Apparently by fairly substantial margins also (@60-40)
The pro-gay marriage side raised approximately twice as much money, and enjoyed plenty of free favorable media coverage.
We're constantly told in the media that the public is changing its mind on this issue, but I don't see any substantial evidence of change here---this particular measure is much harsher than most.
Maybe the population is starting to become aware of my position, that there are only two real possibilities as regards homosexuality in America in the long term. Either it is illegal, or it is illegal to criticize it.
The Vipers Are Now in Charge
13 hours ago
What's all the hubbub over?
9x% of the population is straight
Y% is bi
Z% is firmly gay
Z% exists no matter what marraige laws are
So are we basically arguing that some portion of Y%, which is a fraction of a single digit portion of the population, might choose to be homosexual if it was more socially and legally acceptable.
It doesn't seem like the kind of battleground that you want to fight over when it comes to saving marraige.
This is a status struggle over who has to be in the back of the bus---ie is it illegal to practice homosexuality or is it illegal to criticize it. Our cultural temperment pretty well insures that live and let live (with those 'let live' not making scenes) is out of the question.
Ending no-fault divorce is a larger struggle, but the numbers as yet aren't there for it. IMO, establishing a parallel institution, like covenant marriage that works like marriage 1.0 and eventually deprecating marriage 2.0 is the most workable plan.
If that's your strategy isn't recognizing multiple marraige contracts the best bet.
You're assuming any meaningful fraction of the population is consistent. They're not. Nearly everything in politics is who...whom.
That said, the existing marriage contract system is sufficiently desacralized now in the eyes of most of the population that a lot of things are going to collapse within a generation or two...
For instance, being able to confer all sorts of things legally to your spouse was a decision made by society based on the presumption that 'strategic marriages' was nearly unthinkable. Stuff like immunity from requirement to testify against them, free transfer of property to/from them on death or divorce, and the like. Even the conventions as regard health coverage and taxes are likely to require massive revision.
What's gay marriage at the ballot box now? Something like 0 for 33?
Post a Comment