Six out of 10 Americans Say Homosexual Relations Should Be Recognized as Legal

GALLUP NEWS SERVICE ^ | May 15, 2003 | Frank Newport

[rs79bm]

Pheeewww, I don't think anyone is calling for the end of the human race....but I get your point. Afterall, homesexuals would not even be here if their parents had practiced what homosexuals practice. Soooooo, how do you explain that, people?

[Freebird Forever]

what about the other 250,000,000+ in the US?

Exactly!

Six out of 10 Americans ........ randomly selected national sample of 1,005 adults

This is just another extremely specious extrapolation by the sodomite lobby intended to foist their agenda.

No rest for the wicked

[steplock]

"Gallup's recent Values and Beliefs survey shows that a majority of Americans accept the idea that homosexual relations between consenting adults should be legal and that homosexuality is an acceptable way of life."

This is simply a blatant LIE.

I will believe that the majority of Americans said that homosexual relations between consenting adults should NOT be ILLEGAL. This is a BIG difference in saying it should be LEGAL (denotes approval).

The statement "homosexuality is an acceptable way of life" is the 100% LIE. Well, let's say 1% homosexuals say ok, 10% stupid idiot left-wing radicals say ok, and 10% schitzo... skitsso... NUTS! say ok.
;>)

[El Conservador]

And I just got flamed for calling American Idol's Clay Aiken closeted gay.

Well...

[cake_crumb]

"If the question is re-phrased to emphasize giving 'some of the legal rights of married couples,' but without the assumption that they would in some ways be 'married,' public opinion breaks even."

I doesn't sound to me like the majority of Americans now support special legal rights for gays.

Since 1997, Gallup has been asking Americans the same question over and over, each time gauging the reaction not to the QUESTION, but to the way the question is PHRASED, thus Gallup has been subtly fine-tuning the PHRASING of the question in order to get slightly different rusults each time. This article shows the upward curve in the response trend over a period of years, proving nothing except that the public was getting more and more duped by the POINT behind the PHRASING of the question.

Yes, propaganda works. We all know that already.

[TLBSHOW]

Nobody says getting rid of liberalism was going to be easy. Start with getting rid of tv.

[Belial]

this poll is still suspect. I believe these are out to try and cloakroom influence the US Supreme Court.

What a bunch of tinfoil nonsense.

It may be hard to believe, but the majority of Americans aren't particularly interested in regulating the sex lives of consenting adults.

[borntodiefree]

I have a few ideas. Let's see:

1)allow people to hire and fire whoever they dang well please its their money!!(Government employess being the exception...of course lets have a lot less of them too)

2)Quit paying for the healthcare of these homos...and everyone else for that matter. No one has a right to healthcare, it is up to the individual, family, church, and the "volunteers" in the community!!

3)Remind the "government" they don't have jurisdiction in the institution of marriage and have no business deciding who or what "marriage" is or having any input in the matter.

4)First and foremost lets have parents get away from the TV and the church out of their pee-uhs (pews) and take responsibility for training people (children) in Godly morals.

Lets see: (short list in reference to this topic)
Personal Accountability
+ government convicting "real crimes" (murder, rape, etc...)
+ people dealing with the results of their personal actions
+ work for who you want
+ hire who you want
+ succeed or fail on your own initiatives
+ decide to serve the God of Heaven and His Christ or not
__________________________________________
L I B E R T Y

[Remedy]

Maybe their rumps should be tatooed. "Warning: The Surgeon General has determined that Annal Sex May Be Hazardous to Your Health."

[steplock]

"How can anyone support a biological activity, that if practiced by everyone, would mean the END of the HUMAN RACE. Makes no sense!"

Sure it does! Just find out WHO is advocating this and NOT practicing it! Some families in Massachussetts come to mind here.

This goes along with the "De-stygmatizing" of AIDS, hepatitis, and other health-threatning activities. See WHO are dying of these practices. WHO would benifit? Which Country? Religion???

Hmmmmm....Islam doesn't promote nor condone this activity in their countries.

Other odd thing ... SARS began in the Chinese province with the HIGHEST concentration of AIDS and other sexually transmitted diseases....this very soon after China publicized the "acceptance" of homosexuality and de-stygmatizing those infected with AIDS. Original reports showed a correlation of SARS and Chlamedia (sp?).

Food for thought.

[ffusco]

Man, are you gonna get more than you bargained for from Rem!

[ethical]

Do you really think men and women in heterosexual relationships would limit themselves to a BJ every time all the time? Get real. The point is that no matter what homos or lesbians engage in sexually there will be no baby.

[ffusco]

"death to all who enter"

[Remedy]

2)Quit paying for the healthcare of these homos...and everyone else for that matter.

Texas Phys.Resource Council, Christian Med. & Dental Association, Catholic Med.Association

Texas has a legitimate interest in regulating public health, and the CDC has identified sexually transmitted diseases ("STDs") as a public health problem. Sodomy is an efficient method of transmitting STDs. And regardless of the reason, same-sex sodomy is far more effective in spreading STDs than opposite-sex sodomy. Multiple studies have estimated that 40 percent or more of men who practice anal sex acquire STDs. In fact, same-sex sodomy has resulted in the transformation of diseases previously transmitted only through fecally contaminated food and water into sexually caused diseases primarily among those who practice same-sex sodomy.

[Houmatt]

This is all poppycock created by Gallup.

Look, if they wanted to ask a question that was specific and straightforward, they could have and should asked: Should a group of people be given a minority status (read: special treatment) due to their sexual behavior?

I firmly believe you will find most people will say NO, and gallup knows this, which is why their questions were more convoluted and deceitful than specific.

Here is an example:

"As you may know, there has been considerable discussion in the news regarding the rights of homosexual men and women. In general, do you think homosexuals should or should not have equal rights in terms of job opportunities?"

What they don't tell you is homosexuals already have "equal rights in terms of job opportunities" as citizens of this country. Things change, however, when they make their sexual behavior an issue. Employers do not, and should not have to hire someone whose behavior they object to on whatever grounds. I mean, should the owner of a Christian bookstore be forced to hire an open, in your face homosexual? Of course not.

[Lizavetta]

If you meant it seriously, then please answer the following question: In what way is a consensual relationship between two adults of the same sex even remotely comparable to the premeditated murder of thousands of people?

I think he used the Atta example because it's just as unlikely and ridiculous as the 6 out of 10 bullsh*t. And the article isn't talking about a 'consensual relationship' - they're talking about equating traditional marriages with deviant marriages.

Furthermore, after the gay marriage thing passes, the next 'lifestyle' for which they'll demand legal recognition and protection is swinging, then bestiality, then who knows what else. Remember when the legalization of abortion was for 'the very poorest of women', 'the most desperate situations', etc.? Now there's abortions for everyone, at any time, for any reason.

[Belial]

I will say it again, "How can anyone support a biological activity, that if practiced by everyone, would mean the END of the HUMNAN RACE. Makes no sense!

Perhaps the reason you need to repeat yourself is that your statement is irrelevant to the question at hand, which is whether gay couples should be allowed to get married.

I'll tell you what makes no sense. My boss is celebrating his 14 year anniversary with his partner today. On the other hand, straight couples are getting married as part of a gameshow. Who wants to marry a millionaire? Who gives a damn. It's a twisted world we live in, full of a lot of BS and double standards.

[Remedy]

SODOMY : The Lords of Bakersfield (Powerful gay men. Vulnerable teen-age boys. Murder.)

SODOMY : Homosexual Rape and Murder of Children

SODOMY : Log Cabin leader tied to Website urged murder of President Reagan, Christian leaders

SODOMY : Major Scientific Study Examines Domestic Violence Among Gay Men

SODOMY : Sex Abuse And Homosexuals

SODOMY : Bug Chasers:The men who long to be HIV+

[caisson71]

BS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[ffusco]

So you accept that the vast majority of sex people have has nothing to do with pro-creation as a desired result.