5 ms·

For the record, it's 49% support according to Gallup. https://news.gallup.com/poll/311672/support-sex-marriage-matches-record-high.aspx https://news.gallup.com

by harryh 5y ago

For the record, it's 49% support according to Gallup. https://news.gallup.com/poll/311672/support-sex-marriage-matches-record-high.aspx https://news.gallup.com/poll/311672/support-sex-marriage-mat... And based on the trend, it will cross 50% imminently (if it hasn't already).

drewbug01 5y ago
Progress is also good, but it remains true that we aren’t exactly at “majority support” yet. And it’s not guaranteed to keep climbing either. I hope it does, obviously, because that’s a very good thing for me. We’re just not there yet.
- rayiner 5y ago
  We’ve crossed majority support: https://thehill.com/homenews/news/544500-poll-majority-of-republicans-support-same-sex-marriage-for-the-first-time https://thehill.com/homenews/news/544500-poll-majority-of-re.... I’m from a Muslim country, and among Muslim Americans same sex relationships are taboo. While Muslim support for same sex marriage crossed the 50% mark a couple of years ago, it’s completely rejected within the community itself. (Almost no Muslim Americans identity as LGBT, and virtually no mosques will perform same sex marriages: https://www.cnn.com/2019/05/28/us/lgbt-muslims-pride-progress/index.html https://www.cnn.com/2019/05/28/us/lgbt-muslims-pride-progres....) But the many Muslim Americans who oppose same sex marriage don’t oppose the “existence” of gay people. They believe, consistent with their religion, that marriage is for procreation and government sanction should only be extended to heterosexual relationships. They are also probably ignorant on the issue of sexual orientation being an innate trait. My aunts don’t want to grant government sanction to same-sex relationships, but it’s unfair to say they’re a danger to the “existence” of gay people.
  - drewbug01 5y ago
    > While Muslim support for same sex marriage crossed the 50% mark a couple of years ago, it’s completely rejected within the community itself. Honestly, this is one of the reasons I don't like to reach for statistics in this kind of debate - because of what you've highlighted here. The numbers on the survey say one thing, but they paint a rosier picture than reality. > My aunts don’t want to grant government sanction to same-sex relationships, but it’s unfair to say they’re a danger to the “existence” of gay people. I consider my relationship with my husband to be a core part of my identity (certainly not the only part, of course). It's a major part of who I am and how I move about the world; how I exist within it and relate to it. And this is what straight people do, as well - and for them, it's considered absolutely normal (and society even encourages it in some ways). What's unfair, to me, is to say that my "existence" is only relegated to physically living - life is about a lot more than that. We're not talking about killing the gays, here. We're talking about people who'd like to force the gays back into the closet so that they don't have to hear about relationships that they think are an affront to their religion. Your Aunts aren't calling for the extermination of gay people, and that's good. But we shouldn't pretend that "they can live" is tolerant. --- As an aside, we're pretty far into the weeds with this, although I think what we're talking about is still important to discuss. My original comment, last night, was about how the policy can harm people, and how it can be abused - not so much about what we're discussing now.
    - tptacek 5y ago
      It's frustrating to see the goalposts in these discussions move from "most of us agree the state shouldn't do anything to penalize same-sex couples" to "we should litigate what's in the heart of Rayiner's aunt".
      - drewbug01 5y ago
        It's quite hard when people keep hearing "and now I want your Aunt to accept gay people, fully, in her heart" when all I keep saying is "some people might use this as cover to harass gay people, because that's historically what they've done." I also find the goalpost moving extremely frustrating, but we should be clear about who is actually moving that: the people reading calls for "acceptance" into discussion of a shitty thing that happens to LGBT people at work.
        tptacek 5y ago
        I would have a personal problem relating to or associating with anyone who held anti-LGBT beliefs in their heart, the same way I'd never work with anyone who believed Black people were in any way inferior to other people. But this litigation of what's inside people's heads, when what they're publicly advocating for and voting for is the position we're asking of them in the first place, just makes me think we're surveilling for people to be angry at, because it gives us a dopamine hit. We're not being asked to associate with anyone's aunt here and I think we should try to keep to the topic at hand.
        drewbug01 5y ago
        > But this litigation of what's inside people's heads Nobody is advocating that here, why do you keep bringing it up? This seems like something you feel is happening but that’s not what we are talking about at all. > We’re not being asked to associate with anyone’s aunt here and I think we should try to keep to the topic at hand. ...you and other commenters brought up the Aunt. I don’t know if you’re confused, or what; but I didn’t bring the Aunt up in the first place. It arose spontaneously as a straw man up-thread.
  - vertis 5y ago
    I want to commend you both for having a civilized conversation about something that can get very heated. Speaking from my own (ex-Christian) upbringing, I got only the vaguest references to people being gay as a child/teen except that they were all sinners. I certainly couldn't have held a rational conversation about it because, aside from references inside the church I didn't know any gay people (maybe I did, who could know). It wasn't until I reached adulthood and left that community behind that I began to realize the way LGBTQ* people are and were demonized within certain christian circles. The argument that marriage is solely for procreation, and/or the property of religions doesn't really hold water. Christians I have come across, seem to think they invented marriage, which is just not even close to historically accurate. As to procreation only, this is fraught with the way laws treat things like next of kin, power of attorney and tax benefits. None of those things, have anything to do with procreation and yet they're a big part of marriage. On the positive side @drewbug01, over the course of 15 years I have gone from incredibly uncomfortable with the whole thing (because of upbringing), to some of my best friends being from those communities. There is progress, and with any luck there will continue to be progress.
    - drewbug01 5y ago
      > On the positive side @drewbug01, over the course of 15 years I have gone from incredibly uncomfortable with the whole thing (because of upbringing), to some of my best friends being from those communities. There is progress, and with any luck there will continue to be progress. I'm happy to hear that; it is actually good to hear. I really do think things are getting better, albeit perhaps too slowly. My own background is similar to yours (ex-Christian, not knowing LGBT people growing up, etc). What you said resonates with me quite a bit.
lupire 5y ago
The Republican party has shrunk substantially (10%?) due to Trump's Presidency. I'm curious how that affects the numbers going forward.

by harryh 5y ago

drewbug01 5y ago

Progress is also good, but it remains true that we aren’t exactly at “majority support” yet. And it’s not guaranteed to keep climbing either. I hope it does, obviously, because that’s a very good thing for me. We’re just not there yet.

rayiner 5y ago
We’ve crossed majority support: https://thehill.com/homenews/news/544500-poll-majority-of-republicans-support-same-sex-marriage-for-the-first-time https://thehill.com/homenews/news/544500-poll-majority-of-re.... I’m from a Muslim country, and among Muslim Americans same sex relationships are taboo. While Muslim support for same sex marriage crossed the 50% mark a couple of years ago, it’s completely rejected within the community itself. (Almost no Muslim Americans identity as LGBT, and virtually no mosques will perform same sex marriages: https://www.cnn.com/2019/05/28/us/lgbt-muslims-pride-progress/index.html https://www.cnn.com/2019/05/28/us/lgbt-muslims-pride-progres....) But the many Muslim Americans who oppose same sex marriage don’t oppose the “existence” of gay people. They believe, consistent with their religion, that marriage is for procreation and government sanction should only be extended to heterosexual relationships. They are also probably ignorant on the issue of sexual orientation being an innate trait. My aunts don’t want to grant government sanction to same-sex relationships, but it’s unfair to say they’re a danger to the “existence” of gay people.
- drewbug01 5y ago
  > While Muslim support for same sex marriage crossed the 50% mark a couple of years ago, it’s completely rejected within the community itself. Honestly, this is one of the reasons I don't like to reach for statistics in this kind of debate - because of what you've highlighted here. The numbers on the survey say one thing, but they paint a rosier picture than reality. > My aunts don’t want to grant government sanction to same-sex relationships, but it’s unfair to say they’re a danger to the “existence” of gay people. I consider my relationship with my husband to be a core part of my identity (certainly not the only part, of course). It's a major part of who I am and how I move about the world; how I exist within it and relate to it. And this is what straight people do, as well - and for them, it's considered absolutely normal (and society even encourages it in some ways). What's unfair, to me, is to say that my "existence" is only relegated to physically living - life is about a lot more than that. We're not talking about killing the gays, here. We're talking about people who'd like to force the gays back into the closet so that they don't have to hear about relationships that they think are an affront to their religion. Your Aunts aren't calling for the extermination of gay people, and that's good. But we shouldn't pretend that "they can live" is tolerant. --- As an aside, we're pretty far into the weeds with this, although I think what we're talking about is still important to discuss. My original comment, last night, was about how the policy can harm people, and how it can be abused - not so much about what we're discussing now.
  - tptacek 5y ago
    It's frustrating to see the goalposts in these discussions move from "most of us agree the state shouldn't do anything to penalize same-sex couples" to "we should litigate what's in the heart of Rayiner's aunt".
    - drewbug01 5y ago
      It's quite hard when people keep hearing "and now I want your Aunt to accept gay people, fully, in her heart" when all I keep saying is "some people might use this as cover to harass gay people, because that's historically what they've done." I also find the goalpost moving extremely frustrating, but we should be clear about who is actually moving that: the people reading calls for "acceptance" into discussion of a shitty thing that happens to LGBT people at work.
      - tptacek 5y ago
        I would have a personal problem relating to or associating with anyone who held anti-LGBT beliefs in their heart, the same way I'd never work with anyone who believed Black people were in any way inferior to other people. But this litigation of what's inside people's heads, when what they're publicly advocating for and voting for is the position we're asking of them in the first place, just makes me think we're surveilling for people to be angry at, because it gives us a dopamine hit. We're not being asked to associate with anyone's aunt here and I think we should try to keep to the topic at hand.
        drewbug01 5y ago
        > But this litigation of what's inside people's heads Nobody is advocating that here, why do you keep bringing it up? This seems like something you feel is happening but that’s not what we are talking about at all. > We’re not being asked to associate with anyone’s aunt here and I think we should try to keep to the topic at hand. ...you and other commenters brought up the Aunt. I don’t know if you’re confused, or what; but I didn’t bring the Aunt up in the first place. It arose spontaneously as a straw man up-thread.
- vertis 5y ago
  I want to commend you both for having a civilized conversation about something that can get very heated. Speaking from my own (ex-Christian) upbringing, I got only the vaguest references to people being gay as a child/teen except that they were all sinners. I certainly couldn't have held a rational conversation about it because, aside from references inside the church I didn't know any gay people (maybe I did, who could know). It wasn't until I reached adulthood and left that community behind that I began to realize the way LGBTQ* people are and were demonized within certain christian circles. The argument that marriage is solely for procreation, and/or the property of religions doesn't really hold water. Christians I have come across, seem to think they invented marriage, which is just not even close to historically accurate. As to procreation only, this is fraught with the way laws treat things like next of kin, power of attorney and tax benefits. None of those things, have anything to do with procreation and yet they're a big part of marriage. On the positive side @drewbug01, over the course of 15 years I have gone from incredibly uncomfortable with the whole thing (because of upbringing), to some of my best friends being from those communities. There is progress, and with any luck there will continue to be progress.
  - drewbug01 5y ago
    > On the positive side @drewbug01, over the course of 15 years I have gone from incredibly uncomfortable with the whole thing (because of upbringing), to some of my best friends being from those communities. There is progress, and with any luck there will continue to be progress. I'm happy to hear that; it is actually good to hear. I really do think things are getting better, albeit perhaps too slowly. My own background is similar to yours (ex-Christian, not knowing LGBT people growing up, etc). What you said resonates with me quite a bit.

lupire 5y ago

The Republican party has shrunk substantially (10%?) due to Trump's Presidency. I'm curious how that affects the numbers going forward.