Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Americans Still Oppose Gay Marriage (Duh Alert!)
GALLUP NEWS SERVICE ^ | May 22, 2006 | Lydia Saad

Posted on 05/22/2006 1:18:55 PM PDT by DBeers

Americans Still Oppose Gay Marriage

But only half favor a constitutional amendment to bar it

PRINCETON, NJ -- Americans are closely divided in their reactions to the sort of constitutional amendment banning gay marriage that produced considerable fireworks in the Senate Judiciary Committee on Thursday. Asked whether the Constitution should be amended to define marriage as only between a man and woman -- a move that would preclude states from sanctioning same-sex marriages -- 50% of Americans say they would favor such an amendment, while 47% are opposed.

Sens. Russ Feingold (D-Wis.) and Arlen Specter (R-Pa.) had a heated exchange about a similarly worded amendment before it passed on a 10-8 party-line vote -- although it is expected to fall well short of the two-thirds support needed in the full Senate in order to take the next step toward becoming an amendment. While out of character for the Senate, the indecorous incident perhaps exemplifies the gulf in attitudes between Republicans and Democrats nationally on gay marriage.

According to Gallup's annual Values and Beliefs survey, conducted May 8-11, two-thirds of Republicans (66%) favor a constitutional amendment that would define marriage as a heterosexual institution, while a majority of Democrats (55%) oppose this.

Although only half of all Americans favor a constitutional amendment to ban same-sex marriages, the same poll finds a solid majority (58%) opposed to granting such marriages the same legal rights as traditional marriages. Sharp cultural differences characterize these attitudes, with certain groups widely supportive and others widely opposed.

~~ SNIP ~~

(Excerpt) Read more at poll.gallup.com ...


TOPICS: Culture/Society
KEYWORDS: heterosexualagenda; homosexualagenda; homosexualmarriage; imjustshocked; marriage; poll; samesexmarriage; shockeditellyou; whowouldathought
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-22 next last

1 posted on 05/22/2006 1:18:57 PM PDT by DBeers
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: DBeers

Not too suprising. Gay marriage is like gay sex, both are a pain in the rear.


2 posted on 05/22/2006 1:25:26 PM PDT by AxelPaulsenJr (Keep your friends close and your enemies closer.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: AFA-Michigan; AggieCPA; Agitate; AliVeritas; AllTheRage; An American In Dairyland; Annie03; ...
Homosexual Agenda Ping!

If you oppose the homosexualization of society
-add yourself to the ping list!

To be included in or removed from the
HOMOSEXUAL AGENDA PING LIST,
please FReepMail either DBeers or DirtyHarryY2k.

Free Republic homosexual agenda keyword search
[ Add keyword = homosexualagenda to flag FR articles to this ping list ]

Poll conclusions that agree with reality are my favorites. The numbers may be off somewhat due to any flaws inherent to the questions -regardless, the general conclusion is correct...

3 posted on 05/22/2006 1:28:07 PM PDT by DBeers (†)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: DBeers

Gay Marriage - Imitation Fertilization


4 posted on 05/22/2006 1:29:54 PM PDT by frogjerk (LIBERALISM: The perpetual insulting of common sense.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: DBeers

What's the SNL gag? This just in...Generalissimo Francisco Franco is still dead!


5 posted on 05/22/2006 1:31:41 PM PDT by Huck (Hey look, I'm still here.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: DBeers

There's another way around this.

Petition your state legislature to pass a resolution calling for a Constitutional convention to address the matter. If two-thirds of all the states do so, then the Congress is required by Article V of the Constitution to set the convention up, comprised of delegates from the several states (not Congressmen or Senators). That convention is empowered to recommend amendments that then are submitted to the States. If they are adopted by 3/4 of the States, they become part of the Constitution. And at no point does either the Congress or the President have a say in the matter.


6 posted on 05/22/2006 1:32:34 PM PDT by RonF
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: DBeers

It's clear from this poll there isn't sufficient support for such an ammendment to pass. The issue is dead.


7 posted on 05/22/2006 1:33:08 PM PDT by newzjunkey (Don't use illegals: HIREPATRIOTS.COM)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: DBeers

Practially speaking, what would probably happen is that if the momentum looks strong, Congress would go ahead and pass their own amendment for submittal to the states because there's a lot of debate as to whether the scope of the Constitutional Convention could be limited once it was assembled, and they'd be scared as to what might happen.


8 posted on 05/22/2006 1:34:10 PM PDT by RonF
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: DBeers
Might I remind those who conveniently forget, you don't have to be FOR gay marriage to be against the Amendment. While I think that is mostly bogus, it is a frequent argument put forth by those who favor gay marriage and want to stop the amendment so we don't reign in the Judiciary before they can legislate it.

The amendment is for the judges, not the people. It leaves the people free to decide the issue with nothing more than a name change, a practical step if we are going to truly allow each state it's say. Personally, I don't think we can have one state with gay marriage even under the name civil unions without forcing it on the others. Our federal government is just too big and the definition of marriage too woven throughout our policies and law to keep it separate. But disallowing judges, both state and federal, to decide the matter will help a lot.

9 posted on 05/22/2006 1:34:55 PM PDT by The Ghost of FReepers Past (Woe unto them that call evil good, and good evil; that put darkness for light..... Isaiah 5:20)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: RonF

Where do you propose to get thirty-eight states to ratify such an ammendment when the split of opinion is 50-47?


10 posted on 05/22/2006 1:35:24 PM PDT by newzjunkey (Don't use illegals: HIREPATRIOTS.COM)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: newzjunkey

Where do you propose to get thirty-eight states to ratify such an ammendment when the split of opinion is 50-47?

That would depend on how the opinion is distributed. For example: a few big population states, (say NY, CA) have a huge majority of their citizens against the amendment, but some of the less populous states have a clear majority in favor. Then it very possible that a majority of the STATES could ratify the amendment while much of the populous (living in urban areas) were against it.

Sort of like the electoral college, only better.


11 posted on 05/22/2006 1:42:57 PM PDT by Help!
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: newzjunkey
It's clear from this poll there isn't sufficient support for such an ammendment to pass. The issue is dead.

Amendments take a long time, go through many incarnations, to build support or die on the vine. There is no reason to drop the issue. It keeps the focus on where the problem lies: activist judiciary.

12 posted on 05/22/2006 1:53:40 PM PDT by NutCrackerBoy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: NutCrackerBoy

More support could build for an amendment if more courts allow it. Washington state's Supreme Court has been sitting on a decision in that state for over a year. New Jersey and California, among others, have same sex marriage cases going through their courts.

This issue has gone dormant recently because there haven't been any more state Supreme Courts taking the plunge after Massachusetts did.

And even if some more states courts decide to have same sex marriage, this will still have to go through the U.S. Supreme Court to reach their goal of 50 state gay marriage and federal recognition of homosexual marriage. So I bet lots of people think we're still a long ways from that happening.


13 posted on 05/22/2006 2:33:19 PM PDT by Dilbert San Diego
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: DBeers

Americans Still Oppose Gay Marriage



Ask us in another month, the answer will be the same.


14 posted on 05/22/2006 2:41:13 PM PDT by trubluolyguy (When Ted Kennedy and HRC support you Mr. President, it's time for some soul searching)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: DBeers

Given a general reticence about unnecessarily amending the Constitution, I say 50% in favor of the amendment is pretty strong. That such a greater percentage favor the legal definition to be based on one man and one woman indicates many are not yet convinced that judges will force the change. I am convinced they will and I am determined that if we are to have same-sex marriage throughout the country, it must be passed democratically by 50 state legislatures.


15 posted on 05/22/2006 2:48:20 PM PDT by NutCrackerBoy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: RonF

That's the way to go.


16 posted on 05/22/2006 2:50:59 PM PDT by Republican Wildcat
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: Help!

If it was put on ballots in all 50 states, gay marriage bans would pass in all 50 states. There are no "large majorities" for gay marriage anywhere. Only in the most liberal precincts is there majority support, and that is certainly not a whole state.


17 posted on 05/22/2006 2:58:33 PM PDT by Heartofsong83
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: Help!
That would depend on how the opinion is distributed. For example: a few big population states, (say NY, CA) have a huge majority of their citizens against the amendment, but some of the less populous states have a clear majority in favor. Then it very possible that a majority of the STATES could ratify the amendment while much of the populous (living in urban areas) were against it.

You have named two states already, California and New York. I can name eleven more. THey are Maryland, New Jersey, Connecticut, Rhode Island, Maine, NH, Vermont, Mass., Washington State, Oregon, and Minnesota.

The Amendment will never pass, no matter what.

18 posted on 05/22/2006 3:03:40 PM PDT by MinorityRepublican (everyone that doesn't like what America and President Bush has done for Iraq can all go to HELL)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: DBeers
This is just another call to action for the MSM. They've not done a good enough job selling the homosexers.
19 posted on 05/22/2006 3:31:06 PM PDT by Jaysun (Even with a paddle, shit creek ain't no picnic.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: DBeers
These numbers are a fraud. Put it to a vote and see what happens...

I'll bet it's more like 65% in favor, 25% opposed, 10% clueless.
20 posted on 05/22/2006 8:14:37 PM PDT by Antoninus (The Da Vinci Code is the religious equivalent Fahrenheit 911.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-22 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson