Put it to a vote, and same-sex marriage loses, often big time. Supporters of SSM haven't learned about the fine art of public relations, so they have gone overboard with their protests and their talking points (for example, their offensive comparison between gay rights and civil rights marches, etc.). I have long felt the entire matter was a loser for at least several decades.
The ruling leaves five states that allow same-sex marriages -- Massachusetts, Connecticut, Maine, Vermont and Iowa -- and four of those are in New England. The other states on the verge of approving gay marriage or debating it -- New Hampshire, New York and New Jersey -- are all in the Northeast, making same-sex marriage appear increasingly to be a regional phenomenon rather than a national trend. The exception is Iowa, a heartland state with a long progressive tradition, where a state Supreme Court decision cleared the way for marriage rights.
The rest of the map looks far less hospitable to gay activists. About 30 states have constitutional amendments that define marriage as between a man and a woman. The South appears solidly against same-sex marriage. The Mountain West and the Plains states seem largely opposed, with New Mexico as a possible exception. In the Midwest, gay advocates have hopes in Illinois and Minnesota, but nowhere else. And on the West Coast, Washington shows a measure of promise.
I'd say this poll by Gallup is accurate. While it is true younger people are more supportive of SSM, it does not necessarily follow that SSM will be legal nationwide as a result. People tend to be more "conservative" as they get older, especially with regard to social issues. As it is, it is a loser, and getting court approval makes people antagonistic towards the idea.
No comments:
Post a Comment