Support for Gay Marriage/Civil Unions Edges Upward

Gallup News Service ^ | May 17, 2004 | David W. Moore and Joseph Carroll

[RWR8189]

Public remains divided on constitutional amendment to ban gay marriage

PRINCETON, NJ -- Same-sex marriages have been cleared to become legal Monday in Massachusetts after a federal judge last week refused a challenge to the Massachusetts court ruling that granted same-sex couples the right to marry. A recent CNN/USA Today/Gallup survey finds a modest increase in the number of Americans who support giving gay couples some of the legal rights that heterosexual couples enjoy. The public is about evenly divided on a law that would establish gay civil unions with some of the same rights that marriages have, and it remains more opposed than supportive of giving gay marriages the same legal status as traditional marriages. However, for both proposals, there is somewhat greater support today than there was several months ago. Still, there has been little change in the ambivalence the public expresses about adopting a constitutional amendment that would effectively ban gay marriage, with slightly more people in support than opposed.

The poll, conducted May 2-4, 2004, finds that when the question on civil unions is asked before any mention of gay marriage, 49% of Americans favor and 48% oppose "a law that would allow homosexual couples to legally form civil unions, giving them some of the legal rights of married couples." These views are similar to those expressed a year ago, in a May 5-7, 2003, poll, which also found a divided public, 49% in favor and 49% opposed. But the following July, in the wake of a Supreme Court decision overturning a Texas law that prohibited sodomy between same-sex couples, there appeared to be a public backlash, as support for civil unions dropped to 40% and opposition increased to 57%.

 

Would You Favor or Oppose a Law That Would Allow Homosexual Couples to Legally Form Civil Unions?

The poll also finds that when questions about gay marriage are asked before any mention of civil unions, 42% of Americans say that "marriages between homosexuals should be recognized by the law as valid," an increase from 33% in March of this year.

 

Do You Think Marriages Between Homosexuals Should or Should Not Be
Recognized by the Law as Valid?

This is the highest level of support found by Gallup since it began asking the question in 1996..............

Would You Favor or Oppose a Constitutional Amendment That Would Define Marriage as Being Between a Man and a Woman?

[RWR8189]

Gallup Ping

FReepmail me if you want to be on or off the list.

[glock rocks]

there's a divorce in the left coast's future.

9th district, irs, cascade.

[massiveblob]

Would You Favor or Oppose a Constitutional Amendment That Would Define Marriage as Being Between a Man and a Woman?

Favor: 51%

Dissaprove: 45%

Hey we might be able to get that amendment passed.

[det dweller too]

Okay, let the games begin!
Next step is for some siblings to go for the rings. And there are very practical reasons here. Suppose a brother has a good job with great benefits and his brother/sister has a big bad disease or condition requiring extensive medical attention. They have an even better reason to "marry" than the current crop of applicants in Massachusetts. Lets watch those clowns in the black robes turn themselves inside out trying to get around the sibling proposal once they accept the gay proposal.

[rbg81]

Public support for the war in Iraq is slipping, but support for gay marriage is growing. Why am I not surprised?

[Democratshavenobrains]

I would be willing to settle for civil unions at this point, but the I doubt most gays would. If a guy wants to make sure his boyfriend gets all his stuff after he dies, he should be able to.

[Badeye]

There is something the gay community has completely and totally overlooked on this "issue".

For decades, its been heatedly debated just how large of a percentage the "gay community" actually makes up of the American population.

The only numbers ever tossed around with even a modicrum of validity are from the Kinsley Report, and thats fifty years old if I remember correctly, and was seriously "flawed" as a statistical study.

Five years from now, we will have a rather large database of who applied for a "gay" marriage license, for want of a better term.

I suspect we are going to discover that gays make up less than 3% of the entire population, folks.

And that will in effect end the political power bestowed in large part by a willing media, and liberalism.

On topic, I don't have a problem with "civil unions", just don't call it marriage. If gays want to experience the joy of divorce, so be it....

[Kerberos]

"Suppose a brother has a good job with great benefits and his brother/sister has a big bad disease or condition requiring extensive medical attention"

I would think that would be classified as a pre-exsisting condition and not covered. At least that is how all of the insurance plans I have been under worked.

[det dweller too]

You are right, of course, but in life there are gray corners. Brother may know something is not quite right with sis, but they don't have any test results yet. And they know they don't want test results for the exact reason you gave. Ya know, all these rules simply move the action point. The Key point I am making is there are a huge load of applicants for married status that will appear if the gay marrage thing goes through.