Here's a link of relevant polled questions: On Same-Sex Relationships.
"Do you believe gays and lesbians should be allowed to get legally married, allowed a legal partnership similar to but not called marriage, or should there be no legal recognition given to gay and lesbian relationships?"
.............................Legally married....legal partnership....No legal recognition....Unsure
....................................%............. .........%..........................%............. .......%
5/13-15/12...................37......................33... ......................25.....................5
8/10-11/10...................37......................29... ......................28.....................6
5/12-13/09...................33......................33... ......................29.....................5
11/4-5/06 LV................30......................30...... ...................32.....................7
6/13-14/06...................27.....................25.... ......................39.....................8
5/18-19/04...................25.....................26.... ......................40.....................9
3/3-4/04......................20......................33 .........................40.....................7
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Notice that the most recent response causes a drop from your 53 percentage for the oxymoronic SS "marriage" to 37 percent!
And, notice that the 33 percent who favor recognition but not oxymoronically calling it "marriage" came from, not only the "marriage" group but from the opposed to SS "marriage" group.
Thus supporting SS recognition jumps to 70% if you call it rightly something other than "marriage".
This proves my point that the majority does not support SS .. wait for it .. .. marriage, as 63% do not support SS "marriage" though 70% want SS relationships recognized.
Now sure, there will be extreme ideologues who'll refuse anything other than the oxymoronic "marriage" as the term for these SS recognitions, but they're a really tiny and unreasonable extreme.
Per the link and reference here:http://www.debatepolitics.com/general-political-discussion/164824-naming-inevitability-same-sex-cudps-3.html#post1061986183
Clearly the great majority of society opposes same-sex "marriage", preferring a different name than "marriage" for those same-sex committed romantic domestic partnership civil unions.
This is understandable for a number of good reasons.
These links exhibit those good reasons:
Definitive propriety, respect for the time-honored true meaning of a word, clearly indicates that marriage is between a man and a woman as husband and wife, that heterosexuals really do "own" the word, so to speak: Gay marriage: Give it another name, it will pass
Even President Obama prefers a different name than "marriage" (though he more recently was pressured into denying that reality): Gay 'Marriage' vs. 'Civil Unions': What's in a Name? - Hit & Run : Reason.com
Religious heterosexuals will simply not give up the fight to keep the word "marriage" from being erroneously corrupted, and they have the power: Substitute another word for same-sex 'marriage' | PennLive.com
Recent errors by a small minority of states allowing the oxymoronic "gay marriage" "same-sex marriage" is a temporary aberration, all things considered.
LGBT activists would do well to reconsider their brainwashing media tactic, as such is really futile, and instead take advantage of the current public's support for government and private enterprise recognition under an appropriately different term than "marriage", such as "homosexual marriage" or "homarriage" or the like.
I am opposed to same sex marriage and feel that if someone is really against it then they wouldn't be for it being legal but with just another word used for marriage. If I call a t-bone steak a spinach,lettuce and tomato salad will any vegans want to eat it? If I call a cowpie a t-bone steak will anyone who enjoys t-bone steak want to eat it? If I piss in a glass and call it sweet ice tea will any one who likes drinking sweet iced tea drink it?
This thread it's the biggest waste of time.
Same sex marriage can't be called marriage so we will call it something else but it will be the exact same thing?
Seems pointless rip even post this nonsense.
It's semantics, call a marriage anything you want, it doesn't make it any different. it will be called marriage by all those that practice it anyway.
Word games are ridiculous.
And Gallup says something different.
http://sas-origin.OnstreamMedia.com...roduction/Cms/POLL/jwowsa1ks020ehlt19i1la.png
the government needs to get out the business of marriage all together. No one gets issued a marriage licenses just have them sign a contract of a civil union every one same sex and traditional. leave the title marriage up to the religious institutions where the term marriage originated to decide who qualifies for the marriage title
I am opposed to same sex marriage and feel that if someone is really against it then they wouldn't be for it being legal but with just another word used for marriage. If I call a t-bone steak a spinach,lettuce and tomato salad will any vegans want to eat it? If I call a cowpie a t-bone steak will anyone who enjoys t-bone steak want to eat it? If I piss in a glass and call it sweet ice tea will any one who likes drinking sweet iced tea drink it?
There is no law saying that I can't call myself the King of England, or Dougie-fresh, or Mr. Douglas; I can refer to myself in anyway I want in all situations except legal ones. In the hypothetical situation that we just legalize "unions", what's to stop them from calling themselves "married"? Right now, they can do that if they want, they just don't get any legal benefits. It's a ridiculous word game, they'll be functionally identical to "marriage", whether you call it that or not. You can't legally stop them from using the word "marriage" right now, so I really just don't see the point. All that's on the table is benefits or no benefits, Homosexuals already got "marriage".
It's no different than affirming an oath vs. swearing an oath of office; in the eyes of the law, they're identical, and they're socially identical except for people trying to oust atheists.
Absolutely false.And Gallup says something different.
http://sas-origin.OnstreamMedia.com...roduction/Cms/POLL/jwowsa1ks020ehlt19i1la.png
This is still semantics.
Marriage is civil union, same thing. You are just changing words around.
Besides the anti SSM dint want that because they get to use the term marriage, which is a synonym for civil union, to deny same sex couples equality.
This is still semantics.
Marriage is civil union, same thing. You are just changing words around.
Besides the anti SSM dint want that because they get to use the term marriage, which is a synonym for civil union, to deny same sex couples equality.
It's not a question of equal rights.I think a very few get hung up on the world "marriage," but by and large, they don't want equal rights for gays at all. The result is that many hide behind the word to justify their hate. So that would be the point i guess.
Why not just be happy with the term civil union, then everyone's happy.
no its not denying any one equality because in the eyes of the law and government it is a civil union for both same sex and traditional.
marriage is the title given by the religions institute. many titles are only given if you meet a requirement and a standard to carry that title. is that inequality for the ones who don't qualify or meet the standards for that title?
could a white female ever be crowned black miss America? is that being prejudice and show inequality for not allowing a white female be able to have that title?
Absolutely false.
You cannot rightly compare this poll to the OP poll, as the OP poll asked the relevant question.
The poll you quote here does not give the respondents the option to differentiate between "marriage" and "other than marriage (civil union)" as the OP referenced poll did.
In the OP I contrasted the 53% in the poll back then (what you present here as 54%) with the breakdown of what it means when respondents are given more appropriate options from which to choose.
When respondents are given more appropriate options from which to choose, support for the oxymoronic "gay marriage" drops to 37%!
However, when respondents are given more appropriate options from which to choose, support for government and private enterprise recognition jumps from 53-54% to 70-71%.
Clearly the great majority -- 63% -- are not in favor of the oxymoronic "gay marriage".
But 70%, a greater majority, supports government and private enterprise recognition.
That's a major mandate: come up with a more rightly descriptive word than "marriage" (like "homosexual marriage" or "homarriage") and government and private enterprise recognition of same-sex committed romantic domestic partnership civil unions is a slam dunk!
I think a very few get hung up on the world "marriage," but by and large, they don't want equal rights for gays at all. The result is that many hide behind the word to justify their hate. So that would be the point i guess.
The semantic debate is a pointless waste of time, and reflects a desperate desire to cling to ignorance and and divide us by our differences. "Separate but equal" is not equal, and there is no justification for gay couples to concede on this.
They are synonyms, the two terms mean the same thing.
The church decided they had a role in it, marriage existed long before the church, long before christianity. Their claim on it is false.
The church isn't involved in marriage.
I agree, it's just the latest attempt to subjugate homosexuals.
They are synonyms, the two terms mean the same thing.
The church decided they had a role in it, marriage existed long before the church, long before christianity. Their claim on it is false.
The church isn't involved in marriage.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?