As of now, I am in control here, in the White House

New Poll: Majority Opposes Gay Marriage

A significant majority of Americans oppose gay marriage, according to a new poll by Politico.

The poll of likely voters found that only 40 percent believe same-sex couples should be legally married. Thirty percent said gays should be allowed civil unions but not marriage, and 24 percent opposed all types of legal unions for homosexuals – meaning a total of 54 percent oppose gay marriage.

The poll suggests that, as the Supreme Court prepares to take up the Constitutionality of gay marriage, support for the idea – as well as President Obama’s decision to back gay marriage – might not be as strong as generally thought.

The poll says that by 48-42 percent, respondents approve of “the job President Obama is doing” on gay marriage, but that’s a nebulous way up putting the question, and the result has little meaning.

The author who reported the poll chose to emphasize the more politically correct conclusion – that a “plurality” support gay marriage. But that doesn’t appear to me to be the news here at all.

While, in my view, the article is written incorrectly, the poll was constructed superbly, unlike other recent polls that have shown a small majority favoring allowing gay marriage. These polls have offered the all or nothing choice – do you oppose gay marriage or not?

This poll actually offers respondents the choice they face in the real world: to alter the institution of marriage by allowing couples of the same sex to wed, or to allow a half-way measure – civil unions – and maintain marriage as between opposite sexes.

The other polls are approximately like asking people if they support the death penalty for murderers or 30 years in prison, without offering the option of life in prison without parole.

21 Responses to New Poll: Majority Opposes Gay Marriage

  1. This just reinforces the fact that every time gay marriage has been put on the ballot it has been defeated. So, this poll shouldn’t be a surprise.

    • That’s not true at all. Washington State voters passed a referendum making same sex marriage legal just last month.

      Again, I don’t have a problem with gay marriage.
      But it should be a state law. However, each state must respect the other states’ rules.

  2. I don’t care if homosexuals want to marry each other, but that isn’t the underlying issue. What’s really at stake is any State’s right to determine who may join in a legal contract to act as “one” entity, because that’s what a marriage is today. Marriage allows spouses to transfer assets to avoid confiscation, spouses are not required to testify against each other in court proceedings, and government benefits can be claimed long after the marriage is over.
    Prenup contracts, parental, and property rights all take precedent when the marriage contract is dissolved.

    If the Supreme Court decides that any State does not have a right to determine who may marry, then the gates are thrown open to multiple partner marriages, incestuous or entire family marriages, or group marriages.
    There are legal benfits to a marriage that carry over from domestic arrangements to twarting criminal investigations that are at risk. Every facet of family or domestic law would have to be examined and realigned to accomodate the “new” definition of marriage.
    There would be a tangle of litigation that could take generations to solve.

  3. Mankind has always held the nuclear family to be the strongest bulwark aganst nature and natural processes (disease, famine, and the forces of nature.) Why screw with a good thing?

  4. The government should just get out of the marriage business. Just make any marriage whether it be heterosexual or homosexual a civil union or even a domestic partnership in the eyes of the government and let each private religious institutions decides for itself on what consists of a marriage. If the Roman Catholic Church respectfully declines a gay marriage but the Church down the street agrees to have them, then it’s okay on both accounts since each is excerising it’s right to freedom of religion but not forcing it on anyone. Both gay marriage supporters and opponents can get something out of it without their rights being violated.

    Really not a complicated issue when you just step back a bit.

    • That’s the problem. Socialist Governments won’t “step back” or get out of ANY business. Everthing to them is just a giant sticky gum wad, and no facet of your personal life can be extracted if the State is to rule you properly…

      • Spot on, even if Socialist Governments are given everything they want their minions of Lawyers, Law Professors, Hollywood Celebrities and Human Rights Advocates will simply invent new rights to feed their totalitarian machine.

        And speaking of Lawyers, Law Professors, Hollywood Celebrities and Human Rights Advocates; I could accept the Progressive Left’s “inequality” premise if under the law heterosexuals were permitted to marry a member of the same-sex while homosexuals were denied the same permission but since homosexuals can enter a contract of marriage to a member of opposite sex with the same Equality that heterosexuals enjoy then I find the entire ‘Gay Marriage’ issue to be just another form of made-up rights which Progressive Leftists created to feed the Socialist Government’s totalitarian machine.

        Lastly; I object to Gay marriage on the grounds that the State does not have the right to re-define meaning. Imagine if the State one day decided to re-define homosexual to mean ‘people who have sex’.

        In doing so- re-defining homosexual to mean ‘people who have sex’which is technically correct- is not the State in effect eliminating homosexuality from existence?

        The pro-Gay Marriage people have not thought out the consequences of their actions, giving the State all authority to control meaning is ignorant, stupid and narrow-minded not to mention totalitarian.

  5. ‘Polls’ are the biggest deception of the 20th Century. A skilled pollster can ask a series of leading questions and get any result he wants.

    E.g. When they want a positive result on Gay marriage they ask the question couched in language about equality, legal equivalence and discrimination and readily get a ~60% approval.

    When they want a negative result they will ask the question to exactly the same people but with language focusing on morals, tradition and family values, they always get only ~30%.

    This has been demonstrated so often that it makes the idea that most people support gay marriage a joke. They support equal rights and non-discrimination for gays, but that’s as far as it goes, suggesting that this means anything else is dishonest.