Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Over Time, a Gay Marriage Groundswell (NYT Uses Its Crystal Ball)
New York Times ^ | 8/21/10 | Andrew Gelman, Jeffrey Lax, & Justin Philips

Posted on 08/27/2010 8:57:30 AM PDT by zort

Gay marriage is not going away as a highly emotional, contested issue. Proposition 8, the California ballot measure that bans same-sex marriage, has seen to that, as it winds its way through the federal courts.

But perhaps the public has reached a turning point.

A CNN poll this month found that a narrow majority of Americans supported same-sex marriage--the first poll to find majority support. Other poll results did not go that far, but still, on average, showed that support for gay marriage had risen to 45 percent or more (with the rest either opposed or undecided).

That’s a big change from 1996, when Congress passed the Defense of Marriage Act. At that time, only 25 percent of Americans said that gay and lesbian couples should have the right to marry, according to an average of national polls....

According to our research, as recently as 2004, same-sex marriage did not have majority support in any state. By 2008, three states had crossed the 50 percent line.*

Today, 17 states are over that line (more if you consider the CNN estimate correct that just over 50 percent of the country supports gay marriage)....

This trend will continue. Nationally, a majority of people under age 30 support same-sex marriage. And this is not because of overwhelming majorities found in more liberal states that skew the national picture: our research shows that a majority of young people in almost every state support it. As new voters come of age, and as their older counterparts exit the voting pool, it’s likely that support will increase, pushing more states over the halfway mark.

State figures are based on a statistical technique has been used to generate state estimates from national polls....

(Excerpt) Read more at nytimes.com ...


TOPICS: Culture/Society; Extended News; Politics/Elections
KEYWORDS: bostonglobe; culturewar; downourthroats; gaymarriage; homosexualagenda; incrementalism; inourfaces; lavendermafia; margaretmarshall; nytimesagenda; pravdamedia; romney; samesexmarriage
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-63 next last
What kind of "statistical technique" can generate state estimates from national polls?

Also, I was amused by this comment:

As new voters come of age, and as their older counterparts exit the voting pool
LOL -- older voters don't exit the voting pool... they stick with the Democratic Party forever. ;-)
1 posted on 08/27/2010 8:57:33 AM PDT by zort
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: zort

“Gay marriage is not going away as a highly emotional, contested issue”

When has the NYet Times ever led off an article about protecting unborn children with a sentence like this?


2 posted on 08/27/2010 9:00:16 AM PDT by a fool in paradise (Those who support the construction of the WTC mosque oppose Christian missionaries working abroad.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: zort

I don’t care if 99.999% of the people support gay marriage. I don’t, won’t and never will...


3 posted on 08/27/2010 9:01:59 AM PDT by Russ (Repeal the 17th amendment)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: zort

And as more red diaper doper babies are edumacated through public schools, oppositition to Communism, Socialism, and the decline of America’s standard of living also wanes.


4 posted on 08/27/2010 9:02:01 AM PDT by a fool in paradise (Those who support the construction of the WTC mosque oppose Christian missionaries working abroad.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Russ

How about if their polls showed 103% support for it?


5 posted on 08/27/2010 9:02:50 AM PDT by a fool in paradise (Those who support the construction of the WTC mosque oppose Christian missionaries working abroad.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: zort

NYT should start with a poll of their reporters and editors—and publish it.


6 posted on 08/27/2010 9:04:13 AM PDT by cgbg (Summer recovery?--Lying is what they _do_.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: zort
A CNN poll this month found that a narrow majority of Americans supported same-sex marriage

The poll was BS when first published, and it is still BS.

7 posted on 08/27/2010 9:05:51 AM PDT by MEGoody (Ye shall know the truth, and the truth shall make you free.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: zort

From where I sit there is only a small hard-core minority of gay activists who are really FOR gay marriage.

The rest of the population is divided between those who are adamantly opposed, and those (mainly younger people) who seem indifferent on the subject.


8 posted on 08/27/2010 9:08:31 AM PDT by Buckeye McFrog
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: zort

1) gays will get married

2) the gay divorce rate will be 4 times that of straight couples

3) the primary cause of the high divorce rate in gays will be ‘adultery’-—read about the very promiscuous lifestyle of the homosexual community.

4) lawyers will make a killing on the high divorce rate(what else is new)

5) gays will blame the high divorce rate on ‘nonacceptance prejudice’ from straights and demand new laws

6) NAMBLA will push for lowering the age of consent

7) Blacks and Hispanics will be the greatest opposition to gay marriage YET STILL vote democrat


9 posted on 08/27/2010 9:20:44 AM PDT by Le Chien Rouge
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Le Chien Rouge

And in addition to what you mention, we will see the same legal arguments for same-sex marriage (i.e. consenting adults in relationships want equal rights, etc. ) will be used to justify polygamy and group marriage. Limiting the number of people in a marriage to two will be said by judges to be as discriminatory as limiting marriage to opposite sex partners. The seeds for this are being planted now.


10 posted on 08/27/2010 9:53:11 AM PDT by Dilbert San Diego
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: Le Chien Rouge
"Blacks and Hispanics will be the greatest opposition to gay marriage YET STILL vote democrat"

Yep. I say this all the time, but no one gets it. This is why homosexual marriage is inevitable. Without support from blacks and Latinos in 2008, Prop 8 would have failed. Exit polls in other states in 2004 showed a similar dynamic - heavy support for traditional marriage from minorities. Those same blacks and Latinos then voted for politicians who either pass homosexual-friendly legislation, or nominate and confirm homosexual-friendly judges.

On NAMBLA, it's never going to happen. First, consent laws are set by the state, not the FedGov. Second, the sickos in NAMBLA don't want to have sex with teenagers, they want to have sex with children - they're pedophiles. That is never going to happen. For a lot of different reasons, the age of consent is never going to be lower than 15 or 16 (for sex between a minor and adult). It is lower is some states for sex between two minors.

11 posted on 08/27/2010 10:02:07 AM PDT by OldDeckHand
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: zort

Inevitable?

You mean like the Equal Rights Amendment?

Wasn’t that also inevitable?


12 posted on 08/27/2010 10:04:15 AM PDT by PanzerKardinal (Some things are so idiotic only an intellectual would believe it.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: OldDeckHand
On NAMBLA, it's never going to happen.

20 years ago they were saying that about homosexual "marriage". Now you're throwing in the towel and being a defeatist, calling it inevitable. 20 years from now, another defeatist may be saying the same about NAMBLA.

Give an inch and they'll take a mile.

13 posted on 08/27/2010 10:16:59 AM PDT by DJ MacWoW (If Bam is the answer, the question was stupid.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: DJ MacWoW
"20 years from now, another defeatist may be saying the same about NAMBLA. "

No, it won't. Why? Because in addition to social conservatives not wanting to lower the age of consent, militant feminists don't either. They believe that sex between a grown man and a teenage girl is rape. NAMBLA has no friends on the left, nor right.

I'm not a "defeatist". I'm a realist. I'm smart enough to understand practical realities, demographics, law, and the legislative process. Prohibitions on homosexual marriage will be struck by the Court, probably within the next five years, and there isn't the political will to pass a constitutional amendment. If you think there is, you don't have any idea how constitutional amendments are passed.

14 posted on 08/27/2010 10:27:24 AM PDT by OldDeckHand
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: DJ MacWoW

“Give an inch and they’ll take a mile.”
Ah, the slippery slope. Unfortunately, this is a battle thats been going for a reasonable amount of time. But the problem is related to desensitization, which means that people get used to it and stop caring about it and more significantly stop opposing it. So disappointing as it may seem (and it really is) this does seem inevitable.


15 posted on 08/27/2010 10:29:54 AM PDT by kroll
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: MEGoody

I’d wait for a few more polls to confirm or deny any given result.


16 posted on 08/27/2010 10:32:09 AM PDT by zort (When someone resorts to calling you a "troll", that's when you know they've lost the argument.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: zort

The phrase “Mr. and Mr.” will never be uttered by me.


17 posted on 08/27/2010 10:32:54 AM PDT by Psycho_Bunny (Hail To The Fail-In-Chief)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: OldDeckHand
Because in addition to social conservatives not wanting to lower the age of consent,

Yup. We won on abortion, didn't we. We were ASSURED that it was ONLY in the case of incest, rape and the life of the mother. It would NEVER be used as birth control.

militant feminists don't either.

You mean those women that are all over islam for women's rights?

They believe that sex between a grown man and a teenage girl is rape.

They back what is politically expedient at the moment.

I'm not a "defeatist". I'm a realist.

You're also not a conservative.

18 posted on 08/27/2010 10:38:52 AM PDT by DJ MacWoW (If Bam is the answer, the question was stupid.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: OldDeckHand

I agree - as perverse as the idea of legalized gay marriage undoubtedly is, it still is a choice of consenting adults and affects how the Courts would see it. NAMBLA is an impossibility at every level that I can think of and conflating gay-marriage with it is absurd.


19 posted on 08/27/2010 10:41:18 AM PDT by kroll
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: kroll
Another defeatist. Why even bother to fight it, right? We'll just lose. /s

That attitude isn't popular on FR. This is not just a forum. It is a grassroots activist site. If you won't fight, get out of the way.

20 posted on 08/27/2010 10:41:26 AM PDT by DJ MacWoW (If Bam is the answer, the question was stupid.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

Comment #21 Removed by Moderator

Comment #22 Removed by Moderator

Comment #23 Removed by Moderator

To: OldDeckHand

“You’re not a conservative” is not an insult.


24 posted on 08/27/2010 10:56:54 AM PDT by Darksheare (I shook hands with Sheryl Crow and all I got was Typhus and a single sheet of toilet paper.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: kroll
NAMBLA is an impossibility at every level that I can think of and conflating gay-marriage with it is absurd.

True -- that argument is the equivalent of equating minor rollbacks in the welfare state with throwing Grandma out to starve.

25 posted on 08/27/2010 10:59:19 AM PDT by zort (When someone resorts to calling you a "troll", that's when you know they've lost the argument.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: Darksheare
"You’re not a conservative” is not an insult."

That's your opinion. It's not mine.

When someone is called "not a conservative", when speaking on a conservative forum, it is plainly insulting.

Do you think it was a compliment? It was an attempt to define me. It was either a flattering definition, or an insulting definition. I'm sorry you aren't able to discern that.

26 posted on 08/27/2010 11:01:24 AM PDT by OldDeckHand
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: OldDeckHand

Just a statement, that’s all.
You’d have to be incredibly thin skinned to feel insulted by that.


27 posted on 08/27/2010 11:04:00 AM PDT by Darksheare (I shook hands with Sheryl Crow and all I got was Typhus and a single sheet of toilet paper.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: zort
Over Time, a Gay Marriage Groundswell (NYT Uses Its Crystal Ball)

Frank Bruni swears he fell on it in the shower.

28 posted on 08/27/2010 11:06:05 AM PDT by RichInOC (No! BAD Rich! (What'd I say?))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: OldDeckHand
Ruth Buzzy Ginsberg thinks the age of consent should be 12. Never say never.
29 posted on 08/27/2010 11:11:14 AM PDT by HenpeckedCon (What pi$$es me off the most is that POS commie will get a State Funeral!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: Darksheare
"Just a statement, that’s all. You’d have to be incredibly thin skinned to feel insulted by that."

Statements aren't necessarily made in a vacuum - absent any prior history. Just saying.

30 posted on 08/27/2010 11:11:34 AM PDT by OldDeckHand
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: OldDeckHand

Again, you’d have to be INCREDIBLY thin skinned to be insulted by that.


31 posted on 08/27/2010 11:13:32 AM PDT by Darksheare (I shook hands with Sheryl Crow and all I got was Typhus and a single sheet of toilet paper.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: Darksheare

I dunno — basically, it’s an accusation that “you don’t belong here”.


32 posted on 08/27/2010 11:14:56 AM PDT by zort (When someone resorts to calling you a "troll", that's when you know they've lost the argument.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: zort

Sorry, it’s not an insult.
Neither is telling someone they’re thin skinned.


33 posted on 08/27/2010 11:15:54 AM PDT by Darksheare (I shook hands with Sheryl Crow and all I got was Typhus and a single sheet of toilet paper.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]

To: zort

Oh, and “Welcome to FR.”


34 posted on 08/27/2010 11:17:37 AM PDT by Darksheare (I shook hands with Sheryl Crow and all I got was Typhus and a single sheet of toilet paper.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]

To: Darksheare
"Again, you’d have to be INCREDIBLY thin skinned to be insulted by that."

You'd have to be a pretty unintelligent person to think that this was our first exchange.

You don't think that, do you? And, you'd have to be pretty thin-skinned if you think being called unintelligent is insulting - it's just a statement, right?

See how this works.

Saying someone is not a conservative on a conservative website, isn't flattering and it's not a term of endearment. Insults are either bad for everyone, or they're bad for no one. It can't be something in the middle.

35 posted on 08/27/2010 11:23:39 AM PDT by OldDeckHand
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: OldDeckHand

You’d have to be INCREDIBLY THIN SKINNED to be insulted by that.


36 posted on 08/27/2010 11:31:02 AM PDT by Darksheare (I shook hands with Sheryl Crow and all I got was Typhus and a single sheet of toilet paper.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 35 | View Replies]

To: Darksheare
"You’d have to be INCREDIBLY THIN SKINNED to be insulted by that."

And you would have to be INCREDIBLY OBTUSE to think that.

You can call me names, and I can call you names. It isn't that complicated, to anyone who isn't INCREDIBLY OBTUSE.

I can be just as argumentative as you seem to want to be. In fact, I enjoy it.

37 posted on 08/27/2010 11:34:33 AM PDT by OldDeckHand
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 36 | View Replies]

To: OldDeckHand

Still doesn’t change the fact that you would have to be incredibly thin skinned to be insulted by a statement.
You can wiggle, squirm, and try to best Lawrence Taylor’s football field footwork all you want, doesn’t change the fact that you’d have to be incredibly thin skinned to be insulted by “You’re not a conservative”.


38 posted on 08/27/2010 11:36:55 AM PDT by Darksheare (I shook hands with Sheryl Crow and all I got was Typhus and a single sheet of toilet paper.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 37 | View Replies]

To: OldDeckHand

>In fact, I enjoy it.

No, you don’t.


39 posted on 08/27/2010 11:41:53 AM PDT by swarthyguy (KIDS! Deficit, Debt,Taxes!Pfft Lookit the bright side of our legacy -Ummrika is almost SmokFrei!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 37 | View Replies]

To: Darksheare

Is exactly the argument someone would make who was incredibly obtuse. You’ve got that down. You should look for a publisher. Your first book is going to be a blockbuster.


40 posted on 08/27/2010 11:42:24 AM PDT by OldDeckHand
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 38 | View Replies]

To: OldDeckHand

For someone who is so hurt over the words “You’re not a conservative”, you sure like to try to dish it out.
So why try?
Being that thin skinned means you’re only going to be MORE hurt afterwards.


41 posted on 08/27/2010 11:54:28 AM PDT by Darksheare (I shook hands with Sheryl Crow and all I got was Typhus and a single sheet of toilet paper.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 40 | View Replies]

To: Russ

I don’t care if 99.999% of the people support gay marriage. I don’t, won’t and never will...”

Same here.

This poll is suspect:
WHOM they ack questions, as well as exactly HOW the question is phrased is key.

If I ask 500 horse owners if they like horses, I have totally skewed the poll.


42 posted on 08/27/2010 11:54:41 AM PDT by ridesthemiles
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Darksheare
"Being that thin skinned means you’re only going to be MORE hurt afterwards."

Is the conclusion someone would come to if they were obtuse.

You think I'm thin-skinned and I think you're obtuse. I believe that has been established. Do you have anything additional to add to the dialogue, other than my alleged thin-skinnedness?

43 posted on 08/27/2010 12:00:25 PM PDT by OldDeckHand
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 41 | View Replies]

To: swarthyguy

Some people do enjoy being abusive.


44 posted on 08/27/2010 12:08:18 PM PDT by DJ MacWoW (If Bam is the answer, the question was stupid.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 39 | View Replies]

To: DJ MacWoW

Thanks for steering the thread back on course.

Abuse in gay marriage? NO!!!

And after the groundswell, the rip tide of divorce.


45 posted on 08/27/2010 12:11:29 PM PDT by swarthyguy (KIDS! Deficit, Debt,Taxes!Pfft Lookit the bright side of our legacy -Ummrika is almost SmokFrei!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 44 | View Replies]

To: 185JHP; 230FMJ; AFA-Michigan; Abathar; Agitate; Albion Wilde; Aleighanne; Alexander Rubin; ...
Homosexual Agenda and Moral Absolutes Ping!

Freepmail wagglebee to subscribe or unsubscribe from the homosexual agenda or moral absolutes ping list.

FreeRepublic homosexual agenda keyword search
[ Add keyword homosexual agenda to flag FR articles to this ping list ]

FreeRepublic moral absolutes keyword search
[ Add keyword moral absolutes to flag FR articles to this ping list ]

Oookay, so the NYT, which a very few years ago had at least 75% of its staff admitted homosexuals, is now Nostradamos? Predicts the future in favor of "Perversion Wins"? Anyone who places any credence in this propaganda is either a spineless, gutless coward eunuch, or on their side. Trying to instill defeatism in others is a nasty coward's way of fighting. I see a lot of it lately on FR.

If a person actually has conservative principles but is constantly telling others stuff like "It's over, it's hopeless, they'll win, get used to it" - they're as bad as that coward in "Saving Private Ryan" who refused to deliver the ammo and caused so many deaths. Cowards can go to hell, as far as I'm concerned.

And those who are not the cowards with supposed principles are just regular leftists (aka "pragmatists" and "realists" - btw, so well described in Screwtape and "That Hideous Strength") who want to instill fear and defeatism in conservatives so their side can win.

It's that simple. Read my tagline by C.S.Lewis. He was right.

46 posted on 08/27/2010 12:13:26 PM PDT by little jeremiah (Courage is not simply one of the virtues, but the form of every virtue at the testing point.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: swarthyguy

There was another thread yesterday about a lesbian that killed another woman over her ex. I didn’t get if it was a love triangle but it does show the emotional instability of homosexual relationships. Homosexuals are emotionally unstable. I have a brother that is “gay”. I spent time with him and his friends. They are emotional children.


47 posted on 08/27/2010 12:17:45 PM PDT by DJ MacWoW (If Bam is the answer, the question was stupid.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 45 | View Replies]

To: little jeremiah
If a person actually has conservative principles but is constantly telling others stuff like "It's over, it's hopeless, they'll win, get used to it" - they're as bad as that coward in "Saving Private Ryan" who refused to deliver the ammo and caused so many deaths. Cowards can go to hell, as far as I'm concerned.

I agree. FR is not just a forum. It is an activist site. Part of it's purpose is to counteract the left's message. Those that give in to defeatism and call it reality are counterproductive and aiding the left's agenda. FR's message should be "fight or shut up".

48 posted on 08/27/2010 12:21:30 PM PDT by DJ MacWoW (If Bam is the answer, the question was stupid.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 46 | View Replies]

To: zort; kroll

You’re both wrong, of course. NAMBLA used to march in “Gay Pride parades until the organizers realized it made bad propaganda.

Plus, eliminating - no lowering, but eliminating - all (as in “ALL”) age of consent laws was on the original platform of “gay” rights, but they had to soften that up (for now). It’s their goal, though.

So you are both 100% wrong. Not surprising, though.


49 posted on 08/27/2010 12:24:36 PM PDT by little jeremiah (Courage is not simply one of the virtues, but the form of every virtue at the testing point.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: Darksheare

It’s not that he’s insulted; it’s just that he isn’t a conservative, knows it, and doesn’t want to be totally outed and banned.


50 posted on 08/27/2010 12:27:58 PM PDT by little jeremiah (Courage is not simply one of the virtues, but the form of every virtue at the testing point.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 38 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-63 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson