a constitutional process," said spokesman Scott McClellan.

When asked how long the White House review would last, he said, "I don't know that I'd put any arbitrary timetable on it."

Massachusetts Sen. John Kerry, the front-runner for the Democratic Party's presidential nomination, said last week: "I believe and have fought for the principle that we should protect the fundamental rights of gay and lesbian couples - from inheritance to health benefits. I believe the right answer is civil unions. I oppose gay marriage and disagree with the Massachusetts court's decision."

The Annenberg poll of 814 adults was conducted Feb. 5-8 and has a margin of sampling error of plus or minus 3 percentage points.

[george wythe]

Massachusetts Sen. John Kerry, the front-runner for the Democratic Party's presidential nomination, said last week: "I believe and have fought for the principle that we should protect the fundamental rights of gay and lesbian couples - from inheritance to health benefits. I believe the right answer is civil unions. I oppose gay marriage and disagree with the Massachusetts court's decision."

It seems that both Kerry and Bush oppose gay marriage, so I don't see any great advantage for Bush on this.

[Mr Spock]

Majority rules. I can live with whatever decision the people decide. Besides, there are much more important things (like the budget deficit) to worry about.

[jveritas]

Kerry favors civil unions for gays and opposes a constitutional amendment to define marriage between a man a woman. Kerry voted against "the defense of marriage act in 1998". All this will be very bad for him in the South, the Midwest, and the industrial rust belt states.

[KentTrappedInLiberalSeattle]

In polling conducted by the National Annenberg Election Survey, people said by a 2-1 margin - 60 percent to 31 percent - that they oppose any similar law legalizing same-sex marriage in their states.

That's the part Andrew Sullivan will be blithely ignoring tomorrow, on his blog site.

Still, they were cool to the idea of a federal constitutional amendment to ban same-sex marriages.

In the poll, 49 percent of those polled were opposed to such an amendment, while 42 percent favored it.

That's the part Andrew Sullivan will be hammering tomorrow, on his blog site.

[Paleo Conservative]

It seems that both Kerry and Bush oppose gay marriage, so I don't see any great advantage for Bush on this.

But Kerry doesn't really mean it. He would appoint jugdes who would shove this down our throats. He doesn't favor a consitutional amenment protecting marriage and the states' right to only recognize heterosexual marriage. He didn't vote for the defense of marriage act.

[george wythe]

Kerry favors civil unions for gays and opposes a constitutional amendment to define marriage between a man a woman.

I have not seen any recent story where Kerry opposes a constitutional amendment to define marriage, neither have I seen a recent quote where Bush opposes civil unions for gays.

At least on paper, Bush and Kerry are not that far apart on this issue, but I could be wrong.

At any rate, the economy and Iraq will probably make or break Bush.

Most people oppose gay marriage, but they don't seem too fond of a constitutional amendment either.

[Digger]

This Kerry guy is so full of holes that it almost is impossible to chart him. Can you imagine how far our political system has dropped that this nut is a contender. Of course that is understandable when voting in a 2-party cartel.

[george wythe]

But Kerry doesn't really mean it.

That's clear to you, but I doubt that the average moderate vote will care enough to learn all the facts about Kerry and gay marriage.

Eight months from now, I doubt how many voters will remember the gay marriage law in Massachussetts.

Of course, the Left can screw this issue very badly in the interim. It's conceivable that gay-enablers will get more obnoxious about this issue, by celebrating mass gay weddings in the Deep South or pulling some other crazy stunt.

[WOSG]

Kerry was one of only 16 senators to oppose the Defense of Marriage Act. He has a 100% rating from the gay activist groups.

He doesnt in any way shape or form oppose the judge's who rewrote the Mass. Constitution on this matter. His words against 'gay marriage' are just campaign CYA to cover the fact that what is does support is effectively the same thing and that he wont lift a finger to stop the movement to gay marriage spearheaded by our judicial elites.

Aftre all, Kerry is a part of the Boston-Globe-Liberal set that pushed this gay marriage thing in the first place. HE wont disown his own.

Massachusetts Republicans like Mitt Romney should challenge Kerry to come out' and declare if he is for a Mass Constitutional Amendment that says Marriage is 1 man 1 woman only.

And if Kerry supports it in the Mass. Constitution, why not in the US Constitution?

The Bush advantage on this would be to skewer Kerry's attempt to have it both ways on this issue.

[WOSG]

What was once an 'extreme' position has been 'mainstreamed' by a media that keeps pushing moral degeneration, social experimentation, alternative lifestyles, etc. I do NOT think gay marriage is a small issue for a lot of voters. It's the canary in the coal mine of our culture.

People who talk about it 'not a big deal' are invariably the people who are blase about cultural problems generally. But many many voters care about moral standards in society and dont like the trend.

Kerry was on the wrong side of DOMA vote in 1995. He's for civil unions, which is as 'pro-gay' as civil unions gov Dean was. It's a clear choice IMHO if Bush makes it clear his position. Hopefully, he will adopt the Mitt Romney position and challenge Kerry to join him - or distinguish. Then voters will have some facts about Kerry and gay marriage.

JMHO.

[WOSG]

"At least on paper, Bush and Kerry are not that far apart on this issue, but I could be wrong."

I see where you are coming from and IMHO that is because Bush hasnt clearly articulated his own position well enough.

If this country falls for the 'oppose gay mariage, but give them all right except in name', then they are dumber than I thought.

[puroresu]

The leftist control of the courts gives them a huge advantage. They can enact their agenda by judicial fiat without having to worry about public opinion.

Kerry knows this. He knows that the way to bring gay marriage to America is through the courts, not the ballot box. Notice that in this debate over gay marriage, no one is discussing the possibility of gay marriage being enacted by any legislature. No one expects John Kerry or any other "liberal" to vote for gay marriage. Rather, all the "liberals" have to do is block any conservative effort to stop the courts from imposing gay marriage on us. This allows Kerry and his allies to pretend to oppose gay marriage while blocking any legislation that would stop it on technical grounds.

Want to pass a constitutional amendment limiting marriage in America to one man and one woman? Kerry will assert, "I oppose gay marriage, but I also oppose an amendment that would rob the states of their right to set their own marriage laws."

Want to pass a constitutional amendment that guarantees states the right to decide for themselves whether or not to permit gay marriage? Kerry will assert, "I oppose gay marriage, but I also oppose an amendment such as this, which is clearly a mean-spirited effort to inject bigotry into the national discourse when what we should really be debating are jobs and education."

Want to pass a law stating that gay marriages performed in one state can't be forced on other states (i.e., the Defense of Marriage Act)? Kerry will assert, "I oppose gay marriage, but I refuse to vote for a bill that is the political equivalent of gay bashing. We should be coming together as Americans, not passing laws to divide us."

Want to remove the jurisdiction of courts to decide gay marriage issues? Kerry will assert, "I oppose gay marriage, but I refuse to set the evil precedent of withdrawing the court's jurisdiction. What's next, a return to slavery?"

So Kerry and his cronies will block all efforts to stop gay marriage, while hypocritically claiming to oppose such marriages themselves. Once all these bills and amendments are killed, the courts will quickly use full faith & credit to impose gay marriage on our land.

Kerry's response? "I oppose gay marriage but now is the time for us to come together under the banner of equality. To overturn this ruling would mean that for the first time in our history we are rolling back rights granted to the American people. The court has spoken and we must now obey and respect the wonderful diversity that is America. I wish also to state that while I oppose forcing any church to perform gay marriages by threatening their tax exempt status, I cannot support legislation to protect such tax exemptions because it would set a terrible precedent which could easily lead to a return to Jim Crow, slavery, and violence against women."

And so it will go.

BTW, you may have noticed that the media have been warning President Bush not to oppose gay marriage, since it might make him appear to be an "extremist". But when Kerry says he opposes it, it's cited as proof that he's a "moderate".

[WOSG]

Good points!

Kerry lets the activist judges take the 'heat' for social engineering... And Kerry opposes the Judges who want to MERELY INTERPRET THE LAW so that would bust up their strategy!

What a sick cynical way to undermine the country and our Democracy eh?

[Right_in_Virginia]

"Still, they were cool to the idea of a federal constitutional amendment to ban same-sex marriages."

But are they "cool to the idea" of an amendment to protect the sanctity of marriage?

[jwalsh07]

It seems that both Kerry and Bush oppose gay marriage, so I don't see any great advantage for Bush on this.

Hardly. Kerry voted against DOMA which not only defined marriage as between one man and one woman but also would protect states from out of control judicial oligarchs like the one in Massachusetts that make laws regarding marriage in direct contravention of their powers.

By his negative vote, Kerry affirms that full faith and credit should be given to homosexual "marriages" in his home state of Massachusetts which by the way is where the dem convention is this year. All kinds of possibilities there.

In addition, John Kerry will appoint federal judges who are in lock step with Margaret Marshall, chief lawmaker on the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court.

This is a no brainer, Kerry is on record and it has legs in the south and heartland battleground states.

Ohio just passed the toughest DOMA in the nation banning homosexual partners from receiving government perks.

It won't make a vote but it will tip votes all else being equal. But this is simply one of many votes that Kerry will have to defend. There's a reason why long time Senators have a dismal record when running for the White House.

[little jeremiah]

Homosexual Agenda Ping!

I read one comment to this thread opining that "gay" marriage is not important, especially compared to things like the budget deficit. Anyone like to respond to that?

(Anyone wanting on or off this ping list, ping me!)

[george wythe]

His [Kerry's] words against 'gay marriage' are just campaign CYA

I tend to agree with you.

I just don't see the media questioning Kerry very hard on this issue, so he'll probably get a pass.

We all know that media can make or destroy a candidate, and right now, they are in the process re-making Kerry into a brand-new candidate, "moderate on social issues, strong on defense, and conservative on fiscal policies."

Notice how the media has resuscitated the old, debunked Bush-AWOL story, and now they are questioning even the authenticity of the documents proving that Bush was not AWOL.