Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
A clear majority of Americans (57%) favor allowing gay and lesbian couples to enter into legal agreements with each other that would give them many of the same rights as married couples, a status commonly known as civil unions. This finding marks a slight uptick in support for civil unions and appears to continue a significant long-term trend since the question was first asked in Pew Research Center surveys in 2003, when support for civil unions stood at 45%.
I believe same-sex marriage should be legal, but I also understand that many Americans have trouble accepting social change. In the states where same-sex marriage is out of the question, people who support recognition for same-sex relationships should at least push for civil unions.
Interestingly, Hispanics support same-sex marriage in greater numbers than Whites (non-Hispanic). This is yet more reason for me to believe that the ban on same-sex marriage in California won't last long.
Interestingly, Hispanics support same-sex marriage in greater numbers than Whites (non-Hispanic). This is yet more reason for me to believe that the ban on same-sex marriage in California won't last long.
At the rate they are coming over and being supported by the State, you'll get that ban reversed in no time.
It is not now, nor should it ever have been, the governments right to decide who marries who. The rights of any American shall be the rights of all Americans, felons aside.
It wasn't until the 1990s that a majority of Americans believed that interracial marriage should be legal. I wonder why it's acceptable to vote on same-sex marriage but not on interracial marriage. Some people like to say, "Let the people decide", but if it were left up to "the people", interracial marriage surely would have been illegal for a long time after the courts made it legal. I bet a few states would still outlaw it today, if they could.
yep. a major purpose of the constitution, and especially the bill of rights, is to protect the minority from the will of the majority. matters of civil liberties should not be decided by popular opinion. the point about interracial marriage is a good one. here is what Mildred Loving, a woman involved in a landmark interracial marriage case (who was arrested for being a black woman married to a white man) had to say about gay marriage:
Surrounded as I am now by wonderful children and grandchildren, not a day goes by that I don't think of Richard and our love, our right to marry, and how much it meant to me to have that freedom to marry the person precious to me, even if others thought he was the "wrong kind of person" for me to marry. I believe all Americans, no matter their race, no matter their sex, no matter their sexual orientation, should have that same freedom to marry. Government has no business imposing some people's religious beliefs over others. Especially if it denies people's civil rights.
I am still not a political person, but I am proud that Richard's and my name is on a court case that can help reinforce the love, the commitment, the fairness, and the family that so many people, black or white, young or old, gay or straight seek in life. I support the freedom to marry for all. That's what Loving, and loving, are all about.
i picked the first option in the poll, but i think civil unions with the exact same benefits as marriage is a good compromise. the ideal situation would be if the state got out of marriage altogether and only offered civil unions. marriage becomes a purely religious matter, and churches can decide who they are willing to marry. people can have marriages/commitment ceremonies/whatever in their own way, in a church or not in a church, and it all has nothing to do with legal rights and privileges conferred by the state.
I voted to not legally recognize same sex marriages. To be clear though, I don't think that there should be any legal recognition of traditional marriage either. The government should not be in the business of regulating personal contracts between two people. The government's only job in this area is to enforce the contracts made between the parties involved not to say who can make them.
It is the immoral "benefits" or "penalties" assigned to such contracts by the government that even makes it an issue in the first place.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
