[longtermmemmory]

The notables to the article is the effort to push poll spin this issue as not mattering to voters. They fear voters deciding candidates based on this issue because it will also jeopordize the little local politician democrats. On this issue it makes a local politician running against Bush rather than just a Republican opposition.

The other interesting point, it the 482% which say homosexual marriage is to make homosexuality acceptable. Freudian slip?

For those who have not seen it:
H.J. Res. 56 and S.J. Res. 26
Amendment Text:

Marriage in the United States shall consist only of the union of a man and a woman.
Neither this Constitution or the constitution of any State, nor state or federal law,
shall be construed to require that marital status or the legal incidents thereof be conferred
upon unmarried couples or groups.




convenient how the pollsters never mention it.

[You Dirty Rats]

I heard something very interesting on CBS radio this morning. The anchor mentioned in connection with this story that Dubya supports a ban on gay marriage and Kerry opposes it. Technically, that's not accurate. Kerry doesn't support the amendment, but he has said that the states should decide and that he favors civil unions, not gay marriage.

I found it curious that CBS would describe this the way they did, which is not good for Kerry when most people oppose gay Marriage -- even those who don't support the amendment. Usually, the network spin doesn't favor Dubya. Maybe somebody goofed at CBS.

[jwalsh07]

They started it and now it needs to be finished. Vote Bush and FMA.

[TonyBanks]

(CBS) Americans continue to oppose the idea of same-sex marriage and would support a constitutional amendment to ban it. Yet most do not feel that the issue should be part of the 2004 Election campaign, or that it is important enough to warrant the effort to change the Constitution

This makes no sense.

Americans support a constitutional amendment, yet do not feel it is important enough to warrant changing the Constitution?

CBS reporting at its finest.

[WhiteyAppleseed]

A ban on homosexual marriage violates the First Amendment. As does legalizing homosexual marriage and an elected official performing same-sex marriages in the town hall violates it even more so.

When homosexuals buy car insurance, is there a questionaire that asks what the individual does at home? Can you name whomever you want to be beneficiary of your life insurance? Is it illegal to sell homosexuals health insurance that enables them to provide benefits to another? The cost of the insurance varies from individuals, doesn't it? With or without a ban, with or without legalizing it, as long as we have free will, there will be those who freely choose to do otherwise.

Is a ban, while allowing unions, the best alternative? Anyone watch The Passion yet? What was Jesus' interactions with the Samaritan women at the well? You recall that he told her she had five husbands and that one she was with at the time wasn't her husband. She changed the subject immediately and talked about worshiping on the mountain.

Like it or not, the matter needs to be discussed.

[biblewonk]

Sign me up for "no legal recognition" at all for sodomites.

[lilylangtree]

"most do not feel that the issue should be part of the 2004 Election campaign"

Considering that it's a CBS poll (meaning ultra leftist liberal), this line constitutes the demoncRAT way of thinking. Why am I not surprised that CBS and demoncRATS are joined at the hip?

[Publius6961]

The only way to prevent the perverts from endlessly assaulting us with their neuroses and pathologies is a Constitutional amendment.
Nothing else will shut them up.

In the late seventies they pleaded and whined for understanding and tolerance, that's all. Honest.

They lied.

Too bad.
We have real serious and universal problems to address in the next few decades. Catering to perverts and coddling them is one we can do without.

[rogueleader]

I honestly do not care one bit if George W Bush's economic policy drives us into the second great depression. So long as marriage is protected from the corrupting sodomite assault we can rebuild the economy later.

George W Bush - economy tanks, marriage preserved, we avoid another 9/11, Iran does not get nukes

John "Backtrack" Kerry - economy doesn't tank as badly, marriage destroyed, we get another 9/11, Iran gets nukes

We can rebuild the economy within a few years. We cannot rebuild the institution of marriage until generations and generations have passed. None of it means anything if the terrorists gain the upper hand in the war.

Vote Bush.

[ChevyZ28]

The stench of a leftist spin in this article rises to even the highest levels of heaven itself. What about this 482% figure. Did CBS also poll dead people? The population of the United States is some where around 296 million people, if I am not mistaken. Can you imagine if our population were increased by 482%? Did they actually mean 48.2%? Who knows when the liberal media is involved?

[fml]

REASON MOST PEOPLE WHO FAVOR SAME-SEX MARRIAGE DO SO? To obtain legal rights for gays 37% To get society to approve of gays 482%

That polling for you.

[talleyman]

Veerrrry in-te-res-ting!

[RockandRollResurrection]

The tyranny of the majority is NEVER a basis for law, and should be guarded against. Thomas Jefferson said so, and I'll take his word over... well... the current leadership, if you will. Nor is the tyranny of the majority a basis for mutilating our precious Constitution. That's where the "7/10 oppose it" argument falls down.

So does the "it's an ancient institution" argument. Guess what? So was slavery. So is murder and torture. Next argument? Oh, you don't have anymore?

Basically, all that's left is that heterosexuals won't feel as "Special" ad they did before. Guess what? Feeeeeeeeelings don't dictate public policy, nor should they. If you want special rights, move to a commie country and make friends with the "Generalissimo". I'm sure you'd like it better there.

[Lorianne]

Overall, 56% think defining marriage as only between a man and a woman is not an important enough issue to warrant changing the Constitution. Yet most - 57% - who support the amendment think the issue merits a change to the Constitution.

Huh? Anyone have a clue what this means?