Polls on Same-Sex Marriage State Laws

[Badger]

"Do you think same-sex marriage should be legal or illegal?

Legal............................................................... 45%
Illegal .............................................................. 45%"

Wow.

Um, details? Link?

[Badger]

Not that this subject isn't valuable, but I think that maybe this thread should be relocked and a new one opened.  And more strictly kept to the goal of looking at the chances of marriage equality passing/failing in various states rather than...whatever the hell we're talking about here.

Really I think milhouse24 should just make his own marriage rant megathread.

^^^^ This. It's been fun with the lulz posts, Milhouse, but kindly take at least a couple weeks break from expounding in this thread on your "unique" theories of marriage and sex. Feel free to post anything you want in the meantime about actual polling on same sex marriages. K?

<Assumes Moderator Voice>

AHEM!

In case I wasn't crystal clear before, I meant it that we need to take a break from the discussion of milhouse's expounding on marriage and sex. I assumed it was equally clear this applied to those commenting on milhousems views in addition to the M man himself.

Kindly give it a couple weeks break or start a separate thread in the Off-Topic board. Otherwise this thread may require being locked again. Thank you.

EDIT: I just noticed the new thread started by milhouse. Thank you! That should end further off topic discourse in this thread for the short term at least.

[Badger]

EDIT: I just noticed the new thread started by milhouse. Thank you! That should end further off topic discourse in this thread for the short term at least.

I just split the two threads. Keep this one about same-sex marriage polling and state laws; the other one can be used to continue the discussion about the merits of whether gay marriage is equal, lesser, or a sham. Thanks.

Yeah, i realized that when I opened that thread afterwards. Thanks, partner!

Why wasn't I surpised Milhouse didn't do something so rational? But I digress.....

[Badger]

I've always felt that the best tactic for gay marriage supporters is to get civil unions in place within their state, then go for marriage rights a few years down the road. "The sky will fall" argument/fear of the unknown is the strongest weapon the opponents have (see e.g. the Maine referendum where opponents ran a convincing ad campaign claiming a yes vote wouild require homosexuality to be taught in elementary schools). Civil Unions are much more popular, and after the world doesn't go to hell in a handbasket after they're instituted the concept of allowing actual bona-fide marriage becomes far more palatable to middle-aged and older swing voters.

[Badger]

When has Civil Unions exclusively been on the ballot box?

Washington 2009.

Colorado had a referendum in 2006, but it was the year of Ted Haggard, and scandals about gays bring down gay rights referenda even if they're about hypocrites.

So, twice then? That's hardly much of a trend to create a rule of thumb about.

[Badger]

Hawaii was actually 42-50 illegal in a January poll:

http://www.civilbeat.com/articles/2013/01/16/18077-civil-beat-poll-young-people-tipping-the-scales-toward-gay-marriage

See sole comment in linked article about piss-poor wording of polled question. Unreliable poll IMO.

[Badger]

KY-PPP: 27-65 illegal

http://www.publicpolicypolling.com/main/2013/04/kentucky-miscellany.html

LA-PPP: 29-59 illegal

http://www.publicpolicypolling.com/main/2013/02/louisiana-miscellany.html

TX-PPP: 35-55 illegal

http://www.publicpolicypolling.com/main/2013/01/clinton-could-win-texas.html

WI-PPP: 44-46 illegal

http://www.publicpolicypolling.com/main/2013/02/wisconsin-miscellany.html

KS-PPP: 39-51 illegal

http://www.publicpolicypolling.com/main/2013/02/kansas-miscellany.html

PA-Quinnipiac: 47-43 legal

http://www.politicspa.com/quinnipiac-poll-pa-voters-support-same-sex-marriage-by-a-small-margin/45702

NV (POS): 54-43 legal

http://www.rannv.org/documents/23/Release%20February%2013%20Survey.pdf

...

The last FL poll I can find is from December 2012 from Quinnipiac: 43-45 illegal

http://miamiherald.typepad.com/gaysouthflorida/2012/12/poll-florida-voters-split-on-gay-marriage-oppose-legalizing-pot.html

When oh when will people realize that in most states civil unions are the way to go? They'll pass in all but a handful of states, but would pass in scads of states where gay marriage can't for many years. Furthermore, it'll speed up gay marriage in those states by overcoming the conservatives fear of the unknown.

The issue isn't whether a second rate form of marriage should be accepted. Its whether to accept civil unions and gay marriage in 5-10 years, or no marital rights whatsoever and gay marriage in 20-30 years (maybe).

[Badger]

For support and legality of same-sex marriage.

White -- same-sex marriage legal or has at the least been enacted. No further distinction.

Green -- same-sex marriage not legal, but more popular than unpopular

65% or higher -- deep green (90% saturation)
60.0 - 64.9%  -- dark green  (70% saturation)
55.0 - 59.9%  -- medium green (50% saturation)
50.0 - 54.6% --  light green (30% saturation)
below 50% but positive -- aqua (20% saturation)

tie -- yellow

above 45.0% but negative -- hot pink (30% saturation)
40.0 - 44.9% -- medium red (50% saturation)
35.0 - 39.9%  -- red (60% saturation)
30.0 - 34.9%  -- maroon (70% saturation)
under 30% -- deep red  (90% saturation)

By 2016 we could see direct initiatives legalize gay marriage in AZ, OR, NV, CO, MT, MI, OH, and FL.

OH will likely have one in 2014

[Badger]

Pbrower, I genuinely appriciate the work you do on these maps, but they're completely unintelligible.

And I still have no clue what 'saturation' means.

[Badger]

Might I humbly suggest just tracking popularity/approval of same-sex marriage by state?

Legality of same-sex marriage, or court rulings that might reflect this legality, could be considered a separate issue and included on a map of "legal status of same-sex marriage." This would really simplify the map. Plus it would be interesting to know, say, whether Iowans have come around to the policies their state supreme court imposed on them, or whether they continue to resist.

You are welcome to start your 'rival' map.

Actually pbrower, Nutmeg's suggestion is a great one I sincerely hope you'll adopt.

And ftr, I get the idea that 'saturation' means intensity of color (I.e. support), but for purposes of the maps, again, it's completely unintelligible.

[Badger]

Pbrower, I genuinely appriciate the work you do on these maps, but they're completely unintelligible.

1. Legality of SSM is white.  No further distinction in approval or disapproval of SSM is shown. Local officials are required to accept applications for SSM for adults unless there is some obvious bar as insanity or incestuousness.

This does not mean solely that places under federal jurisdiction within a state (such as military bases or Indian reservations) recognize SSM. If Arizona state law prohibits SSM but Indian reservations or military bases allow SSM in accordance with federal law, then the polling applies to the state.

A state could go to some other color from white if the state outlaws SSM through legislation or initiative/referendum -- but that is highly unlikely.

2. If SSM is not legal, then a green shade applies to that state should there be plurality support of SSM. More intense shades imply stronger approval. A red shade applies to any state in which extant polling shows that SSM has greater disapproval than approval, more intense shades indicating stronger disapproval. Yellow is for a tie.

The rationale of the distinction  is that states in green could approve same-sex marriage either through legislation or initiative/referendum -- which would not happen in a state in which SSM has stronger disapproval than approval. We may see 'evolution' in the process, which is possible.

3. Blue and orange are for legal limbo. The decision is likely to be made in state or federal courts. Blue (Colorado) indicates that there is an appeal, but it is presumed that SSM could be approved by legislation or referendum before an appeal is completed. Orange indicates that legalization is unlikely based upon the most recent polls (Arkansas) or what I reasonably assume (Idaho). Tan indicates that the appeal is going to the US Supreme Court, whose decision is definitive no matter what polls indicate.

4. It all goes white if some ruling analogous to Loving v. Virginia is made by the US Supreme Court. The Supreme Court does not heed polls.        

Pbrower, if you need four paragraphs and about a page of single-spaced text to explain the key to your maps, they're WAY too busy.

[Badger]

Just because the U.S. is currently a secular society doesn't mean it should be.

Speaking as a consistory member of a Christian denomination that approves of SSM,   you post is a great example of why our government should be secular while our society need not be. Secular government is a good way of keeping those like you with a 'my Father in heaven can lick your Father in heaven' mentality from forcing the particulars of your religious worship down religious minorities' throats in the form of statute.

Keep your version of 'God's law' for your own denomination and congregation, thank yoy; the Crusades ended centuries ago.