Support for gay marriage continues to rise in a new Pew Center for the People and the Press poll, completed 2/22-3/1/2011. The latest poll shows support at 45% and opposition at 46%, the narrowest margin in the history of Pew polling on the issue. Some polls by other pollsters have found support exceeding opposition but as the chart above shows, the trend estimates have converged by not quite reached equal levels of support and opposition. The consistency of the trends since 2005, however, all but guarantee support will exceed opposition within the year.
The chart also highlights the Pew polls, which have tended to measure slightly lower levels of support than the overall trendline based on all polls. Opposition in the Pew polls has been more nearly centered on the overall trend. This suggests that pollsters other than Pew are likely to find more support than opposition in upcoming polls.
The long term trend is one of the most compelling in recent history. With the exception of 2004, following the first legalization of gay marriage in Massachusetts which provoked a brief backlash, support has steadily risen while opposition has declined since the first polls on the topic in 1985.
The question wording for the above chart is a dichotomous one, basically “do you believe gay marriage should be legal”? Actual question wording varies across pollsters but all offer only legal or not legal response options. Since 2004 several pollsters (not including Pew) have also offered a trichotomous question, offering “civil unions but not marriage” as an option. Those data and trends are plotted below through the fall of 2010, the last poll we have with this form of the question.
The striking result here is that support for marriage has moved from third to first place among these three options, while opposition to any legal recognition has fallen to near-parity with civil unions. While the civil union preference has remained flat, support for marriage actually passed opposition to any legal relationship at the very end of 2008. While we don’t have direct data on who is changing, it is plausible to imagine movement from complete opposition into civil unions and simultaneous movement out of civil unions into support for full marriage rights. The stability of the civil union group suggests that this movement has been quite evenly balanced. While this series has not been asked since September 2010, the continued trend in the first chart gives us no reason to expect a sharp change in this trend in the last 6 months.
Much has been written about the generation gap in views of gay marriage. The trends here show that opposition to gay marriage is becoming a less and less acceptable position through the public more generally. It is not merely the young who are shifting views. While individual states are certain to vary widely in the balance of public opinion, the national shift is so striking and so regular that it is hard to imagine this issue will remain in doubt for much longer. As a majority emerges in support of gay marriage, the political issue will be state by state repeal of the various “defense of marriage” amendments and referenda that passed in 2004-2006. That battle will depend much more on the more variable views in individual states.
Crossposted at Polls And Votes.
Follow Charles Franklin on Twitter: www.twitter.com/PollsAndVotes
Tony Jones: The Church Should Stay Out of the Marriage Business
http://www-news.uchicago.edu/releases/03/differential-brain-activation.pdf
http://www.newscientist.com/channel/sex/dn14146-gay-brains-structured-like-those-of-the-opposite-sex.html
Gay, Straight Men's Brain Responses Differ
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,155990,00.html
http://www.livescience.com/health/060224_gay_genes.html
http://www.springerlink.com/content/w27453600k586276/
http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/80beats/2008/06/16/172/
There is overwhelming scientific evidence that homosexuality is not a choice. Sexual orientation is generally a biological trait that is determined pre-natally, although there is no one certain thing that explains all of the cases. "Nurture" may have some effect, but for the most part it is biological.
twisting God's words to condone their hate.
Homosexuality is not a sin. The Bible is constantly being taken out of context to
support anti-gay views. Scholars who have studied the Bible in context of the times
and in relation to other passages have shown those passages (Leviticus,
Corinthians, Romans, etc) have nothing to do with homosexuality. These
passages often cherry-picked while ignoring the rest of the Bible. The sins theses
passages are referring to are idolatry, Greek temple sex worship, prostitution,
pederasty with teen boys, and rape, not homosexuality or two loving consenting
adults.
http://www.soulfoodministry.org/docs/English/NotASin.htm
http://www.jesus21.com/content/sex/bible_homosexuality_print.html
http://www.christchapel.com/reclaiming.html
http://www.stjohnsmcc.org/new/BibleAbuse/BiblicalReferences.php
http://www.gaychristian101.com/
http://www.mccchurch.org/AM/Template.cfm?Section=Resources&Template=/CM
/HTMLDisplay.cfm&ContentID=2121
http://www.wouldjesusdiscriminate.org/biblical_evidence.html
http://www.soulforce.org/article/homosexuality-bible-gay-christian
http://www.goodhopemcc.org/spirituality/sexuality-and-bible/homosexuality-not-a-
sin-not-a-sickness.html
The polls above show the effectiveness of a marketing campaign to destroy who we are as a nation.
The polls above show that fair-minded people are coming to dominate while those trapped in outmoded though patterns fading into the past.
The act of legalizing same-sex marriage is not going to suddenly turn heterosexuals into homosexuals who will then run to the arms of the nearest members of the same sex in order to have childless marriages. Heterosexuals will still be heterosexual, and homosexuals will still be homosexual. It will have no negative effect on the US's birth rate whatsoever. In fact, same-sex marriage may even encourage more gay couples to have children, thereby positively affecting the birth rate.
Your argument is *completely* ridiculous.
When people make life-long commitments to each other, and become involved in networks of family support and obligation, this promotes self-restraint, social mores, and real family values. When such people get sick or are otherwise in need of help, they are less likely to require support from public funds (i.e. our taxes). Kids who grow up seeing stable committed relationships among their caretakers are more likely to form stable relationships themselves.
Marriage is a bedrock of society, and people should be encouraged to enter into it. Some very hardcore conservatives might say that government should not privilege some relationships over others at all, and that's a very interesting debate. However, if there is going to be government support for lifelong commitments among individuals, the logic behind doing that applies whether the individuals are gay or straight.
I am saddened that many in the GOP have abandoned real conservative values like these in order to keep peace with the religious right.
Marriage creates families, which are the basic building blocks of society, and same sex marriage would deny the fixed, natural teleology of marriage.
Same sex marriage would automatically deny a child a father or a mother. A loving and compassionate society never intentionally creates motherless or fatherless homes.
Federal and state income taxes will be increased to make up for the new special benefits for same sex couples and to pay for the social costs resulting from the increase in illegitimacy.
Social security taxes will be increased or the benefits will be decreased or both.
Employee benefits will be reduced as employers are mandated to spread their limited benefit dollars.
And so on.
What would be the effect on society if everyone lived faithfully in marriage?
What would be the effect on society if everyone lived faithfully in same sex marriage?
The answer to these questions demonstrate the logic behind the support of marriage.
I am a tax paying citizen of this country, born and raised. YOU have no right to vote on my civil rights.