Poll: 50% say Equal Protection Clause of U.S. Constitution gives gays the right to marry

posted at 5:21 pm on June 6, 2014 by Allahpundit

Four years ago, the split was 49/51. Today it’s 50/43, although I think this poll’s less interesting for the change it shows over time than for the change it doesn’t show. Three months ago, WaPo asked this same question and got a 50/41 split. I thought the flurry of federal-court decisions recently giving gays the right to marry in states like Pennsylvania might trigger a backlash, if not to SSM itself than to SSM imposed by federal order, but today’s number is basically identical to the last one. Americans are not being sticklers in demanding that gay marriage be legalized through democratic processes instead of judicial ones.

Hard to say if the following is noise or a shift/backlash in the making, but it’s worth flagging. Bear in mind that partisan subsamples have larger margins of error than the overall sample. Here’s the result from March, when WaPo first asked whether the Equal Protection Clause does or doesn’t give gays the right to marry…

mar

…versus the result from today:

jun

Maybe the court decisions are boosting Democratic enthusiasm while giving some GOP/indie fencesitters pause. The overall stasis in opinion is preserved because the growing Democratic numbers are offset by the decline in the two other groups, but there’s every reason to believe that Democratic support for judge-backed SSM will continue to grow. And thus so will the overall number, unless that backlash on the right finally materializes. A SCOTUS ruling might do it, but if I had to bet, I’d bet that the net effect of a Supreme Court decision would be to further legitimize gay marriage in the eyes of undecideds rather than instigate a revolt against the Court for trumping state legislatures. We’ll see, probably within the next three years.

One other interesting tidbit from today’s data. You know how amnesty fans are forever insisting that Latinos are natural conservatives because they allegedly lean right on social issues? About that:

his

Part of that eye-popping 59 percent figure almost certainly is statistical noise caused by the larger subsample margin of error. Back in March, WaPo found the split among Latinos to be just 42/40. They didn’t go from narrow plurality to near-supermajority in three months, but that’s not to say the numbers didn’t grow a bit during that time. If you’re inclined to buy the “natural conservative” nonsense, do some googling on polls measuring Latino opinion on gay marriage. They’re in line with Democratic opinion generally. Go figure.

By the way, as of this afternoon, the last of the 50 states that had yet to face a court battle over its SSM ban is now being sued in federal court.


Related Posts:

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

Pretty sure the Constitution doesn’t give anyone the Right to marry.

But if it does, I’m sure that same page also lists the right smoke tobacco and have a 16oz soda. And salt.

BobMbx on June 6, 2014 at 5:26 PM

Public Education….

William Eaton on June 6, 2014 at 5:27 PM

Do they also think affirmative action violates the equal protection clause? Does this mean the drinking age has to be 18?

Flange on June 6, 2014 at 5:28 PM

I blame “Modern Family.”

Also Constitutional ignorance.

Either/or really.

Kensington on June 6, 2014 at 5:28 PM

Wasn’t this already posted today, but in different form? My answer remains the same: 50%+ voted for Obama…twice.

Othniel on June 6, 2014 at 5:29 PM

The Latinos coming here from all points Mexico and south, are anything BUT Conservative, or even moderate for that matter. They’re solid (D) at best and hardcore leftist at worst.

That’s all they know, and will vote that way accordingly.

But hey, if the Chamber of Commerce pays you enough, you just have to support amnesty, huh GOPe? Buncha’ rats.

Meople on June 6, 2014 at 5:29 PM

Wasn’t this already posted today, but in different form?

Othniel on June 6, 2014 at 5:29 PM

All gay all the time!

Kensington on June 6, 2014 at 5:30 PM

Equal Protection Clause of U.S. Constitution gives gays the right to marry

“Gays” have always had the right to marry.

whatcat on June 6, 2014 at 5:30 PM

I’m not sure the “Equal Protection” clause gives this generation of dolts the “Right” to modify (for succeeding generationsand cultures) the definition of a transcending foundational social institution enjoyed by every culture, race and generation since the dawn of human history.

Marriage was an institution not created by man, rather it has been handed down faithfully for millennia by billions of people. They have zero authority, under any document, to change that they never owned or even understood.

We are only charged with the duty to pass it intact to the next generation.

Reuben Hick on June 6, 2014 at 5:30 PM

This just in: 50% plus believes The Constitution guarantees an all-encompassing right to vote.
A decent percentage believes The Bill of Rights are individual rights yet somehow the Second Amendment only grants governments the right to keep and bear arms.

Judge_Dredd on June 6, 2014 at 5:30 PM

50% say Equal Protection Clause of U.S. Constitution gives gays the right to marry

Never mind that it DOESN’T.

Pork-Chop on June 6, 2014 at 5:32 PM

Can we start exercising the Equal Protection Clause for Obama’s selective enforcement of the “Law of the Land” ObamaCare?

Or can we start using it against Obama’s Department of Social Justice selectively prosecuting only Obama’s political enemies?

Or can we use it to combat Obama’s weaponizing of the IRS?

Meople on June 6, 2014 at 5:33 PM

Wasn’t this already posted today, but in different form?

Othniel on June 6, 2014 at 5:29 PM

Of course it was but king RINO Allah loves himself some good news.

The Notorious G.O.P on June 6, 2014 at 5:34 PM

Meh… Allahpundit is just phoning this in… No seriously, he’s at the Gayest gay club in Manhattan doing the snoopy gay dance celebrating…

oscarwilde on June 6, 2014 at 5:35 PM

If that is the case the the constitution gives you the right to be a pedophile also.

The Notorious G.O.P on June 6, 2014 at 5:35 PM

Equal protection for gender, race, religion (faith), and national origin? Yes.

Equal protection for conduct? No.

BuckeyeSam on June 6, 2014 at 5:36 PM

The salient point is that the constitution does not give the government any authority regarding marriage whatsoever.

M240H on June 6, 2014 at 5:36 PM

100 years of public education mean most Americans have only vague notions of what the Constitution says or means. And recent immigrants have even less, no matter where they come from.

rockmom on June 6, 2014 at 5:40 PM

Laughed out loud at the idea that this or any other poll on “The Equal Protection Clause” could mean anything in a country where almost no one could tell you what “The Equal Protection Clause” is. :)

Why not poll people on whether they think cumulative damage to centromeres can be reversed by Gatorade?

40% of Democrats say aye, but 60% of Independents are unsure.

Axe on June 6, 2014 at 5:41 PM

The Supreme Court will strike down all remaining bans very soon. My guess is by June 2015. The justices will probably try to avoid an election year decision and it’s going to be impossible for them to avoid the issue until after 2016 given all the lawsuits, so they’ll take up the first case that makes it their way and decide it next term.

DisneyFan on June 6, 2014 at 5:41 PM

The core of the argument for me has never been whether gays could marry or not. It’s whether gays or any minority can force others to embrace their lifestyle.

That is really the underlying issue. Not that they have the right to marry.. but will I be forced to marry you. Will I be forced to bake your wedding cake. Will I be foreced to attend your wedding.

That is the argument. Everything else is just pink fluff.

JellyToast on June 6, 2014 at 5:42 PM

BobMbx on June 6, 2014 at 5:26 PM

We seem to be finding constitutional rights everywhere in the modern era. Rights that the founders had no intention of providing. That is apparently “progress”, as the “progressives” see it. Making it up as they go.

I’m not sure the “Equal Protection” clause gives this generation of dolts the “Right” to modify (for succeeding generationsand cultures) the definition of a transcending foundational social institution enjoyed by every culture, race and generation since the dawn of human history.

Reuben Hick on June 6, 2014 at 5:30 PM

Marriage has become a joke in the last 50 years or so, really longer. This simply completes it. Marriage, as you say, is (or was) a cultural institution, not a constitutionally created one. But institution, it is no more. It is a joke. Marry, divorce, same-sex – hey, donkeys, multiple husbands/wives, what-have-you. In a year, break it all up and start over.

Screw it. Marriage is dead. There is a saying that when you believe in everything, you believe in nothing.

Chuck Ef on June 6, 2014 at 5:43 PM

Apparently 50% have no clue what the 14th amendment states:

14TH AMENDMENT

AMENDMENT XIV

SECTION 1.

All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the state wherein they reside. No state shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any state deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.

P.S.: I keep hearing about these polls, and yet most of the time when it comes to voting, people are against ssm. It’s almost as if polls are lying (sarc)

Nevsky on June 6, 2014 at 5:43 PM

If over 50 percent of Americans actually were in favor of gay marriage, there would be no need for activist judges to take away the outcome of voting against it in the majority of American States.

kingsjester on June 6, 2014 at 5:44 PM

The Constitution does not give rights. It simply says the government can’t violate them.

CurtZHP on June 6, 2014 at 5:46 PM

Is there any legal difference between a domestic partnership and marriage?

valentine on June 6, 2014 at 5:46 PM

Of course it was but king RINO Allah loves himself some good news.

The Notorious G.O.P on June 6, 2014 at 5:34 PM

Wait a minute, I thought HotAir had conservatives working for them?

reddevil on June 6, 2014 at 5:46 PM

And not only does the constitution not address marriage in any direct or tangential way, the first and tenth amendments preclude the federal government from doing so. Which makes DOMA a silly legal effort and also makes Eric Holder’s opinions on the matter irrelevant.

But hey, you all keep on arguing for the big, intrusive government that you do like.

M240H on June 6, 2014 at 5:47 PM

First, about the “equality” argument. Gays already have exactly the same rights as heteros – to marry another sex. It is not like heteros have withold that right from them, or that heteros can marry same sex but gays cannot. So the “equality” argument, what’s the technical word… BS.

Secondly, about Constitutionality. Declaration of Independence specifies what rights are Constitutional and gives example of them (Life, Liberty and the Pursuit of happiness) – aka Natural Rights. Homosexuality is NOT a Natural Right.

Furthermore, DoI specifies where the Constitutional right come from the Creator. And He most definitely does not consider homosexuality a right, just the opposite

Nevsky on June 6, 2014 at 5:48 PM

The Supreme Court will strike down all remaining bans very soon.

DisneyFan on June 6, 2014 at 5:41 PM

Why would they give special rights to people indulging in a behavior, when it’s been proven that homosexuality is not genetic?

Rebar on June 6, 2014 at 5:50 PM

The Supreme Court will strike down all remaining bans very soon. My guess is by June 2015. The justices will probably try to avoid an election year decision and it’s going to be impossible for them to avoid the issue until after 2016 given all the lawsuits, so they’ll take up the first case that makes it their way and decide it next term.

DisneyFan on June 6, 2014 at 5:41 PM

In Colorado 8 years ago, we set the definition of marriage as a man and a woman, as an amendment to the state Constitution. I doubt they’ll be striking that down any time soon.

Not that it matters too much, the courts forcing businesses to support illegal marriages and all here.

Meople on June 6, 2014 at 5:52 PM

That is really the underlying issue. Not that they have the right to marry.. but will I be forced to marry you. Will I be forced to bake your wedding cake. Will I be forced to attend your wedding.

If I was the photographer or baker being forced to participate, those photos would all come out blurry, and who knows what might end up in the cake. Oops!

SailorMark on June 6, 2014 at 5:52 PM

I wonder if those same “people” would think that the Equal Protection Clause of the Constitution would mean that the IRS has to treat all people/groups equally or just f*ck the conservatives because they are mean?

I know what I think.

jukin3 on June 6, 2014 at 5:53 PM

not exactly relevant, but this “no comment” needed a post
http://www.aroundthecapitol.com/districts/SD26/

corona79 on June 6, 2014 at 5:54 PM

Sad times we live in.

We tend to follow Europe. There is some hope for a renaissance there – but if so – they had to slog in mediocrity for a while.
America is headed there.

22044 on June 6, 2014 at 5:54 PM

Meh…Don’t care anymore. The laws of men are irrelevant when matched against the laws of God. Just because man says that an act of sin is legal does not make it any less sinful in the eyes of God. The same can be said of abortion. Just because our courts deem the vile act legal, it does not grant the offender God’s Grace. Now, that’s just fine for those of you who have no faith in God or the Bible. Those that claim the Bible as the Word of God need to pay serious attention. The Bible also says that this very process of turning away from God and the Word is going to occur. We will devolve into the abyss of a morally bankrupt, nation of miscreants and heathens. Those of us who hold fast to our faith will be mocked, ridiculed, persecuted, and ultimately killed for our beliefs. This WILL happen, folks, and it will happen here in America. The march towards spiritual and moral decimation is well under way. And I, for one, welcome it. For it means that the return of Jesus Christ to claim His Kingdom is imminent. Hallelujah, Praise the Lord!!

bimmcorp on June 6, 2014 at 5:54 PM

So, then, does the Equal Protection Clause of U.S. Constitution give the Christian baker the right to say “Fcuk you!” to the Gaystopo? Or does it require the Christian to lay down like a doormat?

ExpressoBold on June 6, 2014 at 5:54 PM

I wonder if those same “people” would think that the Equal Protection Clause of the Constitution would mean that the IRS has to treat all people/groups equally or just f*ck the conservatives because they are mean?

I know what I think.

jukin3 on June 6, 2014 at 5:53 PM

It think the vast majority of them would be fine with that and worse as long as it’s not being done to THEIR side.

If it’s Conservatives, it’s A-OK!

Meople on June 6, 2014 at 5:55 PM

I will support their right to legalized butt sex when they support my much-less-questionable right to own and carry weapons. Not holding my breath, though.

Rix on June 6, 2014 at 5:56 PM

bimmcorp on June 6, 2014 at 5:54 PM

+ 1000!

SailorMark on June 6, 2014 at 5:56 PM

80% of the country has no clue what is written in the U.S. Constitution.

ThePainfulTruth on June 6, 2014 at 5:57 PM

Americans are not being sticklers in demanding that gay marriage be legalized through democratic processes instead of judicial ones.

that’s really scary. it’s scary that there are so many people who don’t understand what’s wrong with this.

Sachiko on June 6, 2014 at 5:57 PM

ExpressoBold on June 6, 2014 at 5:54 PM

I think you know the progressive/msm/hollyweird answer to that.

jukin3 on June 6, 2014 at 5:57 PM

So, then, does the Equal Protection Clause of U.S. Constitution give the Christian baker the right to say “Fcuk you!” to the Gaystopo? Or does it require the Christian to lay down like a doormat?

ExpressoBold on June 6, 2014 at 5:54 PM

No, apparently it doesn’t. Some kangaroo court ruled they have to support the illegal wedding anyway. And then attend a re-education camp for their “intolerance”.

I’m not making this up either. Was in the news a couple days ago.

All that and gay marriage is illegal as per our state Constitution. Guess the court didn’t read that first.

Meople on June 6, 2014 at 5:58 PM

I will support their right to legalized butt sex when they support my much-less-questionable right to own and carry weapons. Not holding my breath, though.

Rix on June 6, 2014 at 5:56 PM

Guess which activity kills more Americans every year since 1985?

jukin3 on June 6, 2014 at 5:59 PM

Furthermore, DoI specifies where the Constitutional right come from the Creator. And He most definitely does not consider homosexuality a right, just the opposite

Nevsky on June 6, 2014 at 5:48 PM

While I agree with the preamble, this statement is kinda iffy. If I do not believe in the Creator, which is my unquestionable and unalienable right, where do my other rights (or yours, for the matter) come from?

Rix on June 6, 2014 at 6:00 PM

I wonder if those same “people” would think that the Equal Protection Clause of the Constitution would mean that the IRS has to treat all people/groups equally or just f*ck the conservatives because they are mean?

I know what I think.

jukin3 on June 6, 2014 at 5:53 PM

liberals love equality. they think all people who support gay marriage should be treated equally.

Sachiko on June 6, 2014 at 6:00 PM

Guess which activity kills more Americans every year since 1985?

jukin3 on June 6, 2014 at 5:59 PM

No idea, but let me throw a guess… Excessive taxation?

Rix on June 6, 2014 at 6:01 PM

“Gays” have always had the right to marry.

whatcat

True – otherwise Liza Minelli would never have been married.

Look, Governor McGreevey of NJ was married twice.

Gays want to marry the same sex, which is redefining what marriage is, but a gay man could always marry a woman, gay or straight.

Wander on June 6, 2014 at 6:04 PM

There is no, and never has been, a right to marry. Not for normal folks or any one. Society has always had the power to set the standards for which marriage is approved. There is no biological purpose to same sex marriage.

Zelsdorf Ragshaft on June 6, 2014 at 6:09 PM

True – otherwise Liza Minelli would never have been married.

Look, Governor McGreevey of NJ was married twice.

Gays want to marry the same sex, which is redefining what marriage is, but a gay man could always marry a woman, gay or straight.

Wander on June 6, 2014 at 6:04 PM

and of course, gay marriage supporters will never bring this up. they’ll continue to make all of their arguments based on the false premise that gay people supposedly aren’t allowed to get married.

Sachiko on June 6, 2014 at 6:12 PM

While I agree with the preamble, this statement is kinda iffy. If I do not believe in the Creator, which is my unquestionable and unalienable right, where do my other rights (or yours, for the matter) come from?

Rix on June 6, 2014 at 6:00 PM

Great question, but I didn’t write it, Founders did. It is what it is. A package. Without the Creator the rest falls apart.

Nevsky on June 6, 2014 at 6:13 PM

CIA now on Twitter:

The Associated Press @AP · 22s

RT @AP_Politics: Launching Twitter feed, CIA says it can neither confirm nor deny its first tweet. http://apne.ws/1nXHsPE
========================================================

CIAVerified account
@CIA

We are the Nation’s first line of defense. We accomplish what others cannot accomplish and go where others cannot go.
Langley, VA
cia.gov

https://twitter.com/CIA

canopfor on June 6, 2014 at 6:13 PM

Being a Math major, I know equal means “EXACTLY the same”.

What percentage of the population is gay? Let’s say 3%, which means 97% is hetersexual. Now what would happen if things were reversed, i.e. 3% hetero, 97% gay? How long do you think THAT society would last?

The same amount of time? If not, how can they be ‘equal’? Which behavior should society advocate if it wishes to survive?

LouisianaLightning on June 6, 2014 at 6:16 PM

Meh…Don’t care anymore. The laws of men are irrelevant when matched against the laws of God…

Very true.

Everyone in this country is free to exercise their religious beliefs…or none at all…and that’s guaranteed by the Constitution. But the Constitution is not God’s Law…it’s man’s law. And man’s law applies to everyone, regardless of any religion, not the other way around.

JetBoy on June 6, 2014 at 6:17 PM

1005 people inside the beltway of DC doesn’t represent America

DanMan on June 6, 2014 at 6:17 PM

US same-sex marriage
9m
Federal judge overturns Wisconsin’s ban on same-sex marriage, ruling it unconstitutional – @tmj4
Read more on http://www.jrn.com
========================

The Associated Press @AP · 1m

Federal judge strikes down Wisconsin’s ban on same-sex marriage as unconstitutional: http://apne.ws/1nXFleP

The Associated Press @AP · 2h

MORE: Lawsuit challenges ban on same-sex marriage in North Dakota: http://apne.ws/1oAxIHc

The Associated Press @AP · 3h

BREAKING: Lawsuit filed to block nation’s last unchallenged same-sex marriage ban in North Dakota.

canopfor on June 6, 2014 at 6:18 PM

CIA now on Twitter:

The Associated Press @AP · 22s

RT @AP_Politics: Launching Twitter feed, CIA says it can neither confirm nor deny its first tweet. http://apne.ws/1nXHsPE
========================================================

CIAVerified account
@CIA

We are the Nation’s first line of defense. We accomplish what others cannot accomplish and go where others cannot go.
Langley, VA
cia.gov

https://twitter.com/CIA

canopfor on June 6, 2014 at 6:13 PM

HEY, that’s great! Now they have tweets to go along with their bogus YouTube videos to help the Regime cover up for their illegal activity.

Seriously, can this Regime get ANY lower?

Meople on June 6, 2014 at 6:20 PM

BREAKING: Lawsuit filed to block nation’s last unchallenged same-sex marriage ban in North Dakota.

canopfor on June 6, 2014 at 6:18 PM

Ah, North Dakota. I can only assume there’s maybe one gay couple there. ;)

JetBoy on June 6, 2014 at 6:21 PM

While I agree with the preamble, this statement is kinda iffy. If I do not believe in the Creator, which is my unquestionable and unalienable right, where do my other rights (or yours, for the matter) come from?

Rix on June 6, 2014 at 6:00 PM

Nobody. To not believe in a Creator, is to not believe in the constitution. Therefore, you have no ‘rights’ granted you.

bimmcorp on June 6, 2014 at 6:21 PM

US same-sex marriage
9m
Federal judge overturns Wisconsin’s ban on same-sex marriage, ruling it unconstitutional – @tmj4
Read more on http://www.jrn.com
========================

The Associated Press @AP · 1m

Federal judge strikes down Wisconsin’s ban on same-sex marriage as unconstitutional: http://apne.ws/1nXFleP

The Associated Press @AP · 2h

MORE: Lawsuit challenges ban on same-sex marriage in North Dakota: http://apne.ws/1oAxIHc

The Associated Press @AP · 3h

BREAKING: Lawsuit filed to block nation’s last unchallenged same-sex marriage ban in North Dakota.

canopfor on June 6, 2014 at 6:18 PM

So, how does that address Colorado’s ban, which is an amendment to the state’s Constitution?

Meople on June 6, 2014 at 6:22 PM

Allahpundit comes out as being gay next week? I don’t see this becoming blockbuster thread.

SC.Charlie on June 6, 2014 at 6:23 PM

Everyone in this country is free to exercise their religious beliefs…or none at all…and that’s guaranteed by the Constitution. But the Constitution is not God’s Law…it’s man’s law. And man’s law applies to everyone, regardless of any religion, not the other way around.

JetBoy on June 6, 2014 at 6:17 PM

Correct. And the institution of marriage is a theological institution and the Constitution is intentionally silent on the matter. Appropriately so. Marriage is between one man, one woman and God. Pretty simple, really. Glad you finally see things my way. You should teach all of your gay pals the same lesson. It sure would save a lot of grief. But you and I both know this is NOT about marriage, don’t we?

bimmcorp on June 6, 2014 at 6:25 PM

Nobody. To not believe in a Creator, is to not believe in the constitution. Therefore, you have no ‘rights’ granted you.

bimmcorp on June 6, 2014 at 6:21 PM

S/He would still have the rights (if those in charge believ in the Creator and DoI/Constitution)

Otherwise… history of the last century is full of examples that demonstrate what kind of rights non-believers [in-charge] grant to citizens

Nevsky on June 6, 2014 at 6:25 PM

Allahpundit comes out as being gay next week? I don’t see this becoming blockbuster thread. – SC.Charlie on June 6, 2014 at 6:23 PM

Oops, let me rephrase my post.

I don’t see this thread becoming a blockbuster thread. Now if Allahpundit came out as gay next week that might break a record.

SC.Charlie on June 6, 2014 at 6:26 PM

Is marriage now something we’re Constitutionally entitled to?

I’ve almost reached the point where I don’t care – a marriage is by definition between one man and one woman. Anything else will be a “qualified” marriage – as in gay marriage, polygamist marriage. I suppose it isn’t much stranger than when people have dog marriages.

katiejane on June 6, 2014 at 6:26 PM

To not believe in a Creator, is to not believe in the constitution. Therefore, you have no ‘rights’ granted you.

bimmcorp on June 6, 2014 at 6:21 PM

ಠ_ಠ

JetBoy on June 6, 2014 at 6:26 PM

S/He would still have the rights (if those in charge believ in the Creator and DoI/Constitution)

Otherwise… history of the last century is full of examples that demonstrate what kind of rights non-believers [in-charge] grant to citizens

Nevsky on June 6, 2014 at 6:25 PM

You are parsing words. He/she would be treated as though he/she had such rights…but he/she clearly has been ‘granted’ nothing.

bimmcorp on June 6, 2014 at 6:31 PM

ಠ_ಠ

JetBoy on June 6, 2014 at 6:26 PM

Tough concept, right JB?

bimmcorp on June 6, 2014 at 6:32 PM

You are parsing words. He/she would be treated as though he/she had such rights…but he/she clearly has been ‘granted’ nothing.

bimmcorp on June 6, 2014 at 6:31 PM

I accept the correction. Creator gives rights, and they exist whether honored or violated.

A believer would honor these rights [not grant them, since they are Creator granted]. An unbeliever, not so much

Nevsky on June 6, 2014 at 6:34 PM

Oops, let me rephrase my post.

I don’t see this thread becoming a blockbuster thread. Now if Allahpundit came out as gay next week that might break a record.

SC.Charlie on June 6, 2014 at 6:26 PM

So you’re saying that when Rothman joins HotAir he won’t be covering the Homo beat?

reddevil on June 6, 2014 at 6:35 PM

I blame “Modern Family.”

Also Constitutional ignorance.

Either/or really.

Kensington on June 6, 2014 at 5:28 PM

Benighted with propaganda.

INC on June 6, 2014 at 6:43 PM

Nevsky on June 6, 2014 at 6:34 PM

Thanks. That was my point. And the entire institution of marriage is of the church and has nothing to do with the Federal Government. That’s why the Constitution is silent on the matter. Regardless of how much the homosexuals whine and pound their little clenched fists, that fact remains. And, according to the church, marriage is a covenant between one man, one woman, and God. There are no variances.

bimmcorp on June 6, 2014 at 6:44 PM

Great question, but I didn’t write it, Founders did. It is what it is. A package. Without the Creator the rest falls apart.

Nevsky on June 6, 2014 at 6:13 PM

Agreed. Look how far we came in the first 150+ years with the idea of absolute truths and the Creator behind them. Some colonies along the east coast to a world superpower. Look at us now with sixty years of truth is what we decide what it is. Bankrupt financially and morally. we’re rotting from the inside out.

wifarmboy on June 6, 2014 at 6:49 PM

So you’re saying that when Rothman joins HotAir he won’t be covering the Homo beat? – reddevil on June 6, 2014 at 6:35 PM

I think that all writers for HotAir cover the gay rights issue. Allahpundit is known only to the people at HotAir. You must be new to HotAir, right? Frankly, today I would rather discuss other issues. Have at it. I am watching “Saving Private Ryan” in about one hour. Surely there were no gay soldiers fighting on that beach to liberate Europe.

SC.Charlie on June 6, 2014 at 6:50 PM

. Hallelujah, Praise the Lord!!

bimmcorp on June 6, 2014 at 5:54 PM

You are easily amused, Needlenose. A sticky keyboard is a hoot. Meanwhile, your freakin’ country is on the verge of collapse and you yuck it up over a typo?? Hope you get AIDS, Princess.

bimmcorp on June 5, 2014 at 5:32 PM

Good Christian.

bazil9 on June 6, 2014 at 6:52 PM

nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.

Seems pretty obvious to me. If straight people have a right to marry the single consenting adult of their choosing, so do gay people.

DoI specifies where the Constitutional right come from the Creator. And He most definitely does not consider homosexuality a right, just the opposite

Constitution comes from a bunch of guys in Philadelphia, a bunch of guys who fought to set the stage for that convention, and a bunch of guys who ratified it. God ain’t in the document. If you want to live in a theocracy, I hear Turkey’s going that way, but you can still get a drink.

There is no, and never has been, a right to marry. Not for normal folks or any one. Society has always had the power to set the standards for which marriage is approved. There is no biological purpose to same sex marriage.

Zelsdorf Ragshaft on June 6, 2014 at 6:09 PM

The Supreme Court disagrees. See Loving v. Virginia.

“Marriage is one of the “basic civil rights of man,” fundamental to our very existence and survival…. To deny this fundamental freedom on so unsupportable a basis as the racial classifications embodied in these statutes, classifications so directly subversive of the principle of equality at the heart of the Fourteenth Amendment, is surely to deprive all the State’s citizens of liberty without due process of law.”

urban elitist on June 6, 2014 at 6:55 PM

The states have a right to limit or expand the conditions under which a contract may be formed, the Constitution requires states to honor a legal contract legally enacted and enforced in another state.
So, by my limited understanding of constitutional law, if a same sex (married under a state recognized contract) couple from Washington, the only state I know for sure, to vote for legal gay marriage, moved to Texas that couple would have the right to receive all the benefits that other couples do according to the laws of the state.
Texas would not be obligated under the Constitution to grant gay marriages but would have to recognize and accommodate the legal contract from Washington. I don’t even think they would have to take up a gay marriage divorce proceeding as the dissolution of the contract may be referred to the state under which it is enforced.
A civil marriage is a contract between two people. A church wedding/faith marriage is a family and community recognition of a couples love and commitment to each other. The civil contract is the claw the left used to rip marriage apart.

Gwillie on June 6, 2014 at 6:57 PM

Good Christian.

bazil9 on June 6, 2014 at 6:52 PM

Define ‘Good Christian’, Sonny. Go right on ahead. As I said when I issued my sincere apology to verbaluce AND the group, I am a sinner, just as you are. For you to attempt to mock and shame me is comical. I have said much worse, Pal, and I probably will again when provoked. Good Christians sin. They do, however, try to recognize it, repent of it, and TRY not to repeat it. As the late, great, W.C. Fields used to say, “Go away, Son, you bother me…”….

bimmcorp on June 6, 2014 at 7:01 PM

And the world goes on.

coolrepublica on June 6, 2014 at 7:05 PM

You are easily amused, Needlenose. A sticky keyboard is a hoot. Meanwhile, your freakin’ country is on the verge of collapse and you yuck it up over a typo?? Hope you get AIDS, Princess. – bimmcorp on June 5, 2014 at 5:32 PM

Did you actually post this bimmcorp?

SC.Charlie on June 6, 2014 at 7:09 PM

Did you actually post this bimmcorp?

SC.Charlie on June 6, 2014 at 7:09 PM

Yes I did, Charlie. I allowed verbaluce to rile me to a very bad place and I made that comment. And I apologized quite earnestly immediately afterwards. As was brought to my attention, there are many instances where the lefties here post much worse. Anyway, yep… I posted it.

bimmcorp on June 6, 2014 at 7:13 PM

The Constitution is silent on marriage. It should be left to the states.

But then, the courts seem to think there’s a right to privacy in the matters of certain health care.

john1schn on June 6, 2014 at 7:17 PM

Tough concept, right JB?

bimmcorp on June 6, 2014 at 6:32 PM

Are you honestly saying those who don’t believe in God have no rights under the US Constitution? Or am I just reading your comment wrong?

JetBoy on June 6, 2014 at 7:17 PM

…Laws are for other people!

KOOLAID2 on June 6, 2014 at 7:23 PM

JB, I thought you were a good Catholic and now you say you don’t believe in God? Which is it?

kingsjester on June 6, 2014 at 7:24 PM

Are you honestly saying those who don’t believe in God have no rights under the US Constitution? Or am I just reading your comment wrong?

JetBoy on June 6, 2014 at 7:17 PM

You are reading it wrong, as usual. Rights exist but they have been endowed by our creator. Whether you believe it or not. The people who authored the Constitution acknowledged this fact. The people charged with upholding the Constitution have maintained that notion until quite recently. That is the reason our Constitutional Republic is being threatened. Faithless fools such as Barack Obama, Nancy Pelosi, Harry Reid, et al are shredding the very basis for our Constitution. Progressive liberalism is their ‘faith’…THEY are granting or denying our rights in this age of degradation. Just look around you, JetBoy…Every aspect of our traditional American lives has been corrupted, eliminated or mocked and rejected by these ‘leaders’…It is what it is…

bimmcorp on June 6, 2014 at 7:25 PM

And how many of those 49% know anything about Constitutional law besides what they read on lefty blogs?

HiJack on June 6, 2014 at 7:30 PM

JB, I thought you were a good Catholic and now you say you don’t believe in God? Which is it?

kingsjester on June 6, 2014 at 7:24 PM

1) I never sad I was a “good” Catholic…only “a” Catholic. God will decide how “good” I am.

2) Where did I say I don’t believe in God?

JetBoy on June 6, 2014 at 7:30 PM

I never sad I was a “good” Catholic…only “a” Catholic. God will decide how “good” I am.

JetBoy on June 6, 2014 at 7:30 PM

Actually, none of us are actually “good” when we understand what the word really means. It is my understanding that God is good and none other. We, at most, are merely redeemed.

HiJack on June 6, 2014 at 7:34 PM

Actually, none of us are actually “good” when we understand what the word really means. It is my understanding that God is good and none other. We, at most, are merely redeemed.

HiJack on June 6, 2014 at 7:34 PM

Bingo.

bimmcorp on June 6, 2014 at 7:37 PM

Poll: 50% say that

A.The Constitution gives health insurance for everyone
B.The Constitution gives a right to abortion
C.The Constitution allows the federal government to do anything it wants
D.Hillary would be a good president
E.Ukraine is in the Middle East
F.All of the above

spiritof61 on June 6, 2014 at 7:40 PM

You are reading it wrong, as usual. Rights exist but they have been endowed by our creator. Whether you believe it or not. The people who authored the Constitution acknowledged this fact. The people charged with upholding the Constitution have maintained that notion until quite recently. That is the reason our Constitutional Republic is being threatened. Faithless fools such as Barack Obama, Nancy Pelosi, Harry Reid, et al are shredding the very basis for our Constitution. Progressive liberalism is their ‘faith’…THEY are granting or denying our rights in this age of degradation. Just look around you, JetBoy…Every aspect of our traditional American lives has been corrupted, eliminated or mocked and rejected by these ‘leaders’…It is what it is…

bimmcorp on June 6, 2014 at 7:25 PM

Let paragraphs be your friend.

I’m well aware of our God-given rights. I’m Catholic, not atheist. And the Declaration of Independence does not guarantee any rights, it exclaims that because of God…or specifically “our Creator” which doesn’t specify any particular religion or God…we gave England notice the time had come for the colonies to form an independent nation, not ruled by a far-away, overseas crown head of state.

JetBoy on June 6, 2014 at 7:46 PM

Poll: 50% say that

A.The Constitution gives health insurance for everyone
B.The Constitution gives a right to abortion
C.The Constitution allows the federal government to do anything it wants
D.Hillary would be a good president
E.Ukraine is in the Middle East
F.All of the above

spiritof61 on June 6, 2014 at 7:40 PM

G.What’s a Constitution?

HiJack on June 6, 2014 at 7:47 PM

Four years ago, the split was 49/51. Today it’s 50/43, although I think this poll’s less interesting for the change it shows over time than for the change it doesn’t show.

So, after a flurry of federal judges redefining marriage on claims that the Constitution requires it, the yes number bumps up by 1, and the no number down by 8. Presumably then, the only result of all this news about federal judges declaring that Equal Protection means SSM is that 1% more are convinced the judges are right, and 1% fewer are convinced the claim is wrong, and 7% don’t know what the judges are talking about.

That’s not really past the margin of error. Even the 7% could well be because the questions were asked differently this time than the last.

In fact, they would have to have been. Otherwise I would have to believe that there was nobody who was unsure 4 years ago.

Sorry, but this is not journalism. This is an attempt to drive a narrative. And Hot Air is no better than the journalists trying to drive that narrative.

There Goes the Neighborhood on June 6, 2014 at 7:50 PM

JetBoy on June 6, 2014 at 7:46 PM

Besides your lecture on my use of paragraphs or lack thereof, what is your point?

bimmcorp on June 6, 2014 at 7:51 PM

There Goes the Neighborhood on June 6, 2014 at 7:50 PM

Great click bait, though!!

bimmcorp on June 6, 2014 at 7:53 PM

Is JB pretending to be normal again? I would have thought on Friday he’d be some place where they give out hot towels and it’s really foggy.

platypus on June 6, 2014 at 7:55 PM

Besides your lecture on my use of paragraphs or lack thereof, what is your point?

bimmcorp on June 6, 2014 at 7:51 PM

A short sentence does not a “lecture” make. Take a look at your own comments.

And yes…I typed out half my last comment, answered my phone, and apparently didn’t put the important parts in. My bad…been a long week.

JetBoy on June 6, 2014 at 7:58 PM

Furthermore, DoI specifies where the Constitutional right come from the Creator. And He most definitely does not consider homosexuality a right, just the opposite

Nevsky on June 6, 2014 at 5:48 PM

While I agree with the preamble, this statement is kinda iffy. If I do not believe in the Creator, which is my unquestionable and unalienable right, where do my other rights (or yours, for the matter) come from?

Rix on June 6, 2014 at 6:00 PM

Trick question. The answer, of course, is that they come from the Creator. Whether or not you believe in the Creator is irrelevant.

That is, the rights come from who and what we are, not just what we believe about what we are.

But if you are just looking for a reason that a non-believer should accept we have these rights, it’s a matter of Natural Law.

This is actually pertinent to the topic, because marriage itself is a matter of natural law. We are made male and female, and that is why we have male and females joined in marriage. The male is made for the female, and the female for the male.

Those pushing SSM love to demand a reason why a man should not be able to marry a man outside of religion or tradition. Somehow, they ignore the obvious principle of natural law.

There Goes the Neighborhood on June 6, 2014 at 8:01 PM

Comment pages: 1 2