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

Skip to comments.

Most Oppose Gay Marriage; Fewer Back an Amendment
ABC News ^ | June 6, 2006 | GARY LANGER

Posted on 06/05/2006 9:54:35 PM PDT by Sunsong

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-42 next last

1 posted on 06/05/2006 9:54:40 PM PDT by Sunsong
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Sunsong
No matter. Those of us who support traditional marriage are bigots. And for that reason alone, we're not even worthy of a hearing by the Senate.

(Denny Crane: "Every one should carry a gun strapped to their waist. We need more - not less guns.")

2 posted on 06/05/2006 10:01:05 PM PDT by goldstategop (In Memory Of A Dearly Beloved Friend Who Lives On In My Heart Forever)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Sunsong

...and after seeing the results of this survey they will run a marathon of back-to-back episodes of "Will and Grace" on one of their cable channels.


3 posted on 06/05/2006 10:02:17 PM PDT by capt. norm (Ben Franklin: "Does thou love life? Then do not squander time; for that's the stuff life is made of")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Sunsong
That's because this is an issue the RINOs hope will catch on to take our eye off the ball on illegal immigration.
4 posted on 06/05/2006 10:02:22 PM PDT by suijuris
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: goldstategop
They did have a hearing on this, thats why it is being debated before the full Senate. Coincidentally, the hearing was held in a closet.
5 posted on 06/05/2006 10:03:32 PM PDT by Prodn2000
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Sunsong
but fewer, 42 percent, say it rises to the level of amending the U.S. Constitution

I agree with that. I don't like messing with the Constitution. The more you change it, the more it will be changed. Eventually it will become worthless.

6 posted on 06/05/2006 10:07:42 PM PDT by Cobra64 (All we get are lame ideas from Republicans and lame criticism from dems about those lame ideas.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Sunsong

we'll have to do it state by state


7 posted on 06/05/2006 10:08:28 PM PDT by Andy from Beaverton (I only vote Republican to stop the Democrats)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: goldstategop

The hearing was held in January.


8 posted on 06/05/2006 10:11:01 PM PDT by BigSkyFreeper (There is no alternative to the GOP except varying degrees of insanity.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Sunsong
Among conservative Republicans and evangelical white Protestants, though, opposition to gay marriage soars more than 85 percent, and two-thirds support a constitutional amendment to ban it,

Where are Catholics on the issue, did the pollsters skip over them? Surely the largest Christian group in the US is as much opposed to same sex marriage as evangelical protestants are.

State laws and amendments won't stop the homo lobby and it's sympathetic federal judges from shoving homo marriage in our faces, only a Constitutional amendment can do that. An amendment becomes an integral part of the Constitution once it's ratified and the Constitution itself can't be ruled unconstitutional, not even by an arrogant lefty judge.

9 posted on 06/05/2006 10:17:56 PM PDT by epow (No tagline tonight, the tagline store closed before I could get there.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Cobra64

I agree with that. I don't like messing with the Constitution. The more you change it, the more it will be changed. Eventually it will become worthless.

When liberal activist Judges have already destroyed the constitution and the commander in chief cannot fight a war without treason at home, what makes the constitution seem like it has not been destroyed?

It is time to start putting American Values BACK INTO the Constitution when anti-Americans take them out. Sick perversion of marriage is as bad as treason against the President, and the Liberal agenda goes on. Let them change the Constitution?


10 posted on 06/05/2006 10:19:49 PM PDT by Nickey (Loose Lips Sink Ships.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: Andy from Beaverton

What happens when a Federal Judge overthrows the will of the people in a State? It becomes a Federal issue. There is more important issues: Like another hearing on Katrina? We can do more than one thing at a time. It is time we tried to solve this issue.


11 posted on 06/05/2006 10:23:26 PM PDT by Brimack34
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: Sunsong

I'm getting dizzy from all this spin.

I keep hearing how the Constitution shouldn't be amended. Of course it shouldn't < /sarc >. Constitutional change is supposed to come from the Legislative Branch as activist judges consult foreign law to arrive at new interpretations of the Constitution.

So much for the living breathing document. Meanwhile the State of Texas' constitution has hundreds of Amendments.

Just wait'll Congress gets around to a protection of life amendment...


12 posted on 06/05/2006 10:27:28 PM PDT by weegee (Slowly but surely and deliberately, converativism is being made a thoughtcrime.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Andy from Beaverton
we'll have to do it state by state

Won't work.

We amended the GA constitution to define marriage as between a man and a woman by 76% of the total vote. Then a judge in Atlanta threw it out because she says it wasn't passed according to the state constitution's rules for amending. The state Assembly will go through the process again and correct what she says was done improperly, but sure as my feet smell like roses she or another judge will throw it out again for some other made-up reason.

That same kind of thing or some other tactic will eventually happen in every state that has banned homo marriage. The only thing the perversion lobby's pet judges and federal courts can't throw out is a properly passed and ratified amendment to the US Constitution.

13 posted on 06/05/2006 10:35:52 PM PDT by epow (No tagline tonight, the tagline store closed before I could get there.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: epow

Put this Catholic in the "biggot" collumn.

My fear w/ this amendment is that it will lose so big that it sets us back.


14 posted on 06/05/2006 10:38:54 PM PDT by YCTHouston
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: Sunsong

Gary Langer, director of polling for ABC News, said George W. Bush won the 2004 presidential election for two reasons: 9/11 and women voters.

15 posted on 06/05/2006 10:49:58 PM PDT by kcvl
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Sunsong
In a ABC News/Washington Post poll March 7, a substantial majority -- 63 percent -- of respondents 18 to 29 thought gay marriage should be legal. Gary Langer, ABC News polling director, said the finding has been consistent in the four such polls conducted since September. Several factors, including survey wording, produce nuances in data from different pollsters, making comparison difficult, he said.
16 posted on 06/05/2006 10:54:07 PM PDT by kcvl
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: goldstategop

Gary Langer, director of polling for ABC News, one of the sponsors of the poll, said a major flaw in the question is that "moral values" is not the same sort of specific issue that taxes and Iraq are.

"Health care is an issue, terrorism is an issue; moral values is much more of a personal characteristic. It is very broadly defined," Langer said.

Langer and others said "moral values" became a sort of "catchall" for Bush's voters that could include everything from gay marriage to vulgarity on television.


http://tinyurl.com/er3xz


17 posted on 06/05/2006 10:56:07 PM PDT by kcvl
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Sunsong

www.bias.com

Sober and Sensible Polls?

Since the beginning of Monicagate, the networks have used their pollsters to reinforce how popular Bill Clinton is and how most people don’t care about perjury concerning his "private life." But on August 12, five days before Clinton’s grand jury date, ABC News polling analyst Gary Langer rejoiced in the results on ABCNews.com:

"As the Monica Lewinsky affair spins toward its rendezvous with destiny, it’s worth celebrating what has been perhaps the biggest surprise of the scandal: the sober and sensible way average Americans have responded to the whole brouhaha....Pundits hate this kind of thing; Those who declared him dead have had to reconfigure their best lines to accommodate — drat! — actual public opinion."

Langer explained: "It turns out that most Americans have responded to the Lewinsky affair with more of a head scratch than a knee jerk. Their message on this score has been steady: Clinton’s personal behavior, however unsavory it’s alleged to be, is indeed personal."

As the President’s admission drew nearer, Langer endorsed the White House spin that a strong economy negates sex, lies, and perjury: "Lewinsky’s a far juicier story, but when it comes to evaluating presidential performance, average Americans check their wallets. The lowest unemployment in a generation, trivial inflation, growing personal income: What’s a stained dress in the face of these? So far, not much."


http://tinyurl.com/gszma


18 posted on 06/05/2006 10:59:57 PM PDT by kcvl
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: kcvl

Quite a few years ago when I was voting in a small town in Northern CA, I voted on some "gay rights" something or other, walked out of the polling place, and realized I had actually voted "FOR" the gay rights whatever it was. There were not only double negatives, but triple, quadruple, and probably more than that negatives. So I went back in and they let me vote again. The second time I pored over it, mentally crossing out every double negative, so I could figure out the dang thing.

After I walked out the second time I realized I screwed it up again.

Liberals ask questions and word stuff purposely to obfuscate, confuse, and indoctrinate. And I WANTED to vote against whatever the "gay rights" proposal was.


19 posted on 06/05/2006 11:08:01 PM PDT by little jeremiah
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: DBeers

Just in case you don't have enough articles about "gay" marriage in your grip.


20 posted on 06/05/2006 11:09:26 PM PDT by little jeremiah
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-42 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