Gay and Lesbian Marriage....

[Basementdweller]

Interesting....Sitting here watching Sunday morning, CBS, on the old TV....

 

They just said that If Gay and Lesbian Marriage is voted on by the public it has been voted down 100% of the time.

 

With the follow up that the only states that allow it are the ones where the legislature has mandated it....

 

They also stated the party positions Republican tradition man and woman marriage.

Democratic Anyone can be marriage.

 

Interesting.......

 

So are we dealing with the very vocal minority???

(This message has been edited by Basementdweller)

[SeattlePioneer]

In Washington State the state legislature over the past few years gave homosexual partnerships every privilege of heterosexual marriage except the name.

 

During the last legislative session legalizing homosexual marriage was passed. It was since the subject of a referendum petition and will be on the ballot in November.

 

So check out the results in Washington state on election night for an answer to your question.

[nldscout]

The answer to that question is a definate yes.

 

It is obvious inspite of biased studies that say otherwise, the american people will not vote to allow gay marriage.

[Horizon]

Basement:

 

Gallup shows it a tossup nationwide:

 

http://www.gallup.com/poll/154529/half-americans-support-legal-gay-marriage.aspx

 

If you go back a year, they did an age breakdown - the more important cut (in my opinion) for a program that serves youth and therefore younger adults:

 

http://www.gallup.com/poll/147662/First-Time-Majority-Americans-Favor-Legal-Gay-Marriage.aspx

 

Some good data at Gallup to get a feel for the national mindset.

[nldscout]

Horizon

 

The problem with a poll is who paid for it to be done. If you look at polls done by the Family Marriage groups they say the opposite.

 

Polls can be and are bent and twisted by the person paying for it. The real poll will be at the ballot box, where it has been ovious what the polls are.

[Eagledad]

>>They also stated the party positions Republican tradition man and woman marriage. Democratic Anyone can be marriage.

[Pint]

In my opinion the word and term Marrige describes the long term union of a Man and Woman, or to be more exact male and female human.

I have no issue with same sex relationships, or civil partnerships etc etc and if they want it then they should have something thats equivalent to marriage in law, but in my opinion whatever they call it it wont be marriage.

 

As for civil partnerships, from my understanding of the situation here ( in the UK ) these dont have the same legal status as marriage, they sort of ocupy an almost but not quite status, and they are not available to hetrosexual couples who may not feel ready to comit fully in marriage, maybe their should eb a civil engaement and then marriage and civil partnerships and then something else for the homosexuals.

 

[AZMike]

The opinions of the polled American public en masse matter less, perhaps, than the opinions of those who actually exercise their franchise. Those who are willing to legally vote seem to have a decisive opinion on the matter.

[skeptic]

The ballot results on this are particularly telling, in that we have such a poor level of actual participation. Has to make you wonder where that other 60% or so would come down on the issue if they exercised their franchise. But, as we have been told numerous times here; the voice of the majority must take a back seat to that of the minority when it differs from those in charge or with powerful agendas.

 

Of course, what do I know?(This message has been edited by skeptic)

[Eagle732]

My state of Maryland passed gay marriage and it will now be on a referendum this November. My guess is it will not be overturned.

[Horizon]

nldscout - I trust Gallup, that is their business. They run a good statistical model, and are careful with their questions. This also syncs up close to the exit polls in California when Proposition 8 was passed - it was very close and in line with this data set.

 

I would not use that as the only measure, but it does point out this issue is not one of a small minority going against a large majority.

[CalicoPenn]

Questions for the group - is marriage an inalienable right. If it is an inalienable right, does a majority have a right to vote to take away an inalienable right from a minority? If it is not an inalienable right, then what is it?

[AZMike]

Are you talking about state recognition of your marriage as an inalienable right (with the attendant economic benefits) by issuing a marriage license, the right to compel a JoP or a religious denomination to conduct a marriage ceremony, or what?

 

Does being an "inalienable right" mean the state cannot place any restrictions on it (underage marriages, # of people involved, a woman and her cat, two cousins, a guy and an inanimate object, two dudes, etc.)?

[SeattlePioneer]

>

 

 

All of the above.

[scoutingagain]

"We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights, that among these are life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness." I'd have to say being able to marry the one you love falls under the pursuit of happiness clause.

 

I might add the guys that wrote this were hardly the type to simply disagree with the rules and try and work within the system to change them. The were radicals that openly defied authority. Hardly the type to hold out as examples of civility to our scouts. I know this comment crosses threads.

 

SA