Tweet
What percentage of support for the right to marry will it have to reach before the “Fierce Advocate” removes the Cowardly Lion suit?
Nearly half of all Americans think the Constitution provides same-sex couples the right to marry, according to a new CNN/Opinion Research Corporation Poll.Forty-nine percent of respondents think gay and lesbian couples have the constitutional right to get married and have their marriage recognized by law, while 51 percent say those rights do not exist.
The gap widens dramatically when age is taken into account. Nearly six in ten Americans under the age of 50 say gay rights are protected under the Constitution. Only 38 percent of Americans over the age of 50 say the same thing.
“This is one of the few instances when independents side with one party rather than falling in between the Dems and the GOP,” CNN Polling Director Keating Holland said. “56 percent of Democrats and 57 percent of Independents think the Constitution conveys the right to marry to same-sex couples. Only a quarter of all Republicans agree.”
20 Comments
Big news, this…‘Voice of the people?’
Here we are. Especially for the future.
I want to believe itbut I don’t.
Some DiscomfortI’m always a bit uncomfortable when I read articles like this. While it is of some interest that nearly half of Americans support us, I firmly believe that even if it were only 1%, this is a civil rights issue and therefore, the number of people who agree or disagree is irrelevant.
As an absolute……It may not say much about whether or not we deserve equality and civil rights: as to who might think to profit by delaying and denying them? This is dynamite.
Why did you headline the results of question 37 and not 37a?
Why not report that a Majority of Americans support marriage equality as 37a demonstrates?
Evolution, not revolutionI take a very organic approach to the advancement of LGBT civil rights. There isn’t one strait through line. There isn’t one tactic. There isn’t even really a right or wrong. There isn’t one path to equality, but is instead, for want of a better visual analogy, a hemisphere with poorly defined edges. There are many, many ways of approaching it, and they all put pressure on the hemisphere and somehow contribute to urging it forward. They are all right so long as they are sincerely motivated by a desire for progress, they all play on each other, and they all have effects both intended and unintended. Some of the unintended effects are bad, but most of the unintended effects are good. This poll is a sign of a positive unintended effect of the cacophony of many different efforts and approaches going on simultaneously. This is the same pattern followed by civil rights struggles that went on before us.
Ultimately, rights will be granted to the LGBT community when a significant majority of Americans favor the idea. That will cause politicians to recognize the issue as politically expedient and vote in favor of those rights. People pursuing the cause of civil rights keep wanting to find the one, clean, neat, direct, easy path to winning those rights. I suggest there isn’t one, and the big mistake people keep making is in thinking there is one, and arguing amongst ourselves ad infinitum about just what that path might be. That’s kind of like arguing over the fine points of different religions when in reality all religions are a path to God.
Some people think that rights are won when legislators vote for them, and then poor everything into lobbying those legislative bodies, only to throw up their hands in furry when reality doesn’t work their way (a certain Jillian is springing to mind). But what people pursuing such an approach don’t realize is that 1) it’s not the lobbying alone that will convince the legislators but the change in political climate that will do it, and 2) their lobbying is one small part of that change in the political climate. In other words, lobbying alone will not do it, but lobbying is a part of what will. GetEqual’s nonviolent civil disobedience alone will not do it, but it is a part of what will. LGBT positive TV shows and movies alone won’t do it, but they are a part of what will. People living out alone won’t do it, but… Well, you get the idea.
Ultimately, this cultural shift will be represented by a generational shift. A new generation growing up in this new climate will begin to push out the dying off older generation who refuse to change. The new generation would not experience this new cultural climate if everybody weren’t contributing to forming it. History is happening. It will happen, just like it did for other minorities in other struggles. No one or small group of people will be responsible for it. Everyone will have contributed. However, in spite of that fact, I guarantee that this movement will have its heroes, and there will be people given much more than their fair share of the credit for our collective accomplishment. That too, is history repeating itself.
That’s the young folks37a only considers people under age 50. 37 is everyone. The poll reveals most Americans do not favor marriage equality, but just wait…
What difference does it make?It might matter if we lived in a democracy. But we clearly don’t. We have government of the people, by the churches and corporations and for the churches and corporations. Protecting their interests is what our government is about. Not the people.
Support for DADT repeal is at 83% in some polls. But we’ll see it sometime after Jesus returns. Obama got elected with our support, as a result of a pack of blatant lies to us. At this point it couldn’t be much clearer that his only goal for us is to maintain our second-class status, will of the people be damned, Constitution be damned, America be damned.
A valid pointI’ve been thinking about this. My short answer is, it matters, but it’s not the only thing that matters. It will matter more and more as the numbers supporting us rise, but when it will matter enough to actually cause a change in the law is hard to assertain.
When looking for change coming from Congress, the important thing to remember is that with rare exception, all members of Congress care about is getting re-elected. Politics for them is a career, and they just want to at least keep their jobs and hopefully move up. There are fairly simple basic rules for doing that. 1) get lots of money, 2) be likeable to people who you count on to support you, and 3) try not to piss too many people off. Pretty much in that order. What influences politicians in their votes are 1) who will give me the most money, 2) what do people want to hear (or will resonate with them so they like me) and 3) what will keep people from really hating me.
Let’s apply that to our situation. Fortunately for us, there aren’t major commercial interests surrounding LGBT rights. I’m sure some measure of campaign donations are effected by it, but not as much as is, say, oil legislation. If there were big corporate money in keeping down LGBT folks, we wouldn’t have a prayer. That gives us a bit of hope.
The big political issue we have to deal with is the fact that we’ve been made into a wedge issue. We are one of those things that define the differences between the parties in our ridgidly instituted two party system. Given that, you can pretty much count on nearly 100% of Republicans being against us and something over 90% of Democrats being for us, at least in terms of the lip service they give the subject. Voting is another matter. When it comes to voting, you have to consider if a vote for LGBT rights will get their base to like them without pissing too many people off in the middle.
Right now, supporting LGBT issues is death for Republicans, pretty good for Democrats. As these polling numbers rise, this will bring about a slow shift of being even better for Democrats and less lethal for Republicans. That’s why it matters. Further, as these numbers rise, they will cause less ill will from the middle for the legislators who support us.
This begins to suggest what needs to occur before we see legislation supporting our community passing. A big problem we face is that being a wedge issue, our political fortunes are tied to the political fortunes of the Democratic party, and their fortunes are decided by bigger issues than us. We are the caboose at the end of a long political train. One scenario for winning our rights is for the general political climate of our nation to favor Democrats coming to power (as it did in 2008) AND the general favorability of our causes to support Democrats having the courage to actually vote in favor of them (which they appear to be a bit shy of right now). We need a bit more public support while Democrats are in power to get Congress to pass our issues.
The other scenario would be for a general shift in public attitude to reach a point of LGBT support such that it’s not especially damaging to Republicans to vote in favor of our issues, while being very favorable among people in the middle. That, I think, will actually happen some day, but not for a long time. Probably not for a generation. In a two party system, shifts in general public attitude only shift the middle between the parties, but never shift one party completely out of power. The parties change with public attitude. Positions that were once centrist, like avoiding the spread of slavery, are today so wildly extreme as to be completely off the scale. As public opinion shifts in our favor, Republicans will become less hostile to us and Democrats will become more enthusiastic toward us.
Polls like this simply chart our progress toward that goal. It’s a shame that level of support may have come perhaps just a few months too late for Democrats to be in power to act on it. We will either have to wait for the political winds to sweep them into power again or wait for another generation to go by.
That’s what difference it makes.
actuallythe article says that nearly 6 in 10 people under 50 are in favour of marriage equality. that is 60%, so the 52% figure of 37a could not be the under 50 crowd. 37a is a poll very similar to the first one, that changes the question asked by one word.
Do you think gays and lesbians should have a constitutional right to get married and have their marriage recognised by law as valid? (37a)
vs
Do you think gays and lesbians have a constitutional right to get married and have their marriage recognised by law as valid? (37)
The word ‘should’ is the difference in the polls, and it mentions nothing about being only the results for people under 50 (which, is 60%)
Point taken
This is not about whether marriage equality is valid:It’s about deflating the rhetoric of bigots: that “activist” judges are overturning “the will of the people”. If most Americans support marriage equality, then it takes the power out of what is arguably the strongest talking point they use to justify their bigotry.
It weakens their rhetoricSuddenly “overturning the will of the people” becomes a silly complaint if most people support marriage equality.
No, it’s over half52% think we should have the right to marry:
http://rawstory.com/rs/2010/08…
The lower figure is for those who apparently think we already have this right.
I wonder how many in either category actually know what the Constitution is?
Actually, I thing you misread the poll questions…
37 asks if there IS there a constitutional right to gay marriage.
37a asks if there SHOULD BE a constitutional right to gay marriage.
Therefore it would be more accurate for PHBs headline to read that “OVER half of Americans support marriage equality”.
Never mind…
I didn’t notice that this had already been cleared up.
Sorry.
Some people think democracy means that three wolves and a lamb get to vote on what’s for dinner.
I’d love to take credit for that but, alas, I read it somewhere.
Their rhetoric is beside the point, too.They can say anything they like. They can quote religious leaders from Mars, if they like. No matter what they say, and no matter what we say, and no matter what the American people say, the fact remains that our fierce president and our almost-as-fierce congress won’t lift a finger for equality.
I tend to agree with youJust as civil rights shouldn’t be denied by the majority nor should it be advanced because of the majority. Ideally, it shouldn’t matter if only 10% supported the right, especially when based on religious dogma.
I understand that politician, OTH, are very sensitive to polls as a way of strategizing their re-elections, which include President Obama, (and which I suspect was Pam’s point in posting this).
Agreed, with one provisionI’d just add one clause to one of your sentences:
“I understand that politicians including Obama, as opposed to actual leaders, are very sensitive to polls as a way of strategizing their re-elections…”