Poll: Most Americans Oppose Gay Marriage

Discussion in 'Current Events' started by 5stringJeff, Apr 10, 2004.

?

What should be America's gay marraige policy?

  1. Constitutional Amendment banning gay marriage/civil unions

    17 vote(s)
    51.5%
  2. Constitutional amanedment on gay marriage, but civil unions OK

    4 vote(s)
    12.1%
  3. States decide their own gay marriage/civil unions laws

    3 vote(s)
    9.1%
  4. Federal protection for civil unions, but not gay marriage

    4 vote(s)
    12.1%
  5. Federal protection for gay marriages

    5 vote(s)
    15.2%
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. 5stringJeff
    Offline

    5stringJeff Senior Member

    Joined:
    Sep 15, 2003
    Messages:
    9,990
    Thanks Received:
    536
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Location:
    Puyallup, WA
    Ratings:
    +540
    So what's your opinion?


    --------------------
    Poll: Most Americans Oppose Gay Marriage

    LOS ANGELES - Most Americans oppose gay marriage and many believe homosexuality is "against God's will," but otherwise consider themselves tolerant of gays, according to a Los Angeles Times poll.

    By a margin of 55 to 41 percent, those polled agreed with the statement that "if gays are allowed to marry, the institution of marriage will be degraded."

    About half favored a U.S. constitutional amendment defining marriage as the union between a man and a woman, while 42 percent opposed it, according to the poll published Saturday on the newspaper's Web site.

    http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&cid=533&e=4&u=/ap/20040410/ap_on_re_us/gay_marriage_poll
     
  2. Hobbit
    Offline

    Hobbit Senior Member

    Joined:
    Mar 25, 2004
    Messages:
    5,099
    Thanks Received:
    420
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Location:
    Near Atlanta, GA
    Ratings:
    +421
    I've always said "Love the sinner, but hate the sin." I'm tolerant of gays, but allowing gay marriage would legitamize it.
     
  3. NewGuy
    Online

    NewGuy Guest

    Ratings:
    +0
    The Constitution is no place for this. It is supposed to grant citizens their basic freedoms and balance governmentpower.

    You put this in there, and you justify an ammendment for anything else. It will set a precedent for a Constitutional dictatorship faster than you can imagine.
     
  4. Hobbit
    Offline

    Hobbit Senior Member

    Joined:
    Mar 25, 2004
    Messages:
    5,099
    Thanks Received:
    420
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Location:
    Near Atlanta, GA
    Ratings:
    +421
    There is a Constitutional Ammendment banning slavery, which took away the rights of slave holders (granted, it gave rights to the slaves). There was also an ammendment that banned alchohol, which was later repealed. I say that as long as the people have the power to change the Constitution, let them changed it. A stagnant government leads to its downfall. Besides, unless we make it so that the Constitution directly opposed gay marriage, liberal, activist judges will continue to say that the Constitution protects gay marriage.
     
  5. DKSuddeth
    Offline

    DKSuddeth Senior Member

    Joined:
    Oct 20, 2003
    Messages:
    5,175
    Thanks Received:
    61
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Location:
    North Texas
    Ratings:
    +62
    I'm amazed by all the people in churches that love using 'god's will is known only to him' or some such nonsense, but then they know without a doubt that homosexuality is against god's will.

    Didn't they just get done saying that they truly don't know? :rolleyes:
     
  6. Hobbit
    Offline

    Hobbit Senior Member

    Joined:
    Mar 25, 2004
    Messages:
    5,099
    Thanks Received:
    420
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Location:
    Near Atlanta, GA
    Ratings:
    +421
    Well, the little bit of God's will that is known comes from the Bible, which is clearly against homosexuality. Sodom and Gommorah come to mind, as well as such verses as, "...but the liars, idolaters, homosexuals, (long list of sinful people) all have their place in the lake of fire."
     
  7. NewGuy
    Online

    NewGuy Guest

    Ratings:
    +0
    Which was stupid in the first place since "all men are created equal".

    This doesn't belong in the Constitution for the same reason the marriage ban doesn't. In addition, that was for tax reasons which is a whole other kettle of fish.

    They DON'T. They have the power of ADDING AMMENDMENTS which CLARIFY the Constitution. Have you read it? With all the people that keep making this statement, I am going to have to paste the whole dang thing in a thread so nobody can use the ignorance excuse.

    What the heck are you talking about? A government in the power of the PEOPLE has no downfall.

    Again. READ IT. These judges, according to the Constitution MUST BE IMPEACHED. -Not only that but they DO NOT WRITE CONSTITUTIONAL LAW nor do they INTERPRET IT.

    Did you not read the entire proof you demanded from me in another thread? Do I need to repost it?
     
  8. NewGuy
    Online

    NewGuy Guest

    Ratings:
    +0
    The Bible is a documentation of God's will in relation to man as it is relevant in regard to his salvation.

    The Bible is not and doesn't claim to be the end-all be-all of God's will. It claims in no uncertain terms what right and wrong are and how to behave accordingly. Most people including Christians have not sat down to read the whole thing and take it in context. The few who do tend to do large complicated studies and step over the ideas to pick at a detail. I would reccommend if there are questions or references to be pointed out, that one reads the entire PAGE of text to understand the frame of reference at the very least.
     
  9. insein
    Offline

    insein Senior Member

    Joined:
    Apr 10, 2004
    Messages:
    6,096
    Thanks Received:
    356
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Location:
    Philadelphia, Amazing huh...
    Ratings:
    +356
    Here's what i feel. Gay and lesbians should be allowed to have marriages. But in order to do so they need to change the law first. They cant have some leftist judge create law from the bench. There is a reason we have 3 branches of government. It is to prevent any one branch from obtaining too much power.

    The judicial branch is not the legislative branch. It is meant to judge and enforce the laws. They are not to Create new ones by interpretting current laws into their visions of what it should mean.

    That is my whole issue with this gay marriage fiasco. Law is law. If you want to change law, you goto your senator or rep and appeal them to make a new law for gay marriage. You dont encourage some left wing judge or mayor to hand out pieces of paper that basically flaunt the existing law.

    When blacks and women wanted their rights, they appealed to the legislators in order to make the law change. They didnt just go and make new laws out of the blue. It took years but they fought hard for their rights and won. They got the law to change. Thats the way it needs to be done.

    Evryone wants instant gratification nowadays. It doesnt work that way. You have to work for what you want. If its just handed to you, you'll take it for granted.
     
  10. Moi
    Offline

    Moi Active Member

    Joined:
    Sep 2, 2003
    Messages:
    1,859
    Thanks Received:
    11
    Trophy Points:
    36
    Location:
    The ONLY GOOD place
    Ratings:
    +11
    I do not see believing that gay marriage can be prohibited as the same as being homophobic or hating gays. I am as tolerant of gays as I am with anyone else who performs actions I believe are detrimental to society. I neither hate them nor fear them. BUT that doesn't mean I have to stand by and condone their actions while they continue to degrade society.

    Unfortunately, there is no power in the land as the Supreme Court. Judges, state law makers and those charged with upholding the law are clearly not doing the job they are assigned because they believe anti gay marriage laws are unconstitutional. Until the SC rules that these laws are not voided by the constitution, this will continue. They must either do so immediately or we must provide the constitutional working they seek.
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page