REAL polls on gay mairrage

[Guest Cerebus]

Ok, this is more of a supplement to the gay mairrage thread already going on but whatever.

 

From the Pew Research Center done on February 11 - 16, 2004, voters opposed gay mairrages ona two-to-one margin (65%-28%) though this was done before Bush announced his amendment proposal but during the whole debacle in San Fran. Some more tidbits:

 

An ABC News/Washington Post poll conducted Feb. 18-22 showed that 46% support a constitutional amendment while 45% believe it should be up to each state to make its own laws regarding homosexual marriage.

Further, despite the current furor over gay marriage, the public generally does not view a constitutional amendment to ban gay marriage as a top national priority....The issue ranked 21st out of 22 items tested.

About a third of voters (34%) say they would not support a candidate who favors gay marriage, even if they agree with the candidate on most other issues. By comparison, just 6% of voters say they would not back a candidate who opposes gay marriage, even if the candidate is otherwise acceptable.

[Guest Agent of Oblivion]

Voters approved prohibition of alcohol as an amendment, too, if I'm not mistaken.

[Guest Cerebus]

Voters approved prohibition of alcohol as an amendment, too, if I'm not mistaken.

Polls don't necessarily show how good or bad something is per se. They show how good or bad the public CONSIDERS something. So, you're probably right but its a non-sequitur.

[Guest Agent of Oblivion]

My point was that contemporary public opinion shouldn't dictate the foundation of our constitution.

[Guest Cerebus]

My point was that contemporary public opinion shouldn't dictate the foundation of our constitution.

Then what should? That's why the framers put in ways to amend the constiution by both indirect (state assemblies) AND direct (Constiutional Conventions) ways after all. And if you don't think politicians are affected by public opinion polls, then maybe you'd like to see this fine bridge I have for sale.

[Guest Agent of Oblivion]

I look at both the situations, and I see similarities, though. Prohibition and banning Gay Marriage via an amendment, I mean. They seem like overstuffed right-wing posturing against something that isn't really hurting anyone. Granted, no one's going to go around sneaking gays about with Tommyguns and fast cars, but it's the principle of the matter.

 

As for you point about amending the constitution, I'll concede that, but add that public opinion can be pretty stupid, occasionally ending up in yet ANOTHER amendment.

[Guest Cerebus]

I look at both the situations, and I see similarities, though. Prohibition and banning Gay Marriage via an amendment, I mean. They seem like overstuffed right-wing posturing against something that isn't really hurting anyone. Granted, no one's going to go around sneaking gays about with Tommyguns and fast cars, but it's the principle of the matter.

 

As for you point about amending the constitution, I'll concede that, but add that public opinion can be pretty stupid, occasionally ending up in yet ANOTHER amendment.

No argument there (I DO work in politics after all) but the idea is, if people, not politicians necessarily, are stupid enough to put a bad idea as the Law of the Land then they deserve what they get. It's not as simple as that, but that's the generalization. Either way, this is probably why you don't see Kerry or Edwards opposing gay mairrage. It's anybody's guess if they don't personally believe in it, but the fact that 34% say they would not support a candidate who favors gay marriage, even if they agree with the candidate on most other issues doesn't bode well for the canidates to outright support it.

[Guest hunger4unger]

The US constitution should be left alone. There is no other arguement.

[Guest Agent of Oblivion]

Yet you said in another thread that all guns should be banned?

 

I think you're confused..

[Guest hunger4unger]

Yet you said in another thread that all guns should be banned?

 

I think you're confused..

I didnt realize that it was in the constitution regarding guns. If that's the case then despite my feelings towards the subject, guns should stay.

[Styles 0]

The US constitution should be left alone. There is no other arguement.

You don't have a say either way, thank God.

[EricMM 0]

oh god, h4u, what...

 

I mean christ it's the 2nd amendmant...

 

Where are you FROM?

 

What do you KNOW, if you don't know that?

[Guest MikeSC]

Yet you said in another thread that all guns should be banned?

 

I think you're confused..

I didnt realize that it was in the constitution regarding guns. If that's the case then despite my feelings towards the subject, guns should stay.

Heck, out of curiosity, what do you think IS in the US Constitution?

-=Mike

[Styles 0]

oh god, h4u, what...

 

I mean christ it's the 2nd amendmant...

 

Where are you FROM?

 

What do you KNOW, if you don't know that?

He's already demonstrated he doesn't know much about the US, its history, culture or laws but continues to project his hateful, ignorant opinions into our affairs regardless. I don't know where he's from (somewhere in Europe) but I won't guess because I don't want to give all his countrimen a bad name.

[Guest Agent of Oblivion]

He's makin' it up as he goes along. This kid's awful.

[Guest thebigjig]

If I'm not mistaken the kid is from Canada... can you name some of the major Canadian laws, and/or constitutional ammendmant, that is if Canada has a constitution? I have no clue... I know absolutely nothing about Canada

 

He has a right to voice his opinion, just like we have a right to complain about Canada and or any other place on the earth... you dont have to have a degree in US History to have the right to do that

[Styles 0]

If I'm not mistaken the kid is from Canada... can you name some of the major Canadian laws, and/or constitutional ammendmant, that is if Canada has a constitution? I have no clue... I know absolutely nothing about Canada

 

He has a right to voice his opinion, just like we have a right to complain about Canada and or any other place on the earth... you dont have to have a degree in US History to have the right to do that

I don't talk about Canada or any other country's business unless I've actually learned a little something about an issue! Of course he can give his opinions but the fact that he continues to mock and discredit our country and government without even bothering to KNOW WHAT HE'S TALKING ABOUT, is unacceptable. If I was going to insult something Canada did I would give Canadiens at least the decency of, you know, knowing the important issues involved...

[treble 0]

You could also give us the decency of spelling 'Canadians' right, too.

[Styles 0]

You could also give us the decency of spelling 'Canadians' right, too. 

shudup, ya wacky Canuck!

[sfaJack 0]

If I'm not mistaken the kid is from Canada

Actually, he's British, I believe. In addition to Bush & America, he seems to hate Tony Blair with a passion as well.

[Kahran Ramsus 0]

Yeah, don't insult us Canadians for something we didn't do. We don't want this moron in our country any more than you do.

 

And yes, we have a Constitution.

 

http://www.solon.org/Constitutions/Canada/...sh/ca_1982.html

[Styles 0]

Yeah, don't insult us Canadians for something we didn't do. We don't want this moron in our country any more than you do.

 

And yes, we have a Constitution.

So, do you guys have like clothes and houses and stuff, or do you live in igloos?

[Kahran Ramsus 0]

Yeah, don't insult us Canadians for something we didn't do.  We don't want this moron in our country any more than you do.

 

And yes, we have a Constitution.

So, do you guys have like clothes and houses and stuff, or do you live in igloos?

[Firestarter 0]

I think they're called teepees.

[Slayer 0]

Don't forget the pet penguins

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

(*- Yes I know penguins don't naturally live in the Northern hemisphere, before someone feels the need to bring that up)

[Kahran Ramsus 0]

You mean polar bears.

 

And beavers, of course...

[Slayer 0]

And beavers, of course...

Since French-Canadian women don't shave...

[MarvinisaLunatic 0]

Somehow the whole "Gay Marriage Debate" reeks of "lets completely ignore the real issues in an election year and focus on something that really shouldn't be a federal government issue in the first place"

 

Amendment 10 of the US Constitution:

 

The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the states, are reserved to the states respectively, or to the people.

 

Marriages are a states right which is why each state can have different rules about mariages. I don't see how the Federal Government should have any say in matters of marriage, even if the marriages aren't your traditional Man/Woman variety. Let the states decide on their own.

[kkktookmybabyaway 0]

Bob, you were right...

[TheBigSwigg 0]

The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the states, are reserved to the states respectively, or to the people

 

If you read this properly, you'll see that it says "Nor prohibited by the states." This means, even though the federal gov't has never intervened before, as long as the states don't complain, the federal gov't has the right to rule on it. This includes making amendments, etc. I honestly think most states would give the issue to the federal government just so they don't have the responsibility. Think about it, if you could pass off such a controversial issue, wouldn't you?

Anyway, I think the mayor of San Fran. is a moron because he compared himself to Rosa Parks. The difference being he is a civil servant and she was not. If the mayor of a city ignores state laws, what is to stop the residents of that city from doing the same?