50 percent of Californians now support gay marriage

March 25, 2010

A new public opinion poll finds that, for the first time, more Californians now support gay marriage than are opposed to it. [Los Angeles Times]

According to a poll by the Public Policy Institute of California, 50 percent of respondents support gay marriage and 45 percent oppose it. Officials say this is the highest level of support for gay marriage reported in any California poll and comes less than two years after voters approved a ban on same-sex marriage.

There had been debate among gay activists as to whether to attempt to repeal the gay marriage ban in next November’s election;  those plans appear to have been put on hold until 2011 or 2012.

Inline Feedbacks
View all comments

Willie: You actually answered by question better than you thought you did; it has always been determined that when the majority deny, or as in this case in California, the majority voted to take away a right from a segment of the population, which you have admitted is a Constitutional right, that is a wrong that needs to be corrected. Tyranny of the majority is a phrase to describe how a majority may have the numbers to impose their will, but that does not mean that what they have done is the correct thing to do. If the State Supreme Court does not take action to strike down this law, I am confident that the voters will do the right thing if it needs to be brought up for a vote again.

To those who still oppose “gay” marriage (properly, it should be called “same-sex marriage”) I ask you if the term ‘separate, but equal” means anything to you. If you don’t recognize the phrase, it came from a ruling about discrimination from a Supreme Court justice in finding that segregation was not illegal. Of course, the ruling itself led to the formation of civil rights legislation that eliminated segregation as being legal. My point; if you have any form of a legal agreement between two, unrelated, of legal age, consenting adults that is supposed to have all the legal rights of marriage but isn’t marriage, can you not see how this is a logical extension of the “separate, but equal” mindset? I don’t want any religious institution “forced” to perform any ceremony that they don’t want to (like a Rabbi not wanting to perform a Catholic marriage, for instance), but to deny a same sex couple to have all the rights, all the privileges that opposite sex couples enjoy is a form of discrimination, period.

The constitution is just a piece of paper with ink, and so is the bible!

The arguments are logical and powerful when you apply the constitution.

There is a duality in nature and the universe!

The identity of a man and a woman is quite apparent.

I don’t think redefining sex as a tricotomy because they were gay through no fault of their own justifies emotional revenge from feeling put down. Many people in the 1950 and 1960 were indoctrinated to believe heter-sex and mis-segenation was a sin. Gays are going through the same feelings of condemnation when most people don’t give a damn anymore.

There are two documents used and over-used as well as mist-used, turn and twisted more than any other doctrines in history, that is the Consititution and the Bible!

Willie: I am confused by your comments; do you agree that it is time to allow same sex marriages? Do you agree that to not do so is discrimination? In both of your comments, I cannot understand what it is that you are trying to assert; I don’t think that the believe that misogyny was suddenly wrong sprung up in the ’50s and ’60s, the laws on the books that prevented inter-racial couples from marrying had been on the books much longer than that, and it was in the ’50s and ’60s that the laws preventing inter-racial couples from getting married started being repealed. What is your point, what are you trying to say?

I think it is a little too soon or not necessary to be made a law

Gay palimony and marriage are getting sort of a gradual acceptance anyway

The people of California voted NO

The Supreme Court will decide YES

We will all HAVE TO AGREE simply because of the law of the land

I see it as a preference of the people being over-ride by the Supreme Court/ Constitution.

This is what is apparent!

Are you asking me how I voted or what my personal feelings on it are?

Willie: I was not asking how you voted, that is your vote, not my business. What I did not understand in your first two comments was how you felt about the issue, so, I am asking what your personal feelings are. I do agree that the Supreme Court of California could undo the vote on Prop 8, but then again, I thought Prop 8 was wrong. What is your opinion as to my assertion that denying same sex marriage is the same as discrimination?

Bob it is a simple a question, it’s still a tough one for me to answer.

If I wear a legal hat, in my opinion you are correct based on the letter of constitutional law.

If I go by a legal majority hat, then I say it is the will of the people and it is not discrimination.

If I were to consider the forefathers who wrote the constitution, I don’t think this is what they had in mind when drafting the article because of their religious belief.

Did I answer your question? Probably not, it is one big can of worms to another!

this is a beautiful styory that wamrs my heart:)

[…] This post was mentioned on Twitter by CalCoastNews, Web Master. Web Master said: 50 percent of Californians now support gay marriage http://bit.ly/bMEpBK […]

Of course I support gay marriage – why shouldn’t they be allowed to be miserable?