ABC poll: Majority now supports gay marriage

posted at 6:13 pm on March 18, 2011 by Allahpundit

Libertarian fee-vah: Catch it!

While younger adults and liberals remain at the forefront of support for gay marriage, the new results underscore its expansion. In an ABC/Post poll five and a half years ago, for example, under-30s were the sole age group to give majority support to gay marriage, at 57 percent. Today it’s 68 percent in that group – but also 65 percent among people in their 30s, up a remarkable 23 points from the 2005 level; and 52 percent among those in their 40s, up 17 points…

The poll has an insufficient sample size to evaluate individual racial minority groups reliably. However, support for gay marriage is essentially identical among whites, 53 percent, and nonwhites, 54 percent. That’s up by 13 points among whites – and by 20 among nonwhites.

Support is up by a striking 23 points among white Catholics, often a swing group and one that’s been ready, in many cases, to disregard church positions on political or social issues. But they have company: Fifty-seven percent of non-evangelical white Protestants now also support gay marriage, up 16 points from its level five years ago. Evangelicals, as noted, remain very broadly opposed. But even in their ranks, support for gay marriage is up by a double-digit margin.

Pew’s latest poll on gay marriage also showed a continuing trend in favor, although their numbers aren’t yet at majority levels. The split there was 45/46, up from a 36/53 divide just five years ago. ABC’s result might be slightly skewed since, as the president of the National Organization of Marriage points out, their question asks whether gay marriage should be “legal or illegal.” If a respondent misunderstands and thinks “illegal” would entail criminal penalties, he/she may find that draconian and tilt towards legalization. Even so, ABC says it’s used the same phrasing for this question every time they’ve asked it, so the trend lines should be correct even if the numbers are slightly off. And the trend lines speak for themselves.

Three points to take away here. One: If you’ve been wondering when The One will finally have his long-awaited “epiphany” about gay marriage, the answer is — soon. Probably not before election day — don’t want to scare off any seniors! — but shortly thereafter, maybe when one of our three wars takes a sudden downturn somehow and he needs to shore up leftist support. Two: I wonder how much of the uptick in Pew’s and ABC’s numbers is due to the repeal of DADT. Some gay rights activists had targeted that issue as something that could prepare the ground for broader acceptance of gay rights generally; the thinking goes that if the military, with all the pressure it’s under, can see fit to let gay servicemen serve equally, civilians can probably handle equal marriage rights. No evidence here that that’s what’s driving this, but bear it in mind for future polls. And three: Given the rise in support among various demographics, the politics of this issue will be fascinating to watch in the primaries. No Republican will support gay marriage — thanks to The One, they don’t need to — but I’ll bet most/all end up backing civil unions as a de facto compromise position. It’s risky with religious voters, but the nominee’s going to need centrists in the general election and that’ll help a bit. Besides, they’ve got plenty of cover on the right for supporting CUs, from Rush Limbaugh on up to true gay marriage supporters like Dick Cheney. Which of them, if any, would oppose even civil unions? Huckabee, maybe?

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

Comment pages: 1 2 3

First, it’s gay marriage, then it’s Man-boy love, then it’s marry your dog… when does it end?

So it progresses like that, does it?

First, gays wed.

Next, pedophilia.

Endgame: bestiality.

LOL

Good Lt on March 18, 2011 at 9:42 PM

Why is consensual polygamy evil?

ernesto on March 18, 2011 at 8:21 PM

Google FLDS and “lost boys” and see what the results are. People are generally aware that most of the people that strap on suicide vests are from Muslim nations, but most of those nations are also polygamous. Polygamy changes the dynamic between fathers and sons, and removes the stabilizing force of women and family from a large percentage of young risk taking males. Is that enough?

DFCtomm on March 18, 2011 at 9:43 PM

Proud Rino on March 18, 2011 at 9:40 PM

Your parents were male and female, otherwise you wouldn’t be here. The new fertillzation techniques are just that: new.

kingsjester on March 18, 2011 at 9:44 PM

I don’t subscribe to that way of thinking. Men and women complement each other, and in their differences they foster the development of psychosexually well-adjusted children. Depriving children of one or the other will generally have undesirable consequences. Gay “marriage” intentionally creates families in which such deprivation will occur. I’m not in favor of this for my society, and so I speak out against it.

oakland on March 18, 2011 at 9:30 PM

The dad and mom roles can be very different in families today than 100 years ago, where men and women were less able to depart from more narrow gender definitions.

dedalus on March 18, 2011 at 9:47 PM

DFCtomm, who said anything about choosing one over the other?

hboulware on March 18, 2011 at 8:23 PM

I honestly don’t care that much about gay marriage. They will never achieve their goal of acceptance, but they may destroy government sanctioned marriage. I don’t see it as a culture killer, but polygamy is. I oppose gay marriage because it’s the clear line, and once it’s gone then polygamy is next up, and what’s your argument to stop 1 consenting male from marrying 2 consenting females?

DFCtomm on March 18, 2011 at 9:55 PM

Talk to me when two normally developed humans of the same sex can procreate on their own. Sorry there are differences between men in general and women in general.

CWforFreedom on March 18, 2011 at 9:55 PM

dedalus on March 18, 2011 at 9:47 PM

Men & women are different.

Pretending those differences don’t exist has had detrimental effects on marriages, families and on children.

INC on March 18, 2011 at 9:56 PM

I oppose gay marriage because it’s the clear line, and once it’s gone then polygamy is next up, and what’s your argument to stop 1 consenting male from marrying 2 consenting females?

DFCtomm on March 18, 2011 at 9:55 PM

Yep- In all fairness once gay marriage is legal I don’t know how you can keep anyone from marrying another consenting adult(s).

CWforFreedom on March 18, 2011 at 9:57 PM

Pretending those differences don’t exist has had detrimental effects on marriages, families and on children.

INC on March 18, 2011 at 9:56 PM

You’re arguing with dedalus . Dedalus is empathetic towards mothers who kill their own. Just making the point that the
CPU is warped.

CWforFreedom on March 18, 2011 at 9:58 PM

CWforFreedom on March 18, 2011 at 9:58 PM

You’re right. I forgot.

INC on March 18, 2011 at 10:00 PM

DFCtomm on March 18, 2011 at 9:55 PM

The simple fact is, once the definition of marriage is changed, there is nothing at all preventing it from being stretched to encompass polygamy, marriage to close family, groups of various sizes and sexes, once the can of worms is opened, anything is possible – even probable.

The family, as the basic foundation of civilization since civilization was invented, will be destroyed. In it’s place, will be inserted the god of the progressives – government.

Which is what this is, really, what it is all about. Destroy religion, destroy the family, destroy culture, destroy independence, destroy liberty, destroy economics. The logical conclusion of the progressive movement is to remake people into good little worker ants, striving only for the good of the new aristocracy – the self-proclamed intelligentsia.

And it’s working. Soon we’ll be like Canada, where even voicing opposition to the progressives results in massive punishments.

Rebar on March 18, 2011 at 10:07 PM

Really this whole assault on families and marriage started with feminism. This led to all sorts of cultural and societal breakdowns. Gay rights are the progression of this and unfortunately not the end.

hboulware on March 18, 2011 at 10:16 PM

Your parents were male and female,

They still are, I hope!

otherwise you wouldn’t be here. The new fertillzation techniques are just that: new.

kingsjester on March 18, 2011 at 9:44 PM

I’m just responding to the point that marriage is there to facilitate childbirth. It’s not. The species has managed to propagate itself just fine without marriages, and it will continue to do so regardless of whether the govt sanctions your relationship or not.

Proud Rino on March 18, 2011 at 10:25 PM

Men & women are different.

Pretending those differences don’t exist has had detrimental effects on marriages, families and on children.

INC on March 18, 2011 at 9:56 PM

Men and women are different from one another, but their roles in society and parenting are different today than a century ago. There is more than just biology involved.

dedalus on March 18, 2011 at 10:32 PM

Men & women are different.

Pretending those differences don’t exist has had detrimental effects on marriages, families and on children.

INC on March 18, 2011 at 9:56 PM

They aren’t the same but do you think that they should then be treated differently by government. Should we have a set of laws for women and a different set for men? You seem to be arguing that families and children would be better off if we reflected those differences through policy…. what policies?

lexhamfox on March 18, 2011 at 10:49 PM

This is not good for the Christians in this country as is the liberty of most Americans. The gay rights agenda is predicated on denying one’s liberty, one’s freedom to do otherwise. This being the case, true liberty, true freedom of thought, and the freedom of religion are in jeopardy as a majority of Americans concede ground to the gay rights agenda. We are seeing repeated instances that the acceptance of homosexuality means the persecution of Christians.

This is happening in the UK where they are telling a Christian couple that they cannot be foster care parents because of their view on homosexuality, and it is happening here in America where Christian counseling students are required to attend re-education classes because of their views on homosexuality. This is expected as a society grows increasingly contemptuous of the Gospel of Jesus Christ, so persecution in and of itself is not what concerns me. It is those claiming to be Christians that are helping to bring about this persecution that bothers me. A Christian love is tested by how they love their brethren and helping to bring about the persecution of one’s brethren is the antithesis of love. This is what Liberal Christians are doing by supporting those who want to normalize homosexuality. This shows contempt, a hatred of God’s Commandments, and a hatred of one’s brethren.

http://www.bluecollarphilosophy.com/2011/03/new-poll-shows-majority-of-people-support-gay-marriage-wait-until-2012.html

Blue Collar Todd on March 18, 2011 at 10:51 PM

Let’s vote on it, state by state.

frizzbee on March 18, 2011 at 10:53 PM

I believe 30 states have voted on marriage issue and one man one woman is the winner -no to gay marriages

Bullhead on March 18, 2011 at 11:17 PM

Any btw Who believes an ABC poll anyways.

Bullhead on March 18, 2011 at 11:19 PM

Any btw Who believes an ABC poll anyways.

BINGO!

sinsing on March 19, 2011 at 1:26 AM

Why do Christians allow this to happen? The Bible very specifically states that all homosexuals should be slaughtered, and Jesus himself specifically stated that all the old laws should be obeyed. You guys better get busy. Jesus won’t be happy until every homosexual in America has been burnt at the stake!

Vic on March 19, 2011 at 1:38 AM

Yep- In all fairness once gay marriage is legal I don’t know how you can keep anyone from marrying another consenting adult(s).

CWforFreedom on March 18, 2011 at 9:57 PM

You want to get the gay activists ticked off, try saying this at their rallies. They have no intellectual honesty. Zero.

scotash on March 19, 2011 at 3:34 AM

Every poll suggests more and more people are in favor of gay marriage.

And every actual vote sees it rejected.

Dismissed!

There Goes The Neighborhood on March 19, 2011 at 4:18 AM

Your parents were male and female,

They still are, I hope!

otherwise you wouldn’t be here. The new fertillzation techniques are just that: new.

kingsjester on March 18, 2011 at 9:44 PM

I’m just responding to the point that marriage is there to facilitate childbirth. It’s not. The species has managed to propagate itself just fine without marriages, and it will continue to do so regardless of whether the govt sanctions your relationship or not.

Proud Rino on March 18, 2011 at 10:25 PM

Sorry, I really hate to just dump on a commenter, but this is the ultimate in moronic arguments. Contrary to your assertion, the human race has not been propagating itself without marriage anywhere at any time. Marriage is about as universal across cultures as you can get. Even though how it gets entered varies the world over, every single culture on the face of the planet produces children by a mother and a father who are very nearly always married. On those occasions when a child’s parents are NOT married, it is always recognized as a bad thing, even in more tolerant cultures.

Anybody can produce a child. That has always been the case. You can sire children with one-night stands with crack whores. Nobody is really dumb enough to argue that one-night stands with crack whores are therefore the equivalent of marriage.

If you want to reduce humanity to the level of sheep or goats, then all we have to worry about is producing children. But we are above animals. No animal in existence spends as long raising children to adulthood as humans do. We make music, create art, tell stories, philosophize about the meaning of life, play with words, make jokes, debate the nature and existence of God, etc. Some of us even get into arguments on internet boards.

Producing children is the easy part. Raising children is hard. Even childbirth is short and painless compared to actually taking care of a child from infancy up to adulthood.

None of this, whether marriage or family or raising children in a loving home, was the invention of government. Frankly, government that arrogates to itself the right to declare that what marriage consists of has stepped way out of bounds.

I have to laugh at the people attempting to make a small-government argument for forcing people to accept marriage between two men or two women as normal. You’re not fooling anyone.

There Goes The Neighborhood on March 19, 2011 at 4:49 AM

Why do Christians allow this to happen? The Bible very specifically states that all homosexuals should be slaughtered, and Jesus himself specifically stated that all the old laws should be obeyed. You guys better get busy. Jesus won’t be happy until every homosexual in America has been burnt at the stake!

Vic on March 19, 2011 at 1:38 AM

You exaggerate worst than anyone in the universe.

Why are gays such drama queens? I would bet a Christian is as likely, or maybe even more, to jump in and defend someone being harmed than your average citizen.

hawkdriver on March 19, 2011 at 8:10 AM

I’m a Libertarian who never wants to hear gay marriage anymore. I’m done with it. The country’s falling apart…..

adamsmith on March 19, 2011 at 9:43 AM

A civil union is one thing, marriage is completely different. To say that marriage is outdated or old hat is absurd and a slap in the face. I would disagree that the term gay marriage (as oxymoronical or paradoxical as it is) cheapens actual marriages, but mocks it instead.

For centuries there was no such thing as gay marriage. It’s not as though homosexuals are new to the world either. For example: didn’t parts of the Roman society delight in all manners of sex (be it men and women/women and men, men and men/women and women or groups) yet still marriage was kept intact? If it could last through that, I’m pretty sure it can still last a lot longer than what some are saying here.

Marriage and gay marriage isn’t interchangeable. If that’s the case then what’s to keep us from calling the sun the moon? Maybe we should start calling our dogs’ cats and cats’ dogs? I’m baffled at how some on here can’t remember that words mean things. Some of us would argue that certain institutions have even more meaning.

I’m also slightly amused with liberals defending this as well. Not only do these tree huggers, who continually bombard us with “mother earth” this and “it’s not natural” that, want to drop carbon levels (which will ironically hurt trees). Yet they’ve even toped that! They say homosexuality is fine, yet homosexuality goes against nature.

How’s this for our libertarian friends (which I’m straddling the libertarian/conservative border lines myself):

No government, whether federal or state, should be in the business of marriage whatsoever. It would be up to the various religious institutions to marry who they will or won’t. In turn, no individual can sue a religious place or organization that does not see fit to marry said individual.

My money would be on the Unitarians first “marrying” the gay couples.

roopster217 on March 19, 2011 at 11:46 AM

Sorry, meant to say: “Some of us would argue that certain institutions have certain meanings as well.”

This would be one of them.

roopster217 on March 19, 2011 at 11:58 AM

Why is it invariably progressives and RINOs who will happily wallow in any, any cultural sewer as long as they can feel more important and culturally relevant than religious people?

I guess we’d better give in guys, after all when the streets are littered with trash and there are hookers on every corner, we want to be able to say we saw this coming and were supporting societal decay before it was hip.

BKennedy on March 19, 2011 at 12:14 PM

Why is it invariably progressives and RINOs who will happily wallow in any, any cultural sewer as long as they can feel more important and culturally relevant than religious people?

I guess we’d better give in guys, after all when the streets are littered with trash and there are hookers on every corner, we want to be able to say we saw this coming and were supporting societal decay before it was hip.

BKennedy on March 19, 2011 at 12:14 PM

+100

roopster217 on March 19, 2011 at 12:26 PM

i find it a sad farce when the people who are so scared of gay marriage and wave around the pedophilia flag are the same who cheer Milly cyrus and every other underage actress *cough* Hayden Panettiere.. and some how think that gays must be like you. As a gay man I have never been attracted to under age boys, theres a word for that it’s called pedophilia and it’s illegal and practiced by seriously deranged people. It’s well researched, and well documented. The real point is so called “social conservatives” who think no one should be in their business but can’t wait to jump on their neighbor just because he doesn’t want sex with women. Grow up, go back to your houses and leave my family alone.

Zekecorlain on March 19, 2011 at 1:42 PM

I call Bull Sh_t on this poll! Allahpundit is too kookie for this site! Move to Huffpo please.

tomshup on March 19, 2011 at 1:43 PM

I blame Glee

Dork B. on March 19, 2011 at 2:04 PM

The real point is so called “social conservatives” who think no one should be in their business but can’t wait to jump on their neighbor just because he doesn’t want sex with women. Grow up, go back to your houses and leave my family alone.

Zekecorlain on March 19, 2011 at 1:42 PM

Generalize much, Skippy? Miley Cyrus and some girl we haven’t heard of? Weak.

kingsjester on March 19, 2011 at 3:12 PM

So if gays get to be able to marry each other, then what? So now you can marry. Going to have kids, now? Nope! Biology says you can’t! Oh, you’re going to adopt? Well, okay, I guess you could do that… but you don’t really have to, and again I fear that many gays would adopt just to prove their marriage is as good as everyone else’s.

The problem as I see it is this: Gays want to marry for no other reason besides a desire to be “equal,” but they will never be “equal” because no matter how many laws are passed promoting tolerance and understanding they can’t change the way our bodies work. A gay marriage can only imitate a heterosexual marriage, and it cannot achieve the same things.

If you want to shack up with someone of the same gender then go ahead. I have no religious qualms about it personally. However, you should stop trying to force people to accept you and force your relationships to be the “same” as everyone else’s. It just can’t be done.

R. Waher on March 19, 2011 at 3:38 PM

In the U.S. the states are required them to show that any laws restricting marriage are narrowly tailored to achieve an important objective. Legislators aren’t able to shape marriage law simply based on what voters want. Stopping deadbeat dads from marrying again seems like a good idea to me, but it violates their rights and can’t be done.

dedalus on March 18, 2011 at 7:52 PM

I would think the restriction of marriage to that model of one man and one woman, the safest, most effective, historical bulwark of protecting and nurturing children is a legitimate one.

From a fundamental biological perspective homosexual relationships are inferior to heterosexual relationships for this exact purpose. To acknowledge a homosexual relationship as equal is to say to all children that mothers and fathers are irrelevant, that marriage exists for the sexual pleasure of consenting adults alone and serves no other function but to grant benefits to that end.

At this point I don’t even support civil unions. What makes them any different from contract law, an already existent mechanism for handling matters of estate and health proxy?

Homosexuality happens. That doesn’t mean it deserves special status in any capacity.

BKennedy on March 20, 2011 at 3:39 AM

Same sex marriage. Can’t you just picture the honeymoon night? How romantic!

Mason on March 20, 2011 at 11:20 AM

Fallacy does not cease to be fallacy because it becomes a fashion.

I don’t know if I believe this particular poll, due to the actual voting results in states that have had a vote, but I do believe that this is the way our culture is trending. Young people have been well indoctrinated with the hot heterosexual guys and girls playing homosexuals in Hollywood productions like Brokeback Mountain, Glee, Will and Grace, etc… as well as the job the same people have done in making Christians appear bigoted or ignorant, etc…

The Catholics who make up the 23 point increase just so happen to be heretics and therefore not in communion with the church…you can NOT chose to disregard Church teaching and still be ‘Catholic’. You are then a Catholic Heretic, which is a really bad thing to be.

…those who do such things are worthy of death, but not only those who do them, but those who consent to them that do them.

This will not end well.

pannw on March 20, 2011 at 7:21 PM

I am a gay 60 year-old male, who has been through it all ….. and I really mean it all. When I came of age being homosexual was still thought of as a mental disease. When I hit my 30′s there was AIDS. And, still I stayed in the closet .. and beyond those years. I suffered from waves of depression, suicidal thoughts and I still suffer from social anxiety disorder for which I take medications. I am just too blasted tired to discuss the issue of gay marriage. I can only pray that the gay teenagers of today don’t have to go through what I had to go through.

SC.Charlie on March 20, 2011 at 9:23 PM

First, it’s gay marriage, then it’s Man-boy love, then it’s marry your dog… when does it end?

So it progresses like that, does it?

First, gays wed.

Next, pedophilia.

Endgame: bestiality.

LOL

Good Lt on March 18, 2011 at 9:42 PM
——-
OMG BUT WHAT ARE WE GOING TO DO ABOUT THIS:

First, they let women vote

Then they let children vote

Then they let dogs vote

THIS CANNOT BE ALLOWED TO HAPPEN DOGS CANNOT READ AND VOTE RESPONSIBLY

Dave Rywall on March 21, 2011 at 10:29 AM

Once marriage is defined as a civil right, it cannot be denied to anyone under any circumstance.

While I don’t believe the end game is bestiality, I do believe that some segments of the same-sex marriage movement seek the legitimization of same-sex relationships between adults and children. Here’s something to back that up: Experts in Canada testifying that pedophilia is just another sexual preference. In that case, the libertarian folks are being used to advance something far more sinister.

pdigaudio on March 21, 2011 at 10:30 AM

Comment pages: 1 2 3