Posted on 05/10/2012 7:42:45 AM PDT by SeekAndFind
Gay marriage is increasingly accepted across the country. More Americans support gay marriage (47 percent) than oppose it (43 percent), according to a recent Pew survey. In 2004, 60 percent of Americans opposed it in Pew data. Only 8 percent were strongly in favor. In 2004, a majority did not support gay marriage in any state; by 2010, a majority did in 17.
Yet 32 times since 1998, voters have gone to the polls and voted against gay marriage.* Thirty-eight states prohibit gay marriage in some fashion. Even in “blue” states like California, Oregon and Delaware, gay marriage bans stand. North Carolina’s Amendment One Tuesday night was just the latest in a long line of failures at the ballot box for proponents of gay marriage. (Support for bans is falling over time, according to HRC: in 2004 they passed on average 71 percent to 29 percent, but in 2008 the average was 57 percent to 43 percent.)
Gay marriage has had more success in courts and state legislatures. But still, only six states and the District of Columbia allow gay marriage.
What explains the discrepancy between the national movement toward legalization of gay marriage with the repeated failures of such measures at the ballot box? A lot of it comes down to timing.
(Excerpt) Read more at washingtonpost.com ...
RE: Actually California voters REJECTED gay marriage. New York voters were never given a chance to decide. It was rammed through the State legislature with big payoffs from leftist financiers, like BLoomberg, to opponents so they would switch sides. It was a vile act of political corruption.
__________________
Here’s my take ... GAY MARRIAGE IS *LOW* ON A VOTER’s PRIORITY LIST COMPARED TO JOBS AND THE ECONOMY.
For most Blacks, gay marriage is UNIMPORTANT compared to how the government promises to take care of your needs ( and also the race of the candidate ).
That is why you see Blacks voting AGAINST Gay marriage by a 2-1 margin in NC, but voting FOR Obama and any Democrat anyway.
Welfare is more important than gay marriage to Black voters. Hence, they’ll ignore Obama’s stance on this issue anyway.
Didn’t the homosexual marriage ban in CA get tossed by a Federal judge?
RE: It was overturned by a sodomite judge.
Shouldn’t the judge be RECUSED due to conflict of interest?
how do you stand living there
The author, obviously, embraces the Hegelian doctrine of thesis/antithesis/synthesis: The "conversation" must be rather advanced--"further along" than elsewhere--in order for it to have a chance of having evolved to a point at which it has become morally acceptable, according to leftist doctrine...
It's a struggle every day.
The judge retired within a few weeks after he made his pro sodomite ruling.
What I meant was the judge should have recused himself from even hearing the case due to his sexual orientation BEFORE he even retired.
Was he known to be a homosexual when he took on the case?
This looks like a conflict of interest. Why do voters allow that?
You are so correct, deep rooted minorities in the south are against this big time.
Yeah but they will vote for him regardless. But he pushed away another segment of independents.
He’ll lose because the economy sucks, not gay marriage.
Just thinking about what these “gays” do to and with each other is disgusting. Look up the pictures of the San Francisco gay days to see what they now do in public.
Just thinking about what these “gays” do to and with each other is disgusting. Look up the pictures of the San Francisco gay days to see what they now do in public.
“Why does gay marriage keep losing at the ballot box?”
Hmm...
I’m gonna go out on a limb here... because the majority of American voters disagree with it?
RE: because the majority of American voters disagree with it?
But the poll she (the writer) cites show that the majority of Americans AGREE with it... that’s what she can’t understand.
Maybe, just maybe - when liberal poll takers call - hired by newspapers - with 'objective questions' formed by writers ( who are 90+% liberal) - maybe, just maybe the person being polled gives the answer desired.
Years ago to test this theory a group of women were given serving trays with two kinds of juice (small cups) and told to only say the names of the juice to people ('apple' - 'orange' etc.) - and not to say anything else. Turns out they gave away more of the juice they personally preferred even without giving any obvious hints at preference. (the servers were not told in advance what the experiment was about)
In the privacy of the voting booth, socially acceptable lies fall by the wayside. The need to be "PC" in order to be acceptable goes away... and people vote their truth. Democrats know this - it's why they DON'T want secret ballots for Unions. Journalists know the truth too... but it conflicts with 'the story' so they lie in their own ways.
I don’t think he came out of the closet until he made the ruling. So yes he should have recused himself but, as you know, liberals have a way to justify any behavior they choose.
When people talk to a pollster, they are afraid of being called a bigot if they say they oppose gay marriage, so they tell the pollster they are in favor of it.
When they get in the voting both, they vote they how they really think.
While admitting that 38 states — a supermajority — have passed restrictions on homo marriage, the writer manufactures some mythical “nationwide movement toward legalization”. How can repeated rejections of homo marriage be reconciled with increasing acceptance?
Because one is a fact, and one is fiction. And the only polls that matter are the ones taken at the ballot box.
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.