It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Majority of Americans Now Support Gay Marriage - The Evolution of Acceptance

page: 1
18
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on May, 21 2011 @ 10:54 AM
link   
This is a great article and has lots of side links to explore.

TIME NewsFeed



For the first time, a majority of Americans claim that same-sex marriages should be recognized by law. But despite these gains, the issue remains more divisive than ever before.

A new Gallup poll released on Friday reveals that 53% of Americans believe that gay marriage should be legalized, and that couples who enter into these unions should be provided with the same rights as traditional marriages — a 9% increase from 2010, when only 44% of respondents said that gay marriage should be legal.

Read more: newsfeed.time.com...


Link to Poll

This is great news. The majority of people in the US support not just civil unions, or some sort of 'separate but equal' status, but full-on marriage for gay people.

I think this is a sign of things to come. Now that the Defense of Marriage Act is no longer being defended and Don't Ask Don't Tell is out of the way, we can make strides toward true equality in marriage.

Seems older people and Republicans are the holdouts. One of those is self-correcting and eventually, I hope Republicans will see that their discrimination is unconstitutional. They should be made aware that they cannot preach "smaller government" and then increase government's intrusion into our lives.

So, Republicans, listen up!





posted on May, 21 2011 @ 10:56 AM
link   
Small steps my friend.

Also, why is it that we continually see people worrying about what others do in the privacy of their own homes? I just don't understand why people think gay's cannot marry?

Let them get married, it will probably just end in divorce anyway.



posted on May, 21 2011 @ 10:59 AM
link   
post removed because the user has no concept of manners

Click here for more information.



posted on May, 21 2011 @ 11:07 AM
link   
reply to post by Benevolent Heretic
 


It is really hard to believe some people still think of this as a contentious issue. I think some men have had bad experiences as youngsters with one or another older man, a predator and not a quote unquote "homosexual" but a predator - and it makes them jaded or even violent and unreasonable on the topic.

I only say this because I have a friend an acquaintance really, who talks and talks and you cannot shut this guy up for nothing. Even walking away he follows along and never misses where he was in the conversation if you dare to excuse yourself. Happened to see Chasity Bono as a man (hard to believe now this chick was ever a woman) and I commented something like "well at least she's happy" and this guy erupted into a tirade against homosexuals like I have never heard.
Now he knows I am not "homophobic" and said as much to his face, I can't get him to say two words. No great loss since he WAS driving me nuts with the chatter but I was thinking later on, something awful must have happened to him to make him go that route.



posted on May, 21 2011 @ 11:09 AM
link   

Originally posted by FraternitasSaturni
dont you love fake statistics to make you feel that YOU are the one whos wrong? I mean... if the "majority already accepts it..."

The herd mentality, if 80 of the sheep go to the left, the other 20 will follow.

Well I dont move in a herd.

One billion flies can be wrong. I rather eat lamb-shops than s.hit.


Nobody is making you eat shinola buddy.
You can eat it if you want to though and I think that is the whole point.
Not forcing your beliefs on others.



posted on May, 21 2011 @ 11:11 AM
link   
reply to post by Benevolent Heretic
 


Well, my fellow ATSers, this is just one more nail in the coffin of the elite and Old Order criminal/totalitarian hegemony. Isn't it any wonder they're so desperate nowadays?



posted on May, 21 2011 @ 11:16 AM
link   
I think the Feds should have nothing to do with the marriage issue.

On that note this is good news. It is no one's business who wants to marry who but those who are involved in the marriage to begin with.



posted on May, 21 2011 @ 11:28 AM
link   

Originally posted by FraternitasSaturni
dont you love fake statistics to make you feel that YOU are the one whos wrong? I mean... if the "majority already accepts it..."

The herd mentality, if 80 of the sheep go to the left, the other 20 will follow.

Well I dont move in a herd.

One billion flies can be wrong. I rather eat lamb-shops than s.hit.


Alright forget that the statistic was mentioned at all...why do you feel so threatened by what other people do with their lives?



posted on May, 21 2011 @ 11:29 AM
link   

Originally posted by projectvxn
I think the Feds should have nothing to do with the marriage issue.

On that note this is good news. It is no one's business who wants to marry who but those who are involved in the marriage to begin with.


I would agree on the Feds staying out of it where it not for some states being more than perfectly happy to violate the 'freedom of association' clause of the 1st Amendment.........but yes, I'm glad we both agree that this is great news for freedom lovers anywhere.



posted on May, 21 2011 @ 11:36 AM
link   
One more sign of the end of times... come on rapture...!!!!



posted on May, 21 2011 @ 11:40 AM
link   
reply to post by AverageJoe1
 


The problem is, that as far as licensing is concerned, it is a state issue. The Feds do not have that power, only the states do.



posted on May, 21 2011 @ 12:13 PM
link   
reply to post by Soldier of God
 


Uh-oh.
Religious Freak.

I can think of a million more ways why the rapture would happen compared to allowing people to express they're liberties as human beings.



posted on May, 21 2011 @ 12:43 PM
link   
reply to post by Benevolent Heretic
 


The issue of gay marriage was a huge non-issue that was jinned up by social conservatives to generate "outrage". It is absolutely nobodys business who marries who or how many people you marry. Marriage has no place in the realm of public policy - it is contract law, pure and simple and there is absolutely no reason to prevent two gay people from entering in to a contract with one another and there never was.

Gay marriage, like gay parenting is no different than straight marriage and parenting. If people of good motives and integrity are involved, the relationship will undoubtably benefit society. If they have shabby motives or lack integrity, their union and their parenting will be harmful to society. Drawing the distinction between groups and thus essentially suggesting that a couple of good character that is gay's getting married is somehow less desirable than two heterosexuals with poor character getting married is laughable.

This issue is already dead with respect to children. My kids are 8-12. They know what gay people are. They have friends who have gay parents, its no big deal. No different than a kid with a single parent. "the ideal or legitimate family structure" is nonsense.

About time we tossed these distractions into the trash and began to focus on serious issues, such as how folks, whether or not they are straight or gay, single or married are having a tough time paying their bills and finding jobs.



posted on May, 21 2011 @ 01:06 PM
link   

Originally posted by dolphinfan
About time we tossed these distractions into the trash and began to focus on serious issues, such as how folks, whether or not they are straight or gay, single or married are having a tough time paying their bills and finding jobs.


I agree that the economic situation is serious and affects us all. But this is a SOCIAL issue - there is a group of people in this country who still doesn't have the same rights as everyone else and I think that is an important issue, too. We can work on the economy AND civil rights.


I also agree that conservatives made gay marriage a distraction for purposes of fear-mongering (just like abortion), but I think we need to continue to move forward in the civil rights issues for everyone's sake. For the sake of equality.

I think we're seeing the evolution of acceptance and I'm really happy about it.



posted on May, 21 2011 @ 01:27 PM
link   
"Evolution of acceptance", you say? Ugh, I shudder to think of what they'll be telling us to "accept" next.....



Originally posted by dolphinfan
Gay marriage, like gay parenting is no different than straight marriage and parenting. If people of good motives and integrity are involved, the relationship will undoubtably benefit society. If they have shabby motives or lack integrity, their union and their parenting will be harmful to society. Drawing the distinction between groups and thus essentially suggesting that a couple of good character that is gay's getting married is somehow less desirable than two heterosexuals with poor character getting married is laughable.

This issue is already dead with respect to children. My kids are 8-12. They know what gay people are. They have friends who have gay parents, its no big deal. No different than a kid with a single parent. "the ideal or legitimate family structure" is nonsense.

Good God, do you honestly believe this? Seriously, what the hell?



posted on May, 21 2011 @ 01:43 PM
link   

Originally posted by AngryOne
"Evolution of acceptance", you say? Ugh, I shudder to think of what they'll be telling us to "accept" next.....


I doubt anyone is concerned with what you personally accept. I am not. I don't care if people accept gay marriage or not. All I care about is equal treatment under the law for all citizens. And the acceptance that is naturally happening in the US is a sign that equal treatment will eventually be a reality.

With or without your acceptance.



posted on May, 21 2011 @ 01:49 PM
link   
reply to post by Benevolent Heretic
 


I personally think the "social issues" are mere distractions for those who don't have the intellectual ability to tackle the serious economic and global issues. As such they create a distraction that prevent those who do have the ability, due to needing to respond to the nonsensical positioning by the hard right and left from addressing other issues.

Social issues are best dealt within the confines of the smallest group possible, with very few at a state level and even fewer at the federal level. The whole notion of gay marriage is absurd. I was baptized Greek Orthodox. There is 0 chance that gays will ever be married in the Greek Orthodox church and thats the way it should be, because that is the way Greek Orthodox folks want it. The way we have perverted the lexicon and have essentially gave a special designation to a specific contract, "marriage" is the core of the problem. There should be no marriage at all outside of a church. There should be civil contractural unions of consenting adults, all with equal protection. You want to get "married" go to church/temple/mosque You want to get a civil union, go to the courthouse. What happens in the church should have absolutely no legal standing, which in fact it does not, hence the need for a marriage liscence.

The whole business is nonsense drummed up by folks of poor confidence who feel threatned by change.

As far as "acceptance", what will happen in this instance is what happens in every instance and that is that those who fail to evolve with the standards of civil society will increasingly find themselves in the group of the unacceptable, similar to those who seriously opposed inter-racial marriage as recent as 30 years ago, when that opposition was a majority belief and now those who oppose it are considered stone age, ignorant fools with no credibility. The same thing will happen here.



posted on May, 21 2011 @ 02:06 PM
link   

Originally posted by dolphinfan
I personally think the "social issues" are mere distractions for those who don't have the intellectual ability to tackle the serious economic and global issues. As such they create a distraction that prevent those who do have the ability, due to needing to respond to the nonsensical positioning by the hard right and left from addressing other issues.


I don't see why we can't tackle the serious economic and global issues while addressing social issues. There is nothing stopping people from discussing the economy. Let me check something out: I am hearing that you think my posting this thread is something I do because I don't have the intellect to discuss the issues you mentioned. I could be wrong, but that's how I read your post. If that is your opinion, you are entitled to it, but I assure you I do have the intellect to discuss these other issues.
I choose not to discuss them here. I don't see the point.



There is 0 chance that gays will ever be married in the Greek Orthodox church and thats the way it should be, because that is the way Greek Orthodox folks want it.


I agree. I don't think churches should ever marry anyone they don't want to. However, in this country, at this time, marriage is a LEGAL contract, not something that is performed by the church. THat is a wedding ceremony. Churches are free to have wedding ceremonies for whomever they want, but the church does not perform the marriage. The state does. The marriage is a legal institution. Churches hold no legal weight as far as MARRIAGE. To be legally married, a church is not necessary.


There should be no marriage at all outside of a church. There should be civil contractural unions of consenting adults, all with equal protection. You want to get "married" go to church/temple/mosque You want to get a civil union, go to the courthouse.


I wouldn't be opposed to this - as my concern is equal treatment, not the use of the word 'marriage' - but as I said before, in this country, at this time, marriage is a legal contract and should be available equally. How marriage and ceremony change in the future is another discussion.



posted on May, 21 2011 @ 06:49 PM
link   
reply to post by Benevolent Heretic
 


BH, why the heck is marriage federal law? It's a religious ceremony. Hows about we make civil unions the official legally substitute to marriage, in that way we keep religious ceremonies out of government, the religious nuts can keep marriage the way they want to themselves, and civil unions are not bounded by gender.

Simple solution!



posted on May, 21 2011 @ 06:55 PM
link   

Originally posted by projectvxn
reply to post by AverageJoe1
 


The problem is, that as far as licensing is concerned, it is a state issue. The Feds do not have that power, only the states do.


I don't believe states should have the power to dump their religious laws down my throat anymore than the federal government does. State fascism can be just as bad as fascism on the federal level. There are some rights and laws that we have written in the constitution that overrule state laws. This is why Kentucky can't make law to stop anybody from owning a personal gun (as if that will ever happen).

Marriage is a religious institute in my view hence th reason why people insist it to be gender specific. It should be removed from federal law, it should not be enforced by state or federal governments in the first place. Leave the churches to decide what marriage is about, leave the gays to live with eachother under the same rights as same sex couples. Problem solved.



new topics

top topics



 
18
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join