| Author |
Message |
    
Madden 11
Citizen
Username: Madden_11
Post Number: 866
Registered: 12-2003
| | Posted on Thursday, March 23, 2006 - 2:24 pm: | 
|
Quote:Poll: Opposition to Gay Marriage Declining
By WILL LESTER, Associated Press Writer
WASHINGTON - The public backlash over gay marriage has receded since a controversial decision by the Massachusetts Supreme Court in 2003 to legalize those marriages stirred strong opposition, says a poll released Wednesday.
Gay marriage remains a divisive issue, with 51 percent opposing it, the poll by the Pew Research Center for the People and the Press found. But almost two-thirds, 63 percent, opposed gay marriage in February 2004.
"Most Americans still oppose gay marriage, but the levels of opposition are down and the number of strong opponents are down," said Andrew Kohut, director of the Pew Research Center. "This has some implications for the midterm elections if this trend is maintained. There are gay marriage ballot initiatives in numerous states."
http://tinyurl.com/z8dzb |
Southerner
Citizen
Username: Southerner
Post Number: 854
Registered: 2-2004
| | Posted on Thursday, March 23, 2006 - 3:51 pm: |
|
Madden,
Please. Once the true election cycle kicks in those numbers will go back up. Why don't many of you understand polls are worthless. Maybe they paint a resonable picture a few weeks out from an election but to take a poll during a political dead period is worthless. One or two TV commercials about gay marriage and the numbers jump up. |
Brokeback Straw
Supporter
Username: Strawberry
Post Number: 6990
Registered: 10-2001
| | Posted on Thursday, March 23, 2006 - 3:52 pm: |
|
Why is this bad news for me? I support gay marriage. |
Madden 11
Citizen
Username: Madden_11
Post Number: 867
Registered: 12-2003
| | Posted on Thursday, March 23, 2006 - 4:11 pm: |
|
Why is this bad news for me? I support gay marriage.
That may be. But your party depends on those that don't to give them the edge come election time.
Lower radical right wing turnout = bad news for Republicans. Bad news for Republicans = bad news for Straw. |
Madden 11
Citizen
Username: Madden_11
Post Number: 868
Registered: 12-2003
| | Posted on Thursday, March 23, 2006 - 4:15 pm: |
|
One or two TV commercials about gay marriage and the numbers jump up.
You may well be right. And since the GOP doesn't have much of a pitch to make to voters OTHER than fearmongering, I daresay it'll be more than one or two commercials.
I guess we'll see...but it's still bad news for Republicans. |
Duncan
Supporter
Username: Duncanrogers
Post Number: 6063
Registered: 12-2001
| | Posted on Thursday, March 23, 2006 - 4:29 pm: |
|
Quote:Why is this bad news for me?
And straw...if you are for gay marriage why do you use f****t in posts to describe people you don't like? This mystifies me.
Why are any of the "BAD NEWS FOR LIBS" threads bad news for libs? Just another really broad assumption.
|
Brokeback Straw
Supporter
Username: Strawberry
Post Number: 6992
Registered: 10-2001
| | Posted on Thursday, March 23, 2006 - 4:37 pm: |
|
First off, I've never used f****t to describe someone I don't like. That's a god damn lie.
I used it to make a point about the morons outside the library calling people Nazis if they refused to sign their stupid petition. My point being, that the use of the N word is as bad as the use of the f word.
With the exception of a few morons on MOL, most people understood the point. I guess you don't fall into the most people category. |
Alleygater
Citizen
Username: Alleygater
Post Number: 1418
Registered: 10-2004
| | Posted on Thursday, March 23, 2006 - 5:02 pm: |
|
Straw you're a saint, you never call people bad names. You would never do that. We know you're a good momma's boy. |
greenetree
Supporter
Username: Greenetree
Post Number: 7040
Registered: 5-2001
| | Posted on Thursday, March 23, 2006 - 6:00 pm: |
|
I regret it every time I look in this section.
Anyway, charging someone with bigotry of any kind (homophobia, racism, etc.) is not something that should be taken lightly.
Straw and I are not at all politically alike. But he is most emphatically not homophobic. Tossing it around because you don't like his politics makes light of real bigotry. And, quite frankly, is insulting to those of us who have experienced the effect of someone's bigotry. |
Brokeback Straw
Supporter
Username: Strawberry
Post Number: 6994
Registered: 10-2001
| | Posted on Thursday, March 23, 2006 - 7:08 pm: |
|
I have plenty of gay friends and I will say if they were ever the target of hate in my presence, I would be the first to respond.
For the record Greentrees and TS are two of the coolest people I've met since moving to Maplewood. I'm proud both consider me a friend.
|
Nohero
Supporter
Username: Nohero
Post Number: 5217
Registered: 10-1999
| | Posted on Thursday, March 23, 2006 - 9:43 pm: |
|
We all would respond, if any of our friends were the target of hate.
The real test, for all of us, is how we respond when the targets are people who are not our friends, or who we don't even know.
The news story at the top of this thread says, "Opposition to Gay Marriage Declining". It is a fact that a lot of Administration supporters demonized gay people, as part of their effort to get out the vote. I can remember when Bret Schundler deliberately equated being gay with being a child molester. Will the decline in opposition to gay marriage, make them even nastier? That's what we have to watch out for, and all of us need to point it out and criticize it if it happens again. |
Madden 11
Citizen
Username: Madden_11
Post Number: 869
Registered: 12-2003
| | Posted on Thursday, March 23, 2006 - 11:35 pm: |
|
Anyway, charging someone with bigotry of any kind (homophobia, racism, etc.) is not something that should be taken lightly.
I couldn't agree more. Imagine if someone were to insinuate that an entire political party is comprised of criminals, drug dealers, child molesters, and terrorists.
Never mind, no need to imagine it:
/discus/messages/26018/106820.html?1143131340
Greentree, it's clear that you don't spend much time in this section, otherwise you'd have a more accurate impression of which end of the smearing brush your friend generally wields.
|
Brokeback Straw
Supporter
Username: Strawberry
Post Number: 6995
Registered: 10-2001
| | Posted on Friday, March 24, 2006 - 7:18 am: |
|
Greentrees would rather spend time with those who are honest about their opinions as opposed to people like you who need to read the opinions of others to formulate their own..
Your above post is probably the first time you actually said something you came up with all by yourself.. Frankly, it's about time.
|
Bob K
Supporter
Username: Bobk
Post Number: 11036
Registered: 5-2001
| | Posted on Friday, March 24, 2006 - 7:42 am: |
|
Straw, I think you are wrong about Greentree. She expresses opinions in other than the politics thread. Like a lot of posters on MOL she usually avoids the, politely, cut and thrust that goes on here.
|
Madden 11
Citizen
Username: Madden_11
Post Number: 872
Registered: 12-2003
| | Posted on Friday, March 24, 2006 - 8:11 am: |
|
Greentrees would rather spend time with those who are honest about their opinions as opposed to people like you who need to read the opinions of others to formulate their own..
This makes absolutely no sense. How can an opinion be dishonest?
Your above post is probably the first time you actually said something you came up with all by yourself.. Frankly, it's about time.
What on earth are you talking about? I don't write my own posts?
Straw, much like your hero Dubya...you're slipping. |
Duncan
Supporter
Username: Duncanrogers
Post Number: 6074
Registered: 12-2001
| | Posted on Friday, March 24, 2006 - 8:45 am: |
|
Ok Straw...I retract my post. I went to the archives and indeed, my memory of the post in question was not correct. So beyond simply retracting it I will apologize for it.
But with all the name calling you do, it is not hard to have mistaken one insult for another. But, in the end, I owe you apology on this one.
|
Brokeback Straw
Supporter
Username: Strawberry
Post Number: 6996
Registered: 10-2001
| | Posted on Friday, March 24, 2006 - 9:04 am: |
|
thank you..I'm still a big fan of yours. |
Southerner
Citizen
Username: Southerner
Post Number: 857
Registered: 2-2004
| | Posted on Friday, March 24, 2006 - 9:55 am: |
|
Nohero,
I agree with your analysis, but here is the dilemma the Democrats have. Since they scream and holler about every issue this Admin or Republicans undertake that to "criticize them" if they gay bash will do nothing except add to the constant drumbeat. The Democrats still haven't figured out how to effectively play the political game. If they targeted specific issues then they would hold more sway with the electorate. The current philosophy of blasting everything results in numbness and all the issues they scream about are quickly dismissed.
From a political viewpoint, the Dems have blown a great opportunity to create a clear and concise message on which to retake Congress. I see conservative America becoming weary of the Chicken Little party which is why I see the Republicans staying in power. I'll concede the Dems may pick up seats but not enough to retake either branch. Thankfully, the Dems don't have a Newt in their ranks or they probably would become the majority. |
Kiba
Citizen
Username: Radical_kiba
Post Number: 72
Registered: 12-2005
| | Posted on Monday, April 3, 2006 - 12:02 pm: |
|
This is good News. I strongly support gay marriages, and I'm delighted to hear that the opposition is declining. :] |
cjc
Citizen
Username: Cjc
Post Number: 5483
Registered: 8-2003
| | Posted on Monday, April 3, 2006 - 12:19 pm: |
|
Madden 11 -- in truth, gay marriage is not a winner for Democrats either, especially with their black voter base. Most are on record as being against gay marriage. Perhaps that's why Bush won 16% of the black vote in OH.
It will take time and the passing of a generation for the country to come to accept gay marriage and/or civil unions in both parties.
|
SLK Lives!
Citizen
Username: Scrotisloknows
Post Number: 1131
Registered: 10-2005
| | Posted on Tuesday, April 4, 2006 - 11:31 am: |
|
If gays wish to be married then so be it. Their biggest mistake is taking the constitutional route on this matter....
-SLK |
Alleygater
Citizen
Username: Alleygater
Post Number: 1546
Registered: 10-2004
| | Posted on Tuesday, April 4, 2006 - 12:42 pm: |
|
SLK, if it's not law, then they don't have equal rights. If they don't have equal rights, then they are second class citizens. |
SLK Lives!
Citizen
Username: Scrotisloknows
Post Number: 1133
Registered: 10-2005
| | Posted on Tuesday, April 4, 2006 - 12:47 pm: |
|
Alleygater,
I don't believe I have a constitutional right to be married. Nice to hear you think you do.
-SLK
|
Alleygater
Citizen
Username: Alleygater
Post Number: 1548
Registered: 10-2004
| | Posted on Tuesday, April 4, 2006 - 1:00 pm: |
|
I didn't say anything about the constitution. That was you dude.
The ability to be married means something legally speaking. Spouses get certain benefits such as insurance coverage for instance. There are laws that govern marriage. If heterosexuals get those benefits provided by those laws then gays should as well. |
Tom Reingold
Supporter
Username: Noglider
Post Number: 13398
Registered: 1-2003
| | Posted on Tuesday, April 4, 2006 - 2:05 pm: |
|
What makes something into a right? Do I have a right to marry as granted by any authority? Or do I have it by the absense of some sort of prohibition against marriage? Either way, gays don't have the right.
|
cjc
Citizen
Username: Cjc
Post Number: 5489
Registered: 8-2003
| | Posted on Tuesday, April 4, 2006 - 2:11 pm: |
|
I believe (though could be wrong) that SLK is saying using a declaration by the judiciary that gays have a right to marry isn't the way to garner public support and may galvanize efforts to actively oppose it. If would be better to work to gain a majority of public support for it and then have elected representatives or a referendum pass legislation allowing gay marriage. |
Tom Reingold
Supporter
Username: Noglider
Post Number: 13401
Registered: 1-2003
| | Posted on Tuesday, April 4, 2006 - 2:14 pm: |
|
That viewpoint makes sense. And things will probably play out that way, eventually. Maybe soon.
|
cjc
Citizen
Username: Cjc
Post Number: 5491
Registered: 8-2003
| | Posted on Tuesday, April 4, 2006 - 2:26 pm: |
|
I'd say it'll take 10 years for public opinion to come around. |
Tom Reingold
Supporter
Username: Noglider
Post Number: 13403
Registered: 1-2003
| | Posted on Tuesday, April 4, 2006 - 2:28 pm: |
|
I would call that fairly soon. Some will call it not soon enough.
By then, those who have opposed the change ought to see that they were wrong. I'm not holding my breath, though.
|
Alleygater
Citizen
Username: Alleygater
Post Number: 1551
Registered: 10-2004
| | Posted on Tuesday, April 4, 2006 - 2:45 pm: |
|
I think people who feel great injustice in the world want to expose the injustice to everyone in as grand a manner as possible. I'm sure that this may galvanize the opposing side but it also helps to get in the news and to make something that might be perceived as a non-issue into a real issue that people are talking about.
If the civil rights or the suffragette movement hadn't happened, how long might it have taken for our perceptions to have changed then?
CJC, I see the stupidity of the far right here on MOL on a fairly regular basis and I think wow, down south they are EVEN STUPIDER than these folks. So I think you're awfully optimistic with 10 years. I think local governments will continue to provide individual priviledges to gay couples. I'm guessing this will strengthen the argument that gays don't need actual rights (laws to protect them) and it will take even longer to see legislation passed. I'll say 25-50 more years. I sure hope I'm wrong. |
cjc
Citizen
Username: Cjc
Post Number: 5492
Registered: 8-2003
| | Posted on Tuesday, April 4, 2006 - 3:01 pm: |
|
The very blue states of MI and OR passed anti-gay marriage legislation during 2004. I don't think there's a clear majority for gay marriage in the Democratic Party. You've got some work to do up here in the 'smart' states as well. |
SLK Lives!
Citizen
Username: Scrotisloknows
Post Number: 1135
Registered: 10-2005
| | Posted on Tuesday, April 4, 2006 - 3:12 pm: |
|
cjc-thanks for getting it you stupid right winger you... 
Alleygater-
There you go with you anti-right wing over generalizations again.
I sure hope you don't consider this intellectual debate of any sort.
STATE laws recognize marriage between a man and a woman at this point not Consitutions. If you want these laws to change then push for support to change them through state legislatures. Is that so difficult?
Are you ready to be thrown for a loop? I am pretty conservative on a host of issues but think gays should be allowed to get married. Quick, how does your liberal bible reconcile that notion? Alot more conservatives are for it then you think.
And i am sorry your such a negative creep. Your pesstimistic outlook on the days gay can get married reveals how half-hearted/assed you are on fighting for the cause.
Who knows when the day will come when gays can marry. But I do know one thing for sure. GM proponents are wasting a lot of time going the constitutional route....DUDE! They can partially blame themselves fort he stall....
-SLK
And do me a favor, DO NOT compare GM to the Civil Rights movement of the 60's. It is insulting.
|
Alleygater
Citizen
Username: Alleygater
Post Number: 1556
Registered: 10-2004
| | Posted on Tuesday, April 4, 2006 - 3:13 pm: |
|
People are stupid all over, I can't contest that. But the bible belt (the strongest opposition I would say) is definitely in the South. |
SLK Lives!
Citizen
Username: Scrotisloknows
Post Number: 1136
Registered: 10-2005
| | Posted on Tuesday, April 4, 2006 - 3:15 pm: |
|
Thank you CJC-
I forgot to mention the Dem's reluctance towards GM. Who was it that signed DOMA into law?
Alleygater-how do you reconcile being affiliated with a political party that was largely responsible for signing DOMA into law?
Southerner was 100% correct when the Dems missed that Titanic of an opportunity-or was it?
-SLK |
Alleygater
Citizen
Username: Alleygater
Post Number: 1558
Registered: 10-2004
| | Posted on Tuesday, April 4, 2006 - 5:11 pm: |
|
You want to educate me on DOMA? I have no idea what it is or if it is even relevant to this conversation. I suspect, however, it is some red herring to distract everyone.
SLK, clearly GM isn't important enough of an issue to you to make you change parties. The Republican's used anti-gay hysteria to win the election. Heck it's a plank in your party. So I say you're full of a lot of hot air and you aren't the one willing to make a change. You want things to change in the world? How about starting at home first. Why don't you change who you are.
I'll compare whatever I feel like. You are the one who is insulting. You're the one who thinks it's fine to disenfranchise one person and not another. You do that every time you vote Republican, IMO.
I also don't think I'm negative. I would say I am realistic. Look at the times. It's like we've entered a new dark ages, where religion is once again a dominating force in our government. I would however agree with you and say that I am pessimistic. There really is a lot going wrong with our country. The current administration has made me pessimistic.
I think you are fool however if you think our little debate on MOL really changes a damn thing in the real world. |
SLK Lives!
Citizen
Username: Scrotisloknows
Post Number: 1140
Registered: 10-2005
| | Posted on Wednesday, April 5, 2006 - 8:10 am: |
|
Alleygater-
What is DOMA and is it relevant to this thread? You are joking me right? Are you denying the Democrats reluctance to fully embrace GM?
I should stop right here but of course I won't. Why you couldn't look this up is beyond me:
"The Defense of Marriage Act, or DOMA, Pub. L. No. 104-199, 100 Stat. 2419 (Sept. 21, 1996), codified at 1 U.S.C. § 7 and 28 U.S.C. § 1738C, is a federal law of the United States passed by Congress and signed by President Bill Clinton on September 21, 1996. The law provides:
First, it allows each state (or similar political division in the United States) to deny any marriage-like relationship between persons of the same sex which has been recognized in another state.
Second, it explicitly recognizes for purposes of federal law that marriage is "a legal union of one man and one woman as husband and wife" and by stating that spouse "refers only to a person of the opposite sex who is a husband or a wife."
Congressional proponents assert authority to enact the law under the Full Faith and Credit Clause of the United States Constitution with the purpose to normalize heterosexual marriage on a federal level and permit each state to decide for itself whether to recognize "same-sex unions" if other states did recognize same-sex unions. Forty states have enacted laws denying the recognition of same-sex marriages, which is more than the needed number of states required to amend the United States Constitution. Six states currently have established laws recognizing some form of same-sex unions, and twelve states ban any recognition of same-sex unions including civil unions.
My party? Alley, voting twice for a Republican does NOT make one a Republican. How am I full of hot air? How does it benefit me to lie about my stance on GM? So I need to "make a change" by joining the Democratic Party to make my pro-GM stance more legitimate?
What?
Can you please provide me with concrete examples of how "religion is once again a dominating force in our government"? Sounds like typical liberal hysteria to me.
Your simplistic, "Republicans bad/Dems good" pigenholing is ridiculously jejune to say the least. I voted for who I thought was best for the job. Apparently you can't see beyond party affiliation...truly sad.
-SLK
|
Robert Livingston
Citizen
Username: Rob_livingston
Post Number: 1845
Registered: 7-2004
| | Posted on Wednesday, April 5, 2006 - 8:58 am: |
|
"Your simplistic, "Republicans bad/Dems good" pigenholing is ridiculously jejune to say the least."
That is funny for SOOOO many reasons. |
Alleygater
Citizen
Username: Alleygater
Post Number: 1570
Registered: 10-2004
| | Posted on Wednesday, April 5, 2006 - 11:30 am: |
|
SLK, I didn't look DMO up because I was lazy. I also told you, I suspected that you were wasting my time by changing the topic. I see now that I was right. I have very little opinion about DOMA especially considering I knew less than nothing about it. As for how I justify it, I don't. I have problems with the 2 party system in general, and often feel like the Democrats don't take a big enough stand on important issues, which is why when I can, I vote for other parties. I do know however that parties often pass legislation that they don't support 100%. Things get added that they don't support but they vote for it anyway because they want the other parts of the legislation that they do support to get approved. Also sometimes there is political reasons to let things pass (eg. John Roberts) which clearly they would not want to pass. I am not up on my political history regarding DOMA (or for that matter in general) at all so I can't actually explain it to you.
Voting twice for the Republicans certainly makes you supporter IMO, and as I see you are most certainly part of the problem. As for you being full of hot air, I thought I made that clear. You say one thing very loudly but your actions say something completely different. I don't care if you join the Democrats personally. You and I have gone head to head and you feel no remorse for you political choices and party affiliations. So why should I even bother suggesting what you should do.
I will do no such thing as give you concrete examples. I'm so sick of that game. I state something in long drawn out detail and then I get answered with a pat 1 second post asking me to explain something. What I should then go out and do more research and then put in another half hour into explaining myself further? Why? so you can ask me another pat question? No thanks. I think it is clear that the current administration has a religious agenda, gay marriages, abortion rights, whack job pseudo science being forced into schools.
And what is my party affiliation may I ask? Since you seem to know. I'm certainly liberally minded, does that mean I'm a Democrat? a Communist? Please do tell. I am so saddened to think that you believed that W was best person for the job. Even the second time you voted for him? Now still? I guess it's just too late and embaressing to admit that the ship has already sunk let alone that it was never sea worthy to begin with. |
SLK Lives!
Citizen
Username: Scrotisloknows
Post Number: 1142
Registered: 10-2005
| | Posted on Wednesday, April 5, 2006 - 12:10 pm: |
|
Alleygater,
Are you not the individual that started the borderline bigoted thread " letter to my Republican Neighbor"? And are you not the originator of this thread? When do you plan to write a letter to your Democratic neighbor? When should I expect some bad news for Democrats? Should I hold my breath?
And you wonder why I peg you a Dem, hmmmmm....
The simple fact that you fail to acknowledge the Democrat's reluctance to GM while totally blaming the problem on the Republicans tells me something.
What should I feel remorse over? I said from day one I don't agree with everything Dubya does. But, unlike you I can see the larger picture on issues. Apparently in your world what is good for the goose is not good for the gander. You excuse the Democrats for passing unfavorable legislation to gain favorable legislation they are seeking but you don't excuse me for voting for a man you totally despise even though I openly admit that I don't blindly agree with him on everything.
Again, it is called the bigger picture.
Since you are too lazy to do your homework or give me examples on your hysterical accusations, I guess I can't expect nothing from you except a half-assed discourse. let me know when I can begin taking your posts seriously.
God forbid I ask you to do something (wouldn't want you to over exert yourself now) but can you please give me an example of how I talk loudly but my actions speak differently? Do I know you personally? If not, then the only actions of mine you have experienced is my written word.
The only thing not seaworthy in this thread is your tiresome anti-Bush rants. Your Bush hatred is making you and those like you food for the fishes.
But that even could have a positive outcome. You and RL sound like you would make a cute couple..... 
-SLK
|
Alleygater
Citizen
Username: Alleygater
Post Number: 1575
Registered: 10-2004
| | Posted on Wednesday, April 5, 2006 - 1:09 pm: |
|
SLK haven't you heard, opposites attract. I think I'm hot for you.
I see the bigger picture too. The current administration is running the country into the ground. Your actions I speak of (I swear I feel like this is the third time I'm explaining this and I'm beginning to wonder if you are just slow) is the action of you voting Republican which you already admitted.
Don't hold your breath waiting for a letter to my Democratic neighbor (you suggested it in the past) and I almost did, asking for them to stick to their convictions and to go further on important issues, but I decided not to bother. I definitely despise the Republicans more than the Democrats though. But I don't feel the need to explain why they pass specific pieces of legislation I know little about. I did the best I could to explain how as a concept something like that could happen, which I see you completely ignored.
I don't care if you think my posts are worthy of being taken seriously. You are always able to ignore them. I do put in a lot of time (that speaks NOTHING of their quality -- I understand that) into them though so I'm not sure I personally would call them all half-assed. I did take a moment and post 3 very quick examples which once again you ignored. |
Closed: New threads not accepted on this page