Poll: Support For Gay Marriage Growing

A new poll released Thursday by the Pew Research Center finds growing support in the U.S. for allowing same-sex marriage, with as many Americans now favoring same-sex marriage as opposing it.

The Pew Research Center poll found 45 percent of adults now favor allowing gay marriage and 46 percent oppose it. Forty-five percent is the highest support Pew has found for allowing same-sex marriage since they began polling on the issue in 1996. As recently as April of 2009, Pew found only 35 percent of adults supported allowing gay marriage. Other surveys Pew conducted in 2008 and 2009 generally showed support for gay marriage in the 38-40 percent range.

Pew's report notes that support for marriage is divided geographically. Majorities in the Northeast and West support marriage rights, but only 40% in the Midwest and 34% in the South favor allowing it.

Other pollsters have found similar trends toward allowing same-sex marriage (results compiled by Pollingreport.com):

• CBS News asked a three-way question in August 2010, and found that 40% support allowing same-sex marriage, 30% support civil unions, and 25% do not support any legal recognition of gay marriage. Support for allowing gay marriage was up from 30% in 2008 and 22% since they began asking the question in 2004.
• An AP-National Constitution Center poll found that 52% of adults supported same-sex marriage, up from 46% in 2009. In addition, the poll found that 58% think couples of the same sex should be entitled to the same government benefits as opposite-sex couples.
• Fox News asked a three-way question in August of 2010 and found that 37 percent of registered voters supported legal marriage, 29 percent supported some other form of legal partnership, and 28 percent favored no legal recognition. Support for marriage was up from 33 percent in 2009 and from 20 percent since Fox began asking the question in 2004.
• A CNN poll in August 2010 found that 49 percent of adults thought gays and lesbians have a constitutional right to get married legally, up from 45 percent in 2009. In addition, 52 percent said they thought gays and lesbians should have that right under the Constitution.
• A Gallup poll in May of 2010 found that 44 percent said gay marriage should be legally recognized, up from 40 percent in 2008 and 2009, though one Gallup poll in 2007 found 46 percent of adults supported that measure.

While the level of support varies from pollster to pollster depending on the question wording and format, these results collectively show an unmistakable trend towards greater support for allowing same-sex marriage.

Comments

[Scott Anthony]

12:24 AM on 04/26/2011

kingerik, let me make some things clear to you, so you can begin to gain wisdom and facts for once.

You lack experience, knowledge and truth in the debate about beign gay, gay marriage, and what it means to be in a commited relationship relating to this topic.

Here are facts. Many concervatives hold onto religious ideals, failed ideals at that as well as failed laws. Using leviticus law as an attack against Gays and same sex couples. Here is the problem with such narrow minded thinking 90% of leviticus law is illegle today. Those ideas, ideals, and ways of thinking are inhumane, unjust, and not legal in America. We do not inslave our daughters, supress our wives, and stone people for 3rd grade school kid mentality like those failed scribes believed.

Marriage by TRUE definition includes to unity and comming together of two distinct things to share a common bond and form a new shared interest. Such as the marriage pf peotry and music.

Only a gay man or woman knows who they are. Not you or those who are not. Simpel as that. THere is no such thign as EX gay. That is 100% propoganda and has been proven time in time when peopel go into these groups under cover.

[dlbnext]

03:49 PM on 03/16/2011

Abortion, atheism, pornography, gay marriage, euthanasia and doctor-assisted suicide - these are the issues central to Mr. Soros' progressive agenda. Soros spend 100's of millions on undermining America

[brklynivn]

08:27 PM on 03/17/2011

And yet the largest consumers of pornography happen to be in the Bible Belt. And a lot of these pornographer happen to be "free market conservatives".

[StevenKeirstead]

09:05 AM on 03/06/2011

The General Social Survey (GSS), a long running scientific face-to-face survey of social attitudes in the USA, shows even better results than the Pew Research poll. See: http://www.religiondispatches.org/dispatches/sarahposner/4314/more_americans_support_than_oppose_same-sex_marriage_for_first_time/ . In the GSS a plurality of 46.4% of people approved of legalizing same sex marriage surpassing 40.3% who disagree. The trend has been changing faster as more states have legalized same sex marriage, probably due to the fact that more people have seen same sex marriage has not been the treat to traditional marriage that opponents have claimed. Another factor is demographic, because older people who more strongly disagreed with legal marriage equality have been dying and younger Americans who are more likely to support marriage equality have replaced them.

[EmmaDarian]

09:42 AM on 03/06/2011

"The trend has been changing faster as more states have legalized same sex marriage, probably due to the fact that more people have seen same sex marriage has not been the treat to traditiona­l marriage that opponents have claimed. "

Yes! Exactly what happened in Massachusetts. As a matter of fact, that's what a lot of legislators said after the June 14, 2007 vote that protected same-sex marriage. Many who had once voted to put it to a vote but changed their minds gave among their reasons that they had seen the effect of then-three years of marriage equality and that it had been good and not bad for the Commonwealth. And many of them further said that before the vote many constituents who had once asked them to vote against marriage equality had called to ask for the opposite, having seen married same-sex couples in the community.

One such woman told her legislator that she'd changed her mind because a nice gay couple had moved in next door and helped her with her lawn, and if they couldn't be married, they'd leave Massachusetts and she'd have no help with her lawn.

We're going on seven years of marriage equality (at the state level) and it just means more happy people.

[StevenKeirstead]

10:00 AM on 03/06/2011

Yes, as another Massachusetts resident I agree with that assessment. Attitudes have rapidly changed here. I think this change in attitude even influenced Senator scott Brown's vote to dismantle DADT. He calculated his chance of reelection would have been seriously harmed by voting against repeal.

My husband and I married 3 & 1/2 years ago in Boston, having decided it was time after having been together for 16 years at that point. It's great to live in such a tolerant state.

[kingerik]

07:01 AM on 03/06/2011

Marriage is a heavily regulated institution, and for good reason. It bestows on couples benefits that are costly to the state and individuals. Collecting a deceased spouse’s social security, claiming an extra tax exemption for a spouse, and having the right to be covered under a spouse’s health insurance policy are just a few examples of the costly benefits associated with marriage.

They receive these subsidies because marriage between 2 unrelated heteros is likely to result in children. Propagation of society is a state interest. Homosexuals do nothing to propagate society, so why should giving them marriage benefits be a state interest? Sure, they can adopt, but it is in the best interest for children to have a mother and father.

The only benefits prevented from homosexuals today are the ones costly to the state and individuals. They are free to be in love, make a living will, and be completely monogamous. What state interest will gay marriage serve?

Homosexual marriage will also put into law that sexual "love" is the sole criterion for marriage. Then, what basis can the govt have to deny all those who love each other marriage? A sterile brother and sister? 3 guys and 2 girls? Gays might say it should be between 2 people, but what logical basis exists to prevent many people who love each other the right to marry if sexual love is the new primary foundation of marriage, instead of procreation?

[EmmaDarian]

08:54 AM on 03/06/2011

Still spamming your paranoid delusions? Eh, I'm waiting for coffee, so I'll take a couple.

"Collecting a deceased spouse’s social security, claiming an extra tax exemption for a spouse, and having the right to be covered under a spouse’s health insurance policy are just a few examples of the costly benefits associated with marriage."

So you want gay people to help fund those benefits for straight people, but not be eligible themselves. Because no lawyer, no amount of money can get most of the more-than-a-thousand benefits marriage conveys.

"Homosexual marriage will also put into law that sexual "love" is the sole criterion for marriage."

That is absolutely false and completely nonsensical. Nothing changes when two people of the same gender marry. The reasons are what the reasons were--whatever reasons straight people marry for are the reasons gay people marry for.

You keep tying marriage to procreation and perhaps that is all it is to you. But not to many people and not to the law. There is no requirement to procreate, not a requirement to be fertile. Courts, even conservative judges, have found over and over that marriage is not about procreation. And even if it were, gay people do get married and have children. And when they can't marry, they sometimes have children anyway, like many straight people do. Those children should have all the advantages that marriage conveys to parents.

Your logic is anything but. Your facts are false. And you're obsessed.

[kingerik]

09:17 AM on 03/06/2011

"So you want gay people to help fund those benefits for straight people, but not be eligible themselves­."

I guess unless all gays marry, there will be many still funding these benefits that they will not be eligible for themselves. Studies show maybe 1-2% of gays might decide to marry. I guess since my grandpa does not have kids in school he is exempted from paying increased taxes for school levies?

The state is not doling out these benefits because they like that "people are in love". It is all about the propagation of society, which is a state interest.

While there is no requirement to be fertile, most people whom are not do not know it..Testing everyone for fertility would be far too costly and overall too expensive to mandate. Some who marry decide not to have children, but without mind reading technology it would be impossible to exclude them.

Once again, I feel children ARE BEST SERVED by having a mom AND dad.. Somethings gays cannot provide.

The reason close relatives CANNOT marry is because THEY WOULD PROCREATE AND HAVE DEFECTIVE CHILDREN. Hence, again, marriage tied to procreation, and not "love".

[BernieKeating]

10:30 AM on 03/06/2011

Oh you poor sad thing...

[Angel1999]

01:39 PM on 03/05/2011

@ kingerik: Similarly the "Zoophiles­" are trying to attach themselves to the "gay movement"

I asked for any evidence of such a thing occurring, but you haven't responded yet.

@kingerik: actually many men and women in prison learn to enjoy homosexual sex..Some rape of course, but not all of it is..

I asked you for information to back this up, or who you know who has undergone this conversion, but you have yet to respond.

[EmmaDarian]

02:43 PM on 03/05/2011

You know, I actually followed his link to the blog entry about all those supposed zoophiles trying to attach themselves to the attach themselves to the "gay movement." It's one guy. And, of course, he doesn't know why his help is not welcome.

And that is how desperate that commenter is to smear gay people.

[Angel1999]

03:07 PM on 03/05/2011

Sorry for the double post. The first took so long to pop up, I thought it had been deleted.

[Angel1999]

12:57 PM on 03/05/2011

@kingerik: "No, actually many men and women in prison learn to enjoy homosexual sex..Some rape of course, but not all of it is..”

You never answered my question: Do you know any of these people who were raped in prison, and liked it so much they "turned gay"?

@kingerik: "Similarly the "Zoophiles­" are trying to attach themselves to the "gay movement".­. Interestin­g to see how it will all turn out..”

I asked you for any evidence about "zoophiles" attaching themselves to the gay movement. Haven't seen any response to that yet, either.

[WheelsOnFire]

01:31 PM on 03/05/2011

Kingerik gets his pseudoscience from agenda-driven anti-gay websites.

One of his citations came from a guy so discredited that he lost his professional credentials -- for deliberately misrepresenting research findings and engaging in unacceptable sampling techniques.

But the anti-gay bigot brigade eagerly consumes his filth and spews it wherever they can. So pathetic.

[kingerik]

01:44 PM on 03/05/2011

Angel, turn on your tv and watch lock up. I believe msnbc..Many of the men AND women admit they are enjoying some gay activities in prison (not rape), have a sort of boyfriend or girlfriend, yet when they are free will go back to the opposite sex.. Why do you keep mentioning rape?

Here is evidence of zoophiles wanting to be part of the gay movement.. Read the article. He also is gay, but seeks acceptance like many other zoos do.

http://blogs.phoenixnewtimes.com/valleyfever/2009/08/arizona_man_admits_to_animal_a.php

[Angel1999]

02:59 PM on 03/05/2011

So in other words, you found one person in the entire world, and you refer to this as "zoophilia advocates". Hardly a movement.

As for lockup, I found one reference and it says that they are actually gay, not that they turned gay for prison. They discuss the difficulties of being "out" in that sort of a situation.

[Angel1999]

03:00 PM on 03/05/2011

I keep mentioning rape, because that's what 99% of prison sex is. Your responses in that thread suggested that that even if it starts out as rape, the rapees learn to like it and become gay.

[kingerik]

08:08 AM on 03/05/2011

And one more point.. I truly feel gays, are not really anymore "homosexual" than much of America anymore. It really does not matter which gender touches your genitals, if you define "homosexuality" as the inability to bond with a member of the opposite sex, instead of same sex attraction.

Gay groups are right..More divorce, less trust between men and women, more cheating, less children, etc.

I believe the difference in opinions lies in the fact I believe the media and powers that be have played a large role in driving a wedge between men and women, and individuals need to realize that they need to be strong enough to ignore those influences, as the bond between men and women is extremely important to having a successful culture and society.

Gay marriage is simply being used as a way to further drive a wedge between men and women, trying to show that men and women do not even need each ther to have a kids or family..

But be careful gays.. Since you are being used as pawns in this battle, your best interests are not at heart either..If they were, perhaps gay men would not have a life expectancy that is 20 years shorter.. Worry about your own life, and how you can improve it, instead of trying to point out how heteros are not perfedct either.. 20% of hetero men do not have aids..

[Angel1999]

09:30 AM on 03/05/2011

Well, since we don't define homosexuality as the inability to bond with a member of the opposite sex, i guess we can disregard the rest of your statement.

So which gay groups are in favor of more divorce, less trust, more cheating and less children? Again with the substantiated paranoia.

Does the media make you want to be gay? I doubt it. Why would you assume you're the only one able to resist the wiles of those crafty media types?

Gay marriage will not affect straights because they're not gay.

Gays aren't being used as pawns, they're driving the narrative. As it stands, we are trying to worry about our own lives and improve them, and for some reason you are standing in the way.

[cenourinha]

09:43 AM on 03/05/2011

"Worry about your own life, and how you can improve it, instead of trying to point out how heteros are not perfedct [sic] either"

excellent advice...now go take it.

Since you obviously missed it, striving for our rights has nothing to do with driving a wedge between anyone else at all; just like being a lesbian does not mean I hate men (and I'm sure gay men as a rule do not hate women).

[WheelsOnFire]

11:52 AM on 03/05/2011

Well said. Fanned and faved.

And this gay guy likes women. I simply prefer another male as my life partner.

[kingerik]

07:51 AM on 03/05/2011

.
1. 20% of gay men have AIDS. Is that not a more pressing issue than gay marriage?
2. When allowed, about 1% of gays actually marry, compared to over 90% of heteros. Why?
3. When interviewed, over 50% of gay couples ADMIT to having completely open sexual relationships. "Just like heteros"?

I also wonder why gay men who give other gays AIDS are not imprisoned, similar to heteros? Could it be partially because gays have no idea who they got it from?

Do we really think gay marriage will suddenly make gay couples choose to practice monogamy? I doubt it considering the vast majority of gays feel "thier view" of marriage and monogamy is simply better .

The gay world has 2 sides.. The real side which is based on promiscuity and relationships that resemble nothing like a traditional marriage, and another side full of empty words and lies trying to convince others that they are just like heteros, and if they could just be allowed to marry then they can be happy and lead great lives..

If your only answers are bashing me, bashing Christians, pointing out that some heteros cheat, and that some kids unfortunately do not have a mom and dad save it. It seems gay groups are already doing their best to slander and tear down traditional marriage before gays can even become married.. Perhaps if it is slandered and libeled enough gays can fit into the definition of marriage somewhere.

[Angel1999]

09:39 AM on 03/05/2011

1. I can't do anything about gay men who have AIDS.

2. The percentage of gays who actually get married is irrelevant. Clearly some of us want to get married. This is simply a piece of data with no context.

3. I question your 50%, but it's hardly relevant. If they want to do that then fine. I've already told you that none of the gay couples I know have expressed that. Since I don't want an open relationship and only want to commit to my partner, you should let me be one of the putative 1% who get married.

HIV is not a death sentence. Do you think we should imprison people who give other people herpes or chlamydia?

You do not know anything about the gay world, so you ought to stop making ignorant comments about it. I am not promiscuous and my relationship looks just like a marriage. We own a home, I'm working on my Ph.D., my partner is a real estate agent, we have pets and a yard, where I have a garden. If you saw us living our life, you would not find it nearly as exciting as you seem to imagine.

You are a frightfully ugly person. You are most certainly not a Christian. Traditional marriage is nothing to hold up as a shining icon, as you well know (Brittney Spears, Newt Gingrich). Perhaps if you slander and libel gays enough you will convince people of the ugliness of your soul.

[kingerik]

10:44 AM on 03/05/2011

"Traditiona­l marriage is nothing to hold up as a shining icon"

See, this is the fundamental disagreement..Thanks for making my point for me.

I feel traditional marriage is the bedrock of society, and essential for children, men, and women. Segments of the population that uphold this institution do much better than those who do not. In all ways.

Gay advocates repeatedly try to tear down traditional marriage as they despise the institution.. All they want is to have their behavior normalized, and very few might get some inheritances out of it if their partner dies. They want a new open type of marriage that is far from traditional..

[WheelsOnFire]

04:11 PM on 03/05/2011

Your data is mere propaganda -- falsehoods spread by those desperately trying to convince themselves that they are straight but failing to succeed.

As for your silly comment about gays having the right to marry someone of the opposite sex, in Massachusetts you can marry someone of the same gender. Yes or no question -- would you marry someone of your own gender?

[Tracy Fortune]

02:46 AM on 03/05/2011

God does NOT create junk...

Wrap yourself around that...and understand that even in your aggression, you are forgiven...I know...why, you ask?

Because....

[Tracy Fortune]

01:47 AM on 03/05/2011

No one would "choose" to be denigrated, attacked, demoralized, or otherwise subjected to awful treatment.

For those str8 haters who are in their own closets- just accept your own beauty, come out, and join the rest of us who already understand that God does not create "junk"...

[kingerik]

11:55 PM on 03/04/2011

Another study for you..http://www.nytimes.com/2010/01/29/us/29sfmetro.html

Half of gay couples have OPEN relationships with the consent of their partner! And this is "just like heteros"??????Of course they argue that this is a better form of marriage..

So please, let's stop the B.S. that gays are not more promiscuous, or that gays view monogamy in the exact same way that heteros do..

[Kevins]

12:08 AM on 03/05/2011

It's strange if you approve of monogamy and disapprove of promiscuousness, that you want to prevent people from getting married.

Also, don't get too high-and-mighty:
http://www.allaboutlifechallenges.org/marital-infidelity.htm
"The facts about marital infidelity (sexual unfaithfulness to a spouse) are astounding. Polls show that although 90% of married people disapprove of extramarital relationships, statistics from a national survey indicate that 15% of wives and 25% of husbands have experienced extramarital intercourse. These numbers increase by 20% when emotional affairs and sexual relationships without intercourse are included. Another source, The Monogamy Myth, authored by Peggy Vaughan, approximates that 60% of husbands and 40% of wives will have an affair at some time in their marriage."

[kingerik]

12:27 AM on 03/05/2011

WOW.. Huge difference between 50% of gay couples whom KNOWINGLY CONSENT to a lifetime of ongoing promiscuity, (do the other 50% cheat without the agreement?) and 25% of guys and 15% who might slip up over the course of a lifetime.

My point is that gays are fighting for a different type of marriage, thus it should not be called "marriage". (Who are we kidding , we all know a minuscule % of gays might marry anyway.) Of course, the best gay advocates can do is point out that some heteros, over the course of a lifetime cheat too..

[Razpooten]

03:31 AM on 03/19/2011

I think it is safe to assume that regardless of gender (sexual preference as some put it). It is not an uncommonly human characteristic to stray from fidelity in a monogamous realtionship. Non one group had a monopoly of human frailties.

[Angel1999]

01:18 AM on 03/05/2011

But again, this doesn't apply to me, so why would it matter to you whether I get married to my same-sex partner?

[kingerik]

11:02 PM on 03/04/2011

What also amazes me is the FACT (check the cdc stats) that 1 out of 5 gay men have AIDS, and gay men are the only group with diagnoses in America that are increasing. half opf gay men do not even know they have AIDS!

Yet, for some reason, the gay lifestyle is being promoted, and the fact that they are not allowed to marry is the BIG story.. In nations where gays CAN marry, about 1% of gays choose to do so..

It seems the main danger to gay men are other gay men. Not Christians, homophobes, or those who are against gay marriage.

[Kevins]

11:20 PM on 03/04/2011

The fact is that half all AIDS cases in the US are gay men, and half are something else.

Both halves are unfortunate, and growing. There is no cause for your seeming joy over other people's illness. I hope you don't have the same glee about cancer.

What I don't understand is why you claim marriage is wonderful, but when people ask to marry you don't have a good word to say about it. Especially in the age of AIDS, don't you think it's important for people to be able to form permanent bonds of marriage? Why would you deny them that?

[kingerik]

11:27 PM on 03/04/2011

The FACT is that 20% of gay men have Aids, but I sense a lot of animosity towards the religious, Christians, or anyone who steps in the way of the gay movement.

You want to change the numbers and say 50% of ALL AIDS.. Ok Fine.. How many bi men gave unsuspecting women Aids, that then gave aids to men? Of course iv drug users account for another 25%.

But instead of playing with stats, I think gays need to worry about how their actions are MURDERING each other, instead of worrying about being married, which 99% have no interest in..

[Kevins]

11:30 PM on 03/04/2011

PS, not Christians, certainly. I'm Christian. And so is my husband.

[tinkr55]

01:13 AM on 03/05/2011

@kingerik
The truth is that the largest group of newly diagnosed HIV positive people are African American women between 25 and 45. That is largely due to the fact that their husbands/partners are having sex with men who are already HIV positive. The husbands/partners do not consider themselves gay, and call this practice "on the down low."

[nongrata]

09:54 PM on 03/04/2011

it should be a state by state issue. I will never support it and even in the unlikely event it got passed where I live I personally will not respect or recognize a gay couple and no im not religious

[GraysonMichael]

11:59 PM on 03/04/2011

I seem to remember another civil rights incident that was a "state by state" issue too. Wanna know how that turned out?

[tinkr55]

01:15 AM on 03/05/2011

@nongrata
WOW! I'd like to be a fly on the wall when your son says, "Dad, I'm gay'"

[kingerik]

09:38 PM on 03/04/2011

Let my reasoning be clear.. I do not hate gays.. I really do not care.

The issue is that gays are being used, and much of their movement funded by the powers that be that want to destroy the family. They want to form a population that is docile, childless, isolated, and sex obsessed. Read the words for yourself in the communist manifesto of 1848. Destroying marriage was important to controlling a population.

If you define gay as the inability to bond with a member of the opposite sex instead of same sex attraction, it is clear that most of society is "turning gay". Plummeting birth rate, low marriage rate, more and more single parents, etc.

It is much easier to control a population stripped of all forces of collective strength.Gay marriage will simply lead to FURTHER gender confusion, lack of gender roles, fewer marriages, fewer families, fewer children.

It's not about "equal rights" or being nice to gays.. The bigger picture is turning everyone gay, if you define gay as not being able to bond with the opposite sex and form a stable family.

[enderM]

09:58 PM on 03/04/2011

"Let my reasoning be clear.. I do not hate gays.. I really do not care."

yes you do. and yes you do. based on your "clear reasoning", there is no doubt.

[kingerik]

09:01 PM on 03/17/2011

I do not hate them.. They are simply repellent.. I do not "hate" rats or cockroaches either.. But find them repellent..

Nobody cares at all about gays.. Gays included.. If they cared they would not be killing each other with AIDS at such a rapid pace..

[Kevins]

10:14 PM on 03/04/2011

That's funny. I've been with my male spouse for over 30 years, finally allowed to legally marry (finally!)--to the delight of our two daughters and two grandchildren.

If only heterosexuals would emulate us and stay together, if they would weather hard times as well as good times in mutual love and support, instead of flippantly giving up, then straight marriage could be stronger than it is. Of course, to do that, some straight people would find it hard to give up being promiscuous, sex-obsessed, faithless, and essentially self-centered.

[tinkr55]

01:18 AM on 03/05/2011

@Kevins
Congratulations to you and your partner for staying together longer than 90% of str8 couples!

f&f