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

Skip to comments.

Rumors of the Death of Anti-Gay Marriage Movement Greatly Exaggerated
Pajamas Media ^ | 03/29/2013 | Rick Moran

Posted on 03/29/2013 8:22:40 AM PDT by SeekAndFind

Gay-marriage advocates have been laying it on thick these last few days, building what appears to be an unstoppable momentum that will contribute to the inevitable: legalized same-sex marriage in all 50 states.

It’s only unstoppable in their imagination, and if they don’t start taking a longer view of things, they are apt to be royally disappointed. Exactly five polls have come out in the last fortnight that show a majority support for gay marriage — today. Those polls also show a strong minority — more than 40% — still opposed. Such a rapid change in public opinion on an issue that has been controversial for 20 years should be suspect. Other factors could be in play that help explain the shift.

What will those numbers be six months from now? As we’ve seen with the abortion issue and other sensitive social issues, there appears to be a portion of the U.S. population that flits back and forth between the pro and anti positions, depending on which way the political wind is blowing.

One could even argue that the toxicity of the GOP and conservatism in general may be driving some of the increased support for gay marriage. Who wants to take a position on an issue associated with the party of old, bluenose fuddy-duddies?

The bottom line: Anti-gay marriage advocates aren’t giving up and aren’t going anywhere. Those who see opposition to gay marriage as a moral calling or as a cause to save “traditional marriage” may lose a round or two in the courts, but rest assured that they are girding their loins for battle in state legislatures across the country. There are still 41 states that have not approved same-sex marriage, and for the marriage-equality crowd, it’s still going to be a long, uphill climb to achieve their goal.

Jonathan Chait has designated himself obituary writer for the anti-gay marriage movement, claiming that Maggie Gallagher, a prominent figure in the movement, has all but given up:

Now the movement is in a state of total collapse, with every day seeming to bring new converts to the gay-marriage cause and the opposition losing all of its courage. There is no more telling sign of the opposition’s surrender than the public demoralization of Maggie Gallagher, the leading anti-gay-marriage activist and writer.

The unusual thing about the campaign to ban gay marriage is that it was dying from the moment it was born. Even at its peak, at the very outset, the portents of doom were visible on the horizon — polls showed that young voters strongly supported gay marriage. The best case for Gallagher and her allies appeared to be holding on for years, or even decades, but eventually gay-marriage opponents would age out of the electorate.

If Mr. Chait’s crystal ball is that good, he should change careers and become a stock touter. Attitudes of the young can change from generation to generation. For example, more women today are pro-life than were 10 years ago. It’s true that opposition to gay marriage is highest among older Americans. But Chait, who has been touting a similar end to the GOP because of changing demographics in America, should take a closer look at his pet numbers: 66% of black Protestants say that “same-sex marriage would violate their religious beliefs.” And 69% of Catholics — a large percentage being Hispanics — also believe gay marriage would violate their religious tenets. At least 58% of black voters backed Proposition 8 in California (exit polls showed 70% support).

In short, the reported demise of the anti-gay marriage movement has been greatly exaggerated and is based more on wishful thinking than cogent analysis.

Just because a few politicians have recently stuck their fingers into the wind and had a Road to Damascus moment on gay marriage does not denote overwhelming, unstoppable momentum for universal gay-marriage rights in the U.S. This is especially true given the probability that the Supreme Court decisions on the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA) and the constitutionality of California’s Proposition 8 will serve only to open the door a little wider for states to decide the issue themselves. Yes, it’s a perilous game trying to predict how the Supreme Court will rule in those two cases. Recall that many of the same court watchers predicting victory for gay marriage also predicted the Roberts court would overturn the individual mandate in Obamacare. But the range of possibilities points to partial victories for gay-marriage supporters, with the justices leaving it up to states to decide the issue.



TOPICS: Constitution/Conservatism; Culture/Society; News/Current Events; Philosophy
KEYWORDS: gaymarriage; homosexuality; romneyagenda; romneymarriage

1 posted on 03/29/2013 8:22:40 AM PDT by SeekAndFind
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind

Where they been since DOMA passed? certainly not in Bush/Cheney admin


2 posted on 03/29/2013 8:24:40 AM PDT by sickoflibs (To GOP : Any path to US citizenship IS putting them ahead in line. Stop lying about your position.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind
Five out of nine fallible (or blackmailed) Supremes could rule that a horse is the same as a cow, or that 2+2=5, but they can't make them true.

Or they could rule that runaway slaves had to be captured and returned to their masters, as they did before, and that wouldn't be right either.

And they can rule that homosexuals can "marry," but they the can't make that unnatural union a natural marriage any more than they can declare a horse to be a cow.


3 posted on 03/29/2013 8:33:05 AM PDT by Travis McGee (www.EnemiesForeignAndDomestic.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: sickoflibs

Oh let them get married ,they will most of their time getting married , then in divorce court and you’ll never hear from them again ,plus the Dems will lose Gay Marriage bull


4 posted on 03/29/2013 8:34:37 AM PDT by molson209
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind

Marriage is not a "right". Not for homosexuals. Not for heterosexuals. Marriage is an inter-personal religious institution; a covenant between a man, a woman, and God. The government of the United States of America *chose* to recognize that union. Our predecessors recognized the value of marriage. They affirmed that the traditional family unit provided a stable environment conducive to good citizenship and the growth of a sound and moral nation. They did not create "marriage". They merely "recognized" it, and "chose" to encourage it for the betterment of the nation.

As such, we are playing in the liberals' ball field in the gay marriage debate. They have groomed the battlefield such that this has become a question of equal protection. Granted, that is a fallacious argument at the onset. Homosexuals and heterosexuals are equally protected already, because *neither* has the "right" to be married. But still, their's is an emotional and perhaps successful argument, because Conservative Evangelicals like to be "fair".

The Supreme Court should *not* be asking "is it fair or unfair" to support one union and not another. The Supreme Court should recall our predecessors *chose* to support one union for the stability and morality required for good citizenship. The Supreme Court *should* be pressing the gay marriage advocates to provide examples of the stability and morality they add for the purpose of nation building ... but provide it *to the legislature*. The legislature should either be encouraged or discouraged from recognizing a non-marital homosexual union. The Supreme Court *cannot* infringe on the free practice of religion -- and redefining a religious term does precisely that.

In a nutshell, this is the most ridiculous battle the Supreme Court has perhaps ever enjoined themselves into.


5 posted on 03/29/2013 8:42:39 AM PDT by so_real ( "The Congress of the United States recommends and approves the Holy Bible for use in all schools.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: molson209
RE :”Oh let them get married ,they will most of their time getting married , then in divorce court and you’ll never hear from them again ,plus the Dems will lose Gay Marriage bull”

they are here in Maryland.

6 posted on 03/29/2013 8:43:40 AM PDT by sickoflibs (To GOP : Any path to US citizenship IS putting them ahead in line. Stop lying about your position.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind

I’ve not seen anyone backing down. If anything groups like the National Organization for Marriage even with set backs in 2012 are even stronger as people are seeing the seriousness of this issue. It is one thing when people are just responding to the vaporous ideas of “fairness” and “equality” but when they see that SSM marriage means not just extending marriage to gays but to consenting to a suppression of the dominance of biologically correct marriage the opinion shifts markedly. The biggest problem is money. The only reason for the setbacks in 2012 was because Pro Marriage groups were outspent 10-1 in many cases while a billion $ was spent on electing Romney who did not make marriage a big issue even during the Chikfila blowup which was an opportunity. That said marriage out performed Romney by double digits in almost every one of the blue states where there were referendums. Also marriage is an issue that clearly unites blacks, whites, and Hispanics in a way other Republican politics doesn’t. Its an opportunity that has continued to be squandered because of elite consultants and GOP political class.

Look at France. It was unbelievable. Most people believe that people ought to be able to live their private lives as they see fit but the idea that a sexual deviance must be embraced and loved or else throughout society is another thing altogether. I’m not disheartened by the polls most are easily manipulated on this issue by changing just a few words and given such a hard push by the msm they are pulling out all stops. Also as this article rightly points out people can shift dramatically especially when they realize the liberty is at stake and only fools, traitors, or the uninformed could not see that it is.

The downside for the pro gay marriage side is inevitability causes people to believe that they no longer have to be active while it mobilizes the opposition and while we are all tired it is my opinion that the best arguments come out when you see a clear and present threat and the supreme court represents that.


7 posted on 03/29/2013 8:48:05 AM PDT by Maelstorm (This country wasn't founded with the battle cry "Give me liberty or give me a govt check!")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: molson209

You don’t know the homosexual rights crowd very well do you?


8 posted on 03/29/2013 8:49:16 AM PDT by Maelstorm (This country wasn't founded with the battle cry "Give me liberty or give me a govt check!")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind

9 posted on 03/29/2013 8:50:27 AM PDT by mbarker12474 (If thine enemy offend thee, give his childe a drum.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: molson209

Perhaps the anti gay marriage people are actually thinking this through and aren’t just a lot of reactionary bigots the media is portraying them to be (unlike the way they fairly portray them on all the other issues).

Think about this issue. Think it through. Where is it going?


10 posted on 03/29/2013 8:55:27 AM PDT by stanne
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: molson209
"never hear from them again"

You have GOT to be kidding.....these folks are just bit*hy whores of the world....they will NEVER shaddup.

11 posted on 03/29/2013 8:58:23 AM PDT by goodnesswins (R.I.P. Doherty, Smith, Stevens, Woods.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind
Results Table 2 from Mark Regnerus study of a RANDOM SAMPLING of adults who, as children, were raised by at least one gay parent. How did their lives turn out?

For example, did the respondent receive welfare benefits while growing up: -- from biologically intact families, 17% -- had a lesbian mother, 69% -- had a gay father, 57% -- was adopted by strangers, 12% -- parents divorced after subject turned 18, 47% -- had a step-parent, 53% -- raised by single parent, 48%

12 posted on 03/29/2013 9:24:23 AM PDT by mbarker12474 (If thine enemy offend thee, give his childe a drum.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: goodnesswins
You have GOT to be kidding.....these folks are just bit*hy whores of the world....they will NEVER shaddup.

True, too true. The Left is never satisfied, they will never shut-up. If they get this, then the group marriage people will be lining up for the next bite at this apple. And, they will get it because once you re-define marriage, you can just keep redefining it. If marriage, in this country, is no longer between one man and one woman; then, how - legally - do you prevent group marriages? There is no boundry anymore around the term. I would say that even morally (and please don't think I morally approve of anything other than marriage in the traditional sense) you are on thin ice if you think that "expanding" the definition of marriage once is going to end this issue. Every single fringe group out there will be using the same type of attack while demanding their "union" be considered marriage. Some fool woman in Seattle, got dressed up in a wedding gown to marry a building. (She was trying to prevent its demolition.) She will be in court to demand she and her building be officially recognized as a married couple. People are nuts out there. They have no realistic view of life.

And, every Democratic group will get behind these idiots and argue for their case because it isn't "fair" that she can't be married to a building and be legally recognised as having a marriage.

So, yes, they never shut-up, they are never satisfied, they have a long list of grievances to push while destroying this country.

13 posted on 03/29/2013 9:28:56 AM PDT by LibertarianLiz
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind

encouraging article. Thanks for posting.


14 posted on 03/29/2013 1:11:08 PM PDT by SoFloFreeper
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

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