John Adams Posted May 9, 2012 Posted May 9, 2012 I read a lefty political article a couple of days ago arguing that this is the reason Obama doesn't have the nutsack to come out of the closet in favor of gay marriage. It is apparently overwhelming opposed by blacks. I'll try to find the article because the numbers were pretty surprising to me. Here's a pretty good breakdown of the CA 2008 amendment vote. Shows blacks as 70% opposed. One of the largest "Against" demographic slices, after only Republicans and White Republicans. http://www.cnn.com/ELECTION/2008/results/polls/#CAI01p1
IDBillzFan Posted May 9, 2012 Posted May 9, 2012 Here's a pretty good breakdown of the CA 2008 amendment vote. Shows blacks as 70% opposed. One of the largest "Against" demographic slices, after only Republicans and White Republicans. http://www.cnn.com/ELECTION/2008/results/polls/#CAI01p1 I expected a higher number from Latinos cuz they love their baby Jesus.
LeviF Posted May 9, 2012 Posted May 9, 2012 I expected a higher number from Latinos cuz they love their baby Jesus. That's probably part of the reason why blacks are so against it, not to mention that black "culture" is extremely abrasive towards homosexuals.
B-Man Posted May 9, 2012 Posted May 9, 2012 In 2006, in Virginia, with a similarly worded marriage amendment, the people approved it by a vote of 57 percent to 42 percent. Six years later, in a similar southern swing state, the people approved it by an even larger margin 61 to 39 percent. Progress. .
John Adams Posted May 9, 2012 Posted May 9, 2012 In 2006, in Virginia, with a similarly worded marriage amendment, the people approved it by a vote of 57 percent to 42 percent. Six years later, in a similar southern swing state, the people approved it by an even larger margin 61 to 39 percent. Progress. . Or...a different state.
IDBillzFan Posted May 9, 2012 Posted May 9, 2012 That's probably part of the reason why blacks are so against it, not to mention that black "culture" is extremely abrasive towards homosexuals. Maybe it's just the White Black culture that will accept gay marriage.
OCinBuffalo Posted May 9, 2012 Posted May 9, 2012 Maybe it's just the White Black culture that will accept gay marriage. Young people....don't forget young people... You mean to say young White Black culture....because, you know, it's not like young people don't tend to vote more conservatively as they get older, or anything. Yeah, this gay marriage thing will be reality in 10 years....because of the young White Black people.
B-Man Posted May 9, 2012 Posted May 9, 2012 I don’t think we’ve had a boycott of an entire state in a while. California was boycotted over Prop. 8, and so was Utah because it has a lot of Mormons. There also was a Mormon boycott, a boycott of a hotel whose owner supported Prop. 8, and a boycott of gays going to work for a day. California also boycotted Arizona over SB 1070. And Connecticut for electing Joe Lieberman. None those worked out very well. So let’s try North Carolina: The pro-hate vote in North Carolina is despicable, a throwback to the evil days of the past when “state’s rights” was used to support every form of bigotry, ignorance and hatred that came down the pike. Don’t get sad. Get angry. So now, fight back. Hit them where it counts. In the wallet. And it can easily be done. Daily Kos Actually, no it can’t be easily done to a whole state.
John Adams Posted May 9, 2012 Posted May 9, 2012 (edited) I can't imagine young people are about to change their minds and be against gay marriage by age 40. That's like saying, in the 60s, you expected young people who were for interracial marriage would grow up and be against it later in life. Younger people are just more tolerant of homosexuality. That's not something older people (generally) ever were. That's the change that's coming. It's just a matter of time before we put this embarrassing chapter behind us. Edited May 9, 2012 by John Adams
IDBillzFan Posted May 9, 2012 Posted May 9, 2012 I don’t think we’ve had a boycott of an entire state in a while. California was boycotted over Prop. 8, and so was Utah because it has a lot of Mormons. There also was a Mormon boycott, a boycott of a hotel whose owner supported Prop. 8, and a boycott of gays going to work for a day. California also boycotted Arizona over SB 1070. And Connecticut for electing Joe Lieberman. None those worked out very well. So let’s try North Carolina: Daily Kos Actually, no it can’t be easily done to a whole state. Y'know what would be really funny? If the Democrats planned to hold their convention in NC. And it would be even funnier if they planned to hold it at the Bank of America stadium. Oh, wait. And a note to those nutjobs who are seemingly so surprised and upset by this vote: if California didn't approve gay marriage, what in the holy hell makes you stupid enough to think North Carolina would?
DC Tom Posted May 9, 2012 Posted May 9, 2012 Y'know what would be really funny? If the Democrats planned to hold their convention in NC. And it would be even funnier if they planned to hold it at the Bank of America stadium. Oh, wait. That's !@#$ing awesome.
RkFast Posted May 9, 2012 Posted May 9, 2012 I can't imagine young people are about to change their minds and be against gay marriage by age 40. That's like saying, in the 60s, you expected young people who were for interracial marriage would grow up and be against it later in life. Younger people are just more tolerant of homosexuality. That's not something older people (generally) ever were. That's the change that's coming. It's just a matter of time before we put this embarrassing chapter behind us. Yeah....cases of laws and rights.....rights of the state.....civil rights.......playing out and being determined using the mechanisms put in place in the Constitution by our Founding Fathers. An embarrassing chapter, indeed.
KD in CA Posted May 9, 2012 Posted May 9, 2012 Yeah....cases of laws and rights.....rights of the state.....civil rights.......playing out and being determined using the mechanisms put in place in the Constitution by our Founding Fathers. An embarrassing chapter, indeed. If you require the government to enforce the tenets of your religion than your beliefs must be pretty fragile.
John Adams Posted May 9, 2012 Posted May 9, 2012 Yeah....cases of laws and rights.....rights of the state.....civil rights.......playing out and being determined using the mechanisms put in place in the Constitution by our Founding Fathers. An embarrassing chapter, indeed. Yup. The system can be used for good, and bad. In this case, it's bad and the future will agree. Unless we're ruled by mullahs in 50 years.
Adam Posted May 9, 2012 Posted May 9, 2012 I think we are getting this wrong. There is nothing wrong with the Christians who follow their religion. It is good and it's teachings are good. It is the extremist Christians that are a political movement. They don't like our freedom......oh, wait.......
Shoutbox Posted May 9, 2012 Posted May 9, 2012 I can't imagine young people are about to change their minds and be against gay marriage by age 40. That's like saying, in the 60s, you expected young people who were for interracial marriage would grow up and be against it later in life. Younger people are just more tolerant of homosexuality. That's not something older people (generally) ever were. That's the change that's coming. It's just a matter of time before we put this embarrassing chapter behind us. Embarrasing, indeed. I still have yet to hear an intelligent, persuasive argument against legalizing gay marriage. It always comes down to "my invisible friend in the sky says it's wrong in his big book of Middle Eastern fairytales. Plus two dudes kissing is just !@#$ing gross."
John Adams Posted May 9, 2012 Posted May 9, 2012 Embarrasing, indeed. I still have yet to hear an intelligent, persuasive argument against legalizing gay marriage. It always comes down to "my invisible friend in the sky says it's wrong in his big book of Middle Eastern fairytales. Plus two dudes kissing is just !@#$ing gross." "Gay people will abuse the system by marrying so they can get health benefits...it will bankrupt the (government/biz world)" is one that's come up here. You know, because heteros have not had that opportunity. "Let's just leave marriage to man-woman and call homosexual commitment something else because my book/god says that's an OK compromise." Because that makes any sense to legislate that kind of difference in treatment. We'll get there. It's not a pressing issue but it does make all the people against look bigoted and stupid. Yes OC, bigoted.
\GoBillsInDallas/ Posted May 9, 2012 Posted May 9, 2012 I still have yet to hear an intelligent, persuasive argument against legalizing gay marriage. The majority of the people voted against it?
Ramius Posted May 9, 2012 Posted May 9, 2012 "Gay people will abuse the system by marrying so they can get health benefits...it will bankrupt the (government/biz world)" is one that's come up here. You know, because heteros have not had that opportunity. "Let's just leave marriage to man-woman and call homosexual commitment something else because my book/god says that's an OK compromise." Because that makes any sense to legislate that kind of difference in treatment. We'll get there. It's not a pressing issue but it does make all the people against look bigoted and stupid. Yes OC, bigoted. Gays somehow "destroy the sanctity of marriage" but Kim Kardashian doesn't?
John Adams Posted May 9, 2012 Posted May 9, 2012 The majority of the people voted against it? That's not a reason'-based argument. That's a mob-based argument.
Recommended Posts