« Lone Democrat Keeping NY One Vote Shy of Same-Sex Marriage, For Now | Main | Pawlenty Leads National Association of Evangelicals Poll »

June 22, 2011

Same-Sex Marriage Polls: It's All in How You Ask

The Alliance Defense Fund (ADF) recently released results from a poll suggesting that a majority of Americans believe in traditional marriage. The poll found 62 percent of Americans believe that “marriage should be defined only as a union between one man and one woman.”

The poll results seem to run counter to other recent polls showing a majority of Americans support same-sex marriage, but like all polling, the results depend on how the question is asked. What makes the ADF poll unique is that it is the first to ask a question that borrows the same language often used in ballot initiatives.


One explanation given for this difference has been to question the poll's sponsorship. The ADF’s lawyers are the key defenders of Proposition 8, which effectively bars same-sex marriage in California. The poll was conducted by Polling Opinion Strategies, a research firm often works with Republican candidates.

The sponsorship may explain why the poll was conducted, but the methodology provided by ADF is in line with standard practice in polling.

In 31 states, voters have approved initiatives that define marriage as being between one man and one woman. While these ballots effectively prohibit same-sex marriage, they are worded in the affirmative (should the state define marriage as the union between one man and one woman?) not the negative (should the state ban same-sex marriage?).

The importance of question wording has been long recognized by pollsters. For example, the Pew Center for the People and the Press (Pew) asked “Do you think it should be legal or illegal for gay and lesbian couples to get married?”A majority (53 percent) said it should be “legal.”

But another Pew survey conducted just weeks earlier found less support for gay marriage when it asked, “Do you strongly favor, favor, oppose, or strongly oppose allowing gays and lesbians to marry legally?”

This seems to be asking the same idea, but it is not. This question is about “allowing” gays and lesbians to marry, not whether those marriages should be “illegal.” This change in the question wording dropped support for same-sex marriage from a majority to 45 percent (versus 46 percent who oppose same-sex marriage). An August 2010 AP-National Constitution Center Poll found nearly six-in-ten Americans think “couples of the same sex be entitled to the same government benefits as married couples of the opposite sex” and oppose having “the government distinguish between them.”

Such subtle differences are not lost on politicians. In 2008, then California Attorney General Jerry Brown changed the official description of Proposition 8. The original petition asked people to support a proposition that “amends the California Constitution to provide that only marriage between a man and a woman is valid or recognized in California.” Brown changed the wording. The wording on the ballot was titled: “Eliminates the Right of Same-Sex Couples to Marry.”

The ADF question does not ask about same-sex marriage. Instead, it asks what people believe marriage should be. The ADF asked each respondent whether he or she agreed with the statement: “I believe marriage should be defined only as a union between one man and one woman.”

A majority (62 percent) said they agree with this statement. One-third said they disagree. This result seems to contradict polls from Gallup, Pew, and other media outlets, which found growing support for same-sex marriage.

Unlike the ADF, these polls do not ask about how to define marriage but what they think about the legal status of same-sex marriage. In May, Gallup asked, “Do you think marriages between same-sex couples should or should not be recognized by the law as valid, with the same rights as traditional marriages?” A slim majority (53 percent) said they should be recognized; 45 percent said they should not.

An April poll by CNN and Opinion Research Corporation found a similar breakdown (51 to 47 percent). Ask the public about same-sex marriage, and a majority oppose denying gays and lesbians the same legal status as heterosexuals. Ask the public whether they think marriage should be defined as the union of one man and one woman, and the public will answer that they believe in traditional marriage.

This seemingly contradictory result fits with polls that ask people if they support same-sex marriage, civil unions, or neither. Polls generally find about a third of the public supporting each of the three options. For example, Fox News polled registered voters in August. It found that 37 percent favored same-sex marriage; 29 percent preferred civil unions but not marriage; and 28 percent did not want any legal recognition of same-sex couples. A Daily Kos poll found that the public is almost equally split between the three options.

On the one hand, this means that two-thirds of Americans favor gay marriage or civil unions. On the other hand, it means that two-thirds want to keep “marriage” as something that includes only one man and one woman, which is similar to what the ADF poll finds.

If forced to choose between allowing same-sex marriage or not, a slim majority chooses to allow it. If the choice includes civil unions, support for same-sex marriage drops to around one-third, as does support for traditional marriage. Ask if marriage should be defined as the union of one man and one woman, a majority of the public will say it should. It may seem contradictory, but that is the nature of public opinion.


Note: For a quick summary of recent polls mentioned in this post, see the PollingReport.com page on same-sex marriage and gay rights.


People used to think women shouldn't vote. People used to think the earth was flat. People used to think black and white people should never be married. People used to think owning slaves was a good idea. People used to think Popes should marry. People used to think they had to eat fish on Fridays. People in Saudi Arabia think women shouldn't be allowed to drive cars. Amish think they should not use electricity. If you ask the gay marriage question different ways people think different things. Many people used to think gay people are sick, or evil, or undeserving of respect or any number of things. More and more enlightened people are beginning to think gay people are worth the same dignity and respect as everyone else and that marraige, being a good thing, is worth them having and/or aspiring to. THings change. Get on board. And most importantly: Don't BELIEVE everything you THINK.

It does seem inevitable that more and more states will allow for same sex marriage as time goes on. Regardless of what ones position is on the issue I do think that it would be appropriate that churches be allowed to say 'no' to performing weddings for same sex couples if their polices and values are against it.

"Enlightened people" is not the issue. I'll take God's enlightenment. Man's intellectual enlightenment has done little more than sink our country and culture into a deep moral abyss. We are simply repeating in the United States the exact same choices that have destroyed previous "enlightened" cultures in the past.

Regarding morality, God's word is our standard not popular opinion or cultural/societal acceptance/norms. Marriage between a man and a woman (not btw same sexes!) is God's plan:
Gen. 2:21 "...the LORD God caused a deep sleep to fall upon the man, and he slept; then He took one of his ribs and closed up the flesh at that place. 22 The LORD God fashioned into a woman the rib which He had taken from the man, and brought her to the man. 23 The man said,

“This is now bone of my bones,
And flesh of my flesh;
She shall be called Woman,
Because she was taken out of Man.”

24 For this reason a man shall leave his father and his mother, and be joined to his wife; and they shall become one flesh.

And homosexual behavior is an abomination in God's sight: Lev. 18:22 "You shall not lie with a male as one lies with a female; it is an abomination."

@MP: You should follow your own advice: "Don't BELIEVE everything you THINK."

Dan, that phrase means that human beings have to be meek, one meaning of which is teachable. You've heard of another quote from the Bible, "The meek shall inherit the earth?" In other words, the teachable people shall. That means people who think and grow and are enlightened themselves. Not people who stay stuck in their already taught mindsets and refuse to see the things right in front of them. Not people who look at everything in terms of absolutes. Anyone who is unteachable cannot hope to grow. Your stating my quote back to me is a way for you to remain stuck and not have to use your brains at all and to rely on your religious dogma. It's safer for you. People don't like to think the things they are taught could possibly be wrong. I bet if Jesus himself came to you and told you how incorrect you are you'd not automatically accept it. How could you? It's a reaction you have like Pavlov's dogs. And who teaches religion to people? There's been dozens of clergymen of all faiths who have been found wanting in all sorts of ways that stray from spiritual enlightenment. And if you are taught by those people? What does one think then? Fortunately, not even all religions "think" the same way about gay people as you imply.

Gay people know the truth about themselves. That's why we speak up now. We know we are good and not the things that people like you have taught us we should be. Lies in the name of religion are still lies to be exposed. God is helping us do so as you can see nowadays. The Bible passage that comes to mind for me is: "Forgive them Lord, for they know not what they do."

It Gets Better. Thank you, God.

Martin, your very condescending tone to Dan is uncalled for. He can walk miles around you on your understanding of the Bible. It is not just understanding the Bible, but believing with your heart that it is God's Word and believing God. God made it perfectly clear in both testaments that homosexuality and sodomy are an abomination to Him. It doesn't matter at all what man thinks, it only matters what God says. God says that man's wisdom is foolishness to Him. No matter how politically incorrect it may get due to the homosexuals and their pushing of their agenda, John 17:17 says "Sanctify them in the truth; Your word is truth." The word of the psychiatrists is not truth, the word of those pushing your agenda are not truth, God's word is truth. In Hebrews 10:26-27 it says: "If we deliberately keep on sinning after we have received the knowledge of the truth, no sacrifice for sins is left, but only a fearful expectation of judgment and of raging fire that will consume the enemies of God." Those who continue to deny God's Word do so at their own peril. You know in your heart that it is sin and against God.

I was taught that a well designed poll would ask "the question"...as several questions with various wordings. People often believe contradictory things, I think, and they may even change their minds on an issue, mid poll, as I found out when I worked as a pollster one summer in college.

I wish all polls would be reported with a margin of error, preferably with a brief explanation of what that number means. It's been too many decades, after all, since I've taken social statistics classes, and how many people have taken social statistics classes, ever?

Not to mention that "one man and one woman" isn't really "the traditional marriage." It's pretty much the modern era marriage, and still evolving.

Where I live, until pretty recently (rumored to still be happening secretly, but how would I know?), infants would often be contracted in marriage by their parents.

So, do you also believe that marriage should be between "one baby girl and one baby boy?" "One girl and one boy?" "One girl and one Man?" "Girls and women to one man?" "Old widows to boys?" etc.

There are many forms of traditional marriages, including, though rare, one woman with more than one man...usually brothers.

Outside of Christendom anyway, divorce was often easy for a man to do, but nearly, if not actually, impossible for a woman. Given the maternal and infant death rates until modern times...shudder.

It was hardly unknown for a mere child to be married off to an old man. Even if it were theoretically possible for her to lawfully refuse to marry him, in reality, virtually impossible. For royalty it would have been treason for her to refuse to marry someone.

"Tradition marriages" were usually arranged by men, usually by fathers, sometimes by the future fiance and her father...though St. Augustine's mother arranged for him to marry a preteen girl from a good family. It didn't happen, though I don't know the details. At the time he was affianced to the child, he had a beloved 16 year old (if memory serves) son with his long time mistress. He sent her back to Carthage, or she up and went by herself. I've read two versions.

Given the typical ages of newly married females, those many time honored traditional marriages would be highly illegal today. Sigh...the good old days, when people knew what traditional morality and traditional marriage was all about...patriarchy.

Of course, a large percentage of many populations were simply barred from any form of traditional marriage, such as in the United States when my grandfather was born, during the Civil War. Enslaved people were forbidden to marry. The children of an enslaved couple were always illegitimate, even if only the mother was enslaved and the child's father was the richest man in the state. In Muslim lands, a master could free his sons by an enslaved woman and then make them his legitimate heirs; or free a beloved enslaved woman and then marry her, making their future sons legitimate, but not in the United States. The relationships of some enslaved couples were sometimes informally recognized as marriages, at their master's/masters' whims.

Even when I was in high school, "mixed marriages" (whatever that meant back then) were illegal in way too many states, though one would have been way too many. Many a "confirmed bachelor" in some family Bibles were actually in illicit, but loving, relationships, with children.

I am confused by all this talk of religion. Your religion, or lack of it, has very little to do with the 'allowing' or making it 'legal' to have same sex marriage, unless of course that is all you care about. Religion is a personal thing, public law quite another.

The Polls were clear. When it comes to the legality of it most people, being Americans and having an underlying belief in freedom and equality, go for allowing or legal.

When asked in a different way, how they define it or how it should be defined, the numbers shift a bit.

I am not pro-abortion, but I am pro-choice. I am a man so I will never have to make that decision. But we do not have abortions in my immediate family. Why? for our own reasons. I would not force those reasons on others.

I am more afraid of the Saints who would enslave others into their life choices than than I am of the devils. At least the devils aren't pretending to be the good guys.

We can talk and talk as long as we want. However, talking cannot change reality. Marriage must, of necessity, be between a man and a women. It is the natural scheme of humanity. It is, if you'll pardon the reference - the way God designed humankind. What the underlying cause of homosexuality it, seems to require considerabe study. Unfortunately, this does not seem to be something into which knowledgeable people wish to delve. Consequently, the folks go on and on about it to no avail. Sad to say, it just aint the way human kind was made.

"one man and one woman" isn't really "the traditional marriage." Really? Gen. 2:24 "For this reason a man shall leave his father and his mother, and be joined to his wife; and they shall become one flesh." Whether or not man obeyed God is another issue, but from the beginning it was one man one woman.

@MP: Here is the complete definition of meekness:
Meekness toward God is that disposition of spirit in which we accept His dealings with us as good, and therefore without disputing or resisting. In the OT, the meek are those wholly relying on God rather than their own strength...
Now regarding being teachable, MP, see Proverbs chapters 1-6. But Prov. 1:1-8 sets the direction for us:
To know wisdom and instruction,
To discern the sayings of understanding,
3 To receive instruction in wise behavior,
Righteousness, justice and equity;
4 To give prudence to the naive,
To the youth knowledge and discretion,
5 A wise man will hear and increase in learning,
And a man of understanding will acquire wise counsel,
6 To understand a proverb and a figure,
The words of the wise and their riddles.
7 The fear of the LORD is the beginning of knowledge;
Fools despise wisdom and instruction."

What is your source of wisdom, MP? The secular priests: psychologists, psychiatrists, sociologists, anthropologists? You may keep them. I will stick with God's word: II Tim. 3:16-17 "All Scripture is inspired by God and profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, for training in righteousness; 17 so that the man of God may be adequate, equipped for every good work."
Jer. 23:29 “Is not My word like fire?” declares the LORD, “and like a hammer which shatters a rock?
Hebrews 4:12 "For the word of God is living and active and sharper than any two-edged sword, and piercing as far as the division of soul and spirit, of both joints and marrow, and able to judge the thoughts and intentions of the heart."
MP, it is God's word which gives moral direction to us. And His word is very clear. I recommend it very highly to you, as I have found it quite enlightening and instructive. But the best part is that it leads us to God through Jesus His son so that we may have a personal relationship with Him! John 5:39 "You search the Scriptures because you think that in them you have eternal life; it is these that testify about Me..." John 14:6 "Jesus *said to him, “I am the way, and the truth, and the life; no one comes to the Father but through Me."

Conclusion - meekness is accepting what God's word says is true for us and humbly responding to Him in love, reverence, fear, and obedience.

As a law-abiding, taxpaying Gay American, I SUPPORT "traditional marriage." If some pollster called me on the phone and asked me if I support "traditional marriage," I would say YES. I think it's wonderful when Straight (i.e. heterosexual) couples decide to made a solemn commitment to one another for life. I would never, EVER want to take that right away from them.

The fact that I support the right of Gay couples to do the same doesn't mean I don't support "traditional marriage." NOTHING is happening to "traditional marriage." Most people are Straight, always have been and always will be, and they will continue to date, get engaged, marry, and build lives and families together as they always have. None of that is going to change when Gay couples are allowed to do the same. If you think that your "traditional marriage" is somehow going to be harmed by the fact that the Gay couple next door decided to get married, then your marriage was already on shaky ground.

So YES, when you poll people on marriage equality for Gay couples, it's all about how you phrase the question. If I tell a pollster from the Alliance Defense Fund that I support "traditional marriage," I sure don't want him to think I favor denying Gay couples those same rights.

"Gay marriage" is like the Arabs saying they want peace with Israel, only until they gain the power to totally destroy it. "Marriage" has a meaning: the joining together of ONE MAN and ONE WOMAN.

I believe in states rights for each state to vote, but when passed legally, it is still fought. If gay couples want the rights of marriage - civil union or similar term, it might pass more readily.

I am tired of words and meanings being twisted. Being a fan of 1930, 1940 & 1950 movies, GAY meant you were a happy person; by that meaning my wife and me are "GAY". If homosexual, say so but lets not twist it so it is more publicly acceptable. Homosexuality has become more accepted because we have come to terms that the world is living in its fallen state and we need to pray for it. Most Christians do no approve of the “act” of homosexuality, but still love the person.

I cannot speak for all Christians, but believe if they are going to live in their homosexuality and want a legal union and if passed BY THE PEOPLE OF THEIR STATE, they should have if. God is the only one that can convict their heart that they are living in sin and will want to change. Christians need to pray for change in the homosexual community as we do our leaders in government and other issues the Bible leads us to.

you must consider the purpose of marriage. whether it is legal or not is not the question. the question of marriage is--to reproduce like kind--in other words children. i challenge anyone any where to prove to me that two men or two women has ever had a child between them. it takes a male and a female to produce another living human being. we are not talking about artificial insemination (which still requires the male sperm); but even if we were has anyone ever heard of a man giving birth by the same method? you talk about a freak of nature. when that happens then i will support SSM and LGBT.

wake up and smell the coffee!!!!!!!

We need to consider legislation that insists that all plebiscites and referenda will contain clear and straightforward language. This manipulation of sentences to "get a yes" borders on misrepresentation, and the deliberate abuse of language.

DEAR DAVID (above):

The reason why the "states rights" argument is weak is because the federal government, through its own actions, has made marriage a FEDERAL issue. Yes, it’s true that the word “marriage” does not occur in the Constitution, but most of legal benefits, protections, and responsibilities of marriage are bestowed by the FEDERAL government … and not the least of those protections is the “Full Faith & Credit” clause, which means that a marriage recognized in ONE state is honored in ALL states.

Making marriage a "states rights" issue would mean the following:

1: If a couple is legally married in one state, they must apply for a new marriage license if they move somewhere else.

2: If first cousins are married in a state where such a marriage is legal, then later they move to a state where that marriage is illegal, that marriage must be declared null and void.

3: All of the 1,138 legal benefits of marriage granted by the federal government go bye-bye. These benefits have to do, in part, with tax law, Social Security, property inheritance, child custody, hospital visitation, immigration, etc. There would be no more survivor benefits for spouses under Social Security, since Social Security can’t operate in such a patchwork fashion.

If marriage is to be purely a “States Rights” issue under the 10th Amendment, married couples had better be prepared to lose most of the legal benefits, protections, and responsibilities that they currently enjoy.

In other words … careful what you wish for!


Ask any Straight couple why they choose to marry. Their answer will not be, "We want to get married so that we can have sex and make babies!" That would be absurd, since couples do not need to marry to make babies, nor is the ability of even desire to make babies a prerequisite for obtaining a marriage license.

No, the reason couples choose to marry is to make a solemn declaration before friends and family members that they wish to make a commitment to one another's happiness, health, and well-being, to the exclusion of all others. Those friends and family members will subsequently act as a force of encouragement for that couple to hold fast to their vows.

THAT'S what makes marriage a good thing. Gay couples recognize that and support that. And keep in mind that many Gay couples DO have children, whether through adoption or some other means.

Yes, some people (and cultures as a whole) in certain past eras held to wrong ideas about particular issues. Doubtless our current culture and era also has certain blind spots, whether in the area of science, ethics, politics, etc. But it simply does no good to dismiss with a wave of the hand all ideas that might have been held by individuals in the past, just because you (legitimately in some cases) reject their past errors in particular arenas. This reflects what C. S. Lewis termed "chronological snobbery":

"The uncritical acceptance of the intellectual climate common to our own age and the assumption that whatever has gone out of date is on that account discredited. You must find why it went out of date. Was it ever refuted (and if so by whom, where and how conclusively) or did it merely die away as fashions do? If the latter, this tells us nothing about its truth or falsehood. From seeing this, one passes to the realization that our own age is also a 'period,' and certainly has, like all periods, its own characteristic illusions. They are likeliest to lurk in those widespread assumptions which are so ingrained in the age that no one dares to attack or feels it necessary to defend them."

It's simply irrelevant to the present topic whether people in an ill-defined "past" (when, specifically? The past was less intellectually uniform than we tend to assume) believed the earth was flat, believed in geocentrism, held slaves, etc. The argument seems to be:
a) People in the past believed some wrong ideas about... (science, race, etc.)
b) People in the past believed marriage was defined as the one-flesh, lifetime union of a man and a women
c) Since people in the past held wrong ideas in the area of (a), therefore they also held wrong ideas in the area of (b)

This type of argument just doesn't follow, nor does it help us to deal with the specific issue at hand, that of the definition and legal parameters of marriage. We need to examine the issue on its own merits, not wave it away rhetorically through an overdetermining narrative of "Enlightenment," "Ever-Expanding-Liberation-from-Past-Oppression", or simply "Progress" (progress *from* what *to* what?).

Look at us all, fighting about a topic that, by the bible, is a mortal sin. Yet, how can it be a sin? As christians, most claim that we were all put on this earth by God, so wouldn't homosexuals be the same? Or are we all born evil, learning what is good as time goes on?

The bible was written by man in the few years after the death of christ, with mans opinions. No one can claim that the bible is unbyst, it was written too long ago. Since the idea of christianity, being homosexual was concidered a sin, but it hadn't always been that way.

Since the dawn of mans reign on earth until the start of christianity, some religions had no problem with homosexuality. Tribes depended on homosexuals, believing that because they loved their fellow men so much they would be a better, stronger defender of the tribe.

So should gay and lesbian marriage be legal? Yes, beacuse we were all put on this earth by God, be you gay, lesbian, straight, bisexual or transexual.

AMEN to Dan and Barbara! You both know God's word well and overcame the many spin-masters on here who distort Truth. Congratulations and God bless you! God's word IS alive and sharper than a two-edged sword, so I pray it gets through and convicts those who distort His word into licentiousness. God is Holy, which means he hates sin. He loves sinners but he NEVER EVER condones sin!!! So many people twist God's grace and mercy into freedom to do anything you want without consequence. The wages of sin remains death, therefore, the only release from that penalty is acceptance of Jesus Christ and living according to His word. Therefore, it is very clear that homosexuality is condemned in both Old and New testaments, so you cannot claim to be a follower of a holy God and live an unholy lifestyle that he finds abominable as quoted above in Leviticus. "Nature's God" is referenced in the founding documents of our country- which means nature itself proclaims that male and female complement each other and are necessary to fulfill God's command to "be fruitful and multiply." I agree with doug as well - our country is falling into a deep moral abyss and the legalization of gay marriage would only make it decline even more rapidly and I fear for future generations if that happens! The Romans thought they were "enlightened" people as well as the gladiators slaughtered humans for entertainment. I'm sure the people of Sodom and Gomorrah believed they were more evolved and enlightened as well. And please don't forget that Hitler believed his race was superior and highly intelligent as well! Heed the warnings from these corrupt civilizations lest history repeats itself!!

@CA: "As a law-abiding, taxpaying Gay American, I SUPPORT "traditional marriage." Sorry to burst your balloon, but traditional marriage is btw a man and a woman - not two men or two women.
Gen. 2:22-24 "The LORD God fashioned into a woman the rib which He had taken from the man, and brought her to the man. 23 The man said,

“This is now bone of my bones,
And flesh of my flesh;
She shall be called Woman,
Because she was taken out of Man.”

24 For this reason a man shall leave his father and his mother, and be joined to his wife; and they shall become one flesh."

Their is nothing traditional about two men marrying or two women marrying. Check out history.

Martin Luther King, Jr. said so wisely, "Science investigates, religion interprets. Science gives man knowledge which is power; religion gives man wisdom which is control."

Many so-called "enlightened" people today, who think they have evolved instead of were created, and think the Bible is an archaic book, only prove that they have knowledge without wisdom; and therefore without control of their passions that are a perversion of how the human body was made by God. Read Romans chapter 1 in the New Testament.

According to these intellectuals who consider themselves so smart: If man is ultimate authority over himself, then God is either irrelevant or a Deity of your own making, so the Bible is not something they consult. That's why so many seek like-minded friends, psychologists or psychiatrists to deal with the inner turmoil to tell them what they want to hear instead of the Truth that will set them free!--John 8:36. May the Lord God set our country free from all these twisted, perverse ideas about marriage and life disguising themselves as "knowledge."

History proves over and over again that civilizations that deny the moral and spiritual part of humanity - that part that is kept in check by acknowledgment of God to whom we each must answer - ultimately DEVOLVE instead of evolve into pits of corrupt, man-made moral standards which eventually self-destruct. Just look what kind of things are shown in the name of entertainment today. The more gory and/or sexually explicit and perverse, the more money it makes. Sex sells- no wonder God says, "the love of money is the root of all evil." In the name of free enterprise, what sells is therefore NO indicator of what is right or good or true.

Bethany, the Bible was written over a period of 1400 to 1800 years by 40 different authors. The Bible has 66 different books. Jesus quoted from all of the books of the Old Testament except for the book of Esther. How could He quote from them if they had not been written yet? The Bible mentions cities that at first archeologists thought never existed. But later in time, other archeologists came upon more discoveries and found that the cities mentioned did indeed, exist. It is backed up by history, archeology, and hundreds of fulfilled prophecies. There are non-biblical historians such as Josephus, who wrote about Jesus and His miracles. A good book to read is "From God to Us-How we Got Our Bible" by Norman Geisler and William Nix. You might at least check it out to see why Christians, 2000 years later, are willing to go to their deaths for their beliefs. A very brief introduction to the Bible and why we believe it is true is at: http://www.allabouttruth.org/is-the-bible-true-c.htm

Very good info again, Barbara! Another great site is allabouthistory.org which gives historically ACCURATE info about God's role in the founding of our nation, what the separation of church and state REALLY means, and other significant facts that are being terribly skewed by the liberal agenda today. The thing is, many people would rather believe anything EXCEPT the real Truth, no matter how many websites and accurate facts you provide for them. Sadly! The thing is, if history is not told accurately, all kinds of lies can perpetrate as TRUTH! The only way to thwart all the lies and propaganda out there is to overcome them with the whole truth and nothing but!

God bless you!

@Barbara and Barb: Nicely written posts. Keep it up.

If what we do is righteous, we never have to justify ourselves. The only time we justify ourselves is when we are doing something wrong.
To use your body other than what it was created for is wrong. A man cannot physically have a child with another man and the same is with women. Our bodies were made to bear fruit unto God, and that can only be done when a man and a women are joined together.

Re: Gideon - you stated such a simple but profound concept - why can't modern man grasp it? Paul wrote in Rom. 1:21ff "...they became futile in their speculations, and their foolish heart was darkened. 22 Professing to be wise, they became fools...God gave them over in the lusts of their hearts to impurity, so that their bodies would be dishonored among them. 25 For they exchanged the truth of God for a lie...God gave them over to degrading passions; for their women exchanged the natural function for that which is unnatural, 27 and in the same way also the men abandoned the natural function of the woman and burned in their desire toward one another, men with men committing indecent acts and receiving in their own persons the due penalty of their error."

I hope you are all as happy as I am that the Marriage Equality Bill has passed in New York tonight in a bi-partisan vote. Your lives will now remain the same. Mine just got better. God, thank you so much for your continued enlightenment to shine on those who previously have been taught that we are not of your own creation. We know we are.

Martin, you can keep pretending how happy you are but we know it is just that-pretending. Because nobody feels happy when they are separated from God. But if you think you're unhappy now, it will be much, much worse when you die. Anyone with two neurons in their brain knows from your parades that you and your friends are not "normal".
I don't mean to sound smug or happy about your problem of your practicing your sin even though you know it is sin and an abomination to God. I sincerely pray that you will repent and truly accept Jesus as your Lord and Savior. He is very real, and He loves you. God loves you but does not accept your sin no matter how many people think it's fine. It's what God says that matters. I just pray that you will turn from darkness to light and from the dominion of satan to God, and become a true believer and disciple of God. Satan is the one rejoicing.

Now that the homosexuals can marry according to politicians because according to NYState constitution the public can't vote on it and they would have voted 62% against. Now, the homosexuals can leave the church alone. They don't need the church and they can continue their way of doing sex while the rest of us struggle with saying no to our addictions by following Jesus by fighting addictions and yes, that is what two men having sex is, an addiction. So, goodbye, homosexuals, The Church can now get back to its business of spreading the word and not have to be sidetracked by you guys. Jesus said for those who don't listen, leave them, and go on to those who will listen. So, now you can leave Christianity alone, you got what you wanted, the legal right to do with each other what you want, like Hollywood, sex wins or sells or whatever. But for me, I'll take Jesus and his Father and his Church.

I've had exchanges with you on other posts in other areas before, Barbara. I know that you believe you are being truthful and correct about what you write and what you believe, what can I say? There is no point in me arguing about it, or talking about it, in that case, as I have before to no avail. There are those who choose to believe what things they want to believe from the religious teachers that taught them or the interpretations they have decided on. And dueling Bible quotes never leads to learning. God works in mysterious ways, although from what I read here in the posts there is no mystery, there is only absolutes. I will just leave these posts with the one quote that seems appropriate: "Forgive them, Lord, for they know not what they do."

P.S.: Original Anna, religion aside, your ignorance of what a gay person is, or what it means to be born gay, is astounding. And that poll number of 62% that you quote is not just about New York State, but that poll you cite was found to have a statistical flaw because it was heavily weighted to voters over 50 and 60 and only 7% were younger people.

I don't know what all the fuss over "religious exemptions" was for. Muslim and Jewish and Atheist couples are allowed to legally marry, and to the best of my knowledge none of them have ever FORCED churches to provide them wedding and other services. This isn’t going to change when Gay couples are allowed to legally marry as well. And as long as religious organization aren’t benefitting from MY tax dollars, I don’t really care who they discriminate against. All it illustrates is their own prejudices and discomfort. And it bears repeating (for the umpteenth time) that NONE of the legal benefits of marriage come from the church, they come from GOVERNMENT.

Anyway, there are plenty of other venues which are more than willing to do business with Gay couples. In Charleston, West Virginia (where I live), there are several churches that are accepting and supportive of their Gay congregants, and I would much rather have my wedding there rather than some place where my spouse and I are viewed with disdain.

I am a woman from the city of New York with several gay friends. I respect and accept them for their choice and they are dear friends; however, I do not believe in same sex marriage. Marrige, in my opinion, should be between a man and woman.

"...dueling Bible quotes never leads to learning." So far you haven't provided ANY Scriptural support for your view - just futile speculation - so it hasn't been a duel. In fact, MP, you have no Biblical support - no homosexual has ever been able to provide scriptural support/evidence condoning homosexual behavior. Why? B/c homosexual behavior is rooted in the pagan religious rituals Paul speaks out against in Romans 1:18-32. Paul said b/c of their dishonoring of Himself, God gave the pagans over to 3 things:

1) God gave them over in the lusts of their hearts to impurity, so that their bodies would be dishonored among them.

2)God gave them over to degrading passions; for their women exchanged the natural function for that which is unnatural, 27 and in the same way also the men abandoned the natural function of the woman and burned in their desire toward one another, men with men committing indecent acts and receiving in their own persons the due penalty of their error.

3)God gave them over to a depraved mind, to do those things which are not proper, 29 being filled with all unrighteousness, wickedness, greed, evil; full of envy, murder, strife, deceit, malice; they are gossips, 30 slanderers, haters of God, insolent, arrogant, boastful, inventors of evil, disobedient to parents, 31 without understanding, untrustworthy, unloving, unmerciful; 32 and although they know the ordinance of God, that those who practice such things are worthy of death, they not only do the same, but also give hearty approval to those who practice them.

MP - I recommend you seriously consider your condition in light of what the Word of God says about homosexuality.

I think same sex marrage is an obomination against god. I do not want them living next to me in my apt building. I am a christian and it says in many places, 7 that I know of that men on men and women on women is EVIL!

Does the fact that we were designed for male and female sexual reproduction mean anything? I guess not. People are trying to screw that up as well. Thanks

"I like your Christ, I do not like your Christians. Your Christians are so unlike your Christ."- Ghandi

Is that the same Ghandi who needlessley allowed his wife to suffer for lack of medical treatment?

BTW, the "polls" showing support for same-sex attraction "marriage" were not scientifically conducted. The ADF poll was.

This story is so idiotic as is basing human rights on polls and public opinion. When the Supreme Court struck down laws in the South which banned inter-racial marriage in 1968, only 20 percent of Americans believed that two people of different races should be allowed to marry. It wasn't until 1990 that more than 50 percent of people thought inter-racial marriage as all right.

1 Peter 3:15
"...but sanctify Christ as Lord in your hearts, always being ready to make a defense to everyone who asks you to give an account for the hope that is in you, yet with gentleness and reverence..."

It is unfortunate that most Christians cannot provide a Biblical defense for heterosexual marriage in contrast to the homosexual's anti-biblical view. Here is a short word study I did over the word "abomination" in Lev. 18:22 which shoots down the Gay theory that whenever the word "abomination" is used it primarily refers to ritual prohibitions rather than ethical prohibitions.

[The context of this study is that a Gay advocate had listed many verses from the OT that contained the word "abomination" and had concluded that ONLY ritual prohibitions were connected to the word "abomination"and that those prohibitions no longer had ethical force today under the New Covenant. I proved her wrong with a simple word study from www.biblestudytools.com

Here is the meat of the study.

"... to disaggregate the Biblical text based on the word "abomination" is helpful to some degree and it may shed light on some points, but then you end up with decontextualized verses. And so your conclusions regarding Biblical acceptance of homosexual behavior cannot walk on all four legs. Here's why:
*The word "abomination" = hb[wt = (transliterated)Tow`ebah
*There are 112 occurances of the word "abomination" in the OT and none in the NT.
* Definition of abomination include the following:
a disgusting thing, abomination, abominable
in ritual sense (of unclean food, idols, mixed marriages)
in ethical sense (of wickedness etc) (NAS Concordance)
*A short inquiry into the word's origins [Heb. word Ta`ab] reveals its possible meanings: to abhor, be abominable, do abominably
(Niphal) to be abhorred, be detested
in the ritual sense
in the ethical sense
to loathe, abhor, regard as an abomination 1b
in the ritual sense 1b
in the ethical sense
to cause to be an abomination
(Hiphil) to make abominable, do abominably
in the ritual sense
in the ethical sense
(NAS Concordance)

So as you can clearly see, both the ritual sense and the ethical sense can be denoted by the word. The key then to its interpretation falls primarily upon that good old hermeneutical principle - the rule of context. [Remember: a word is known by the company it keeps. Well, it's true for verses, too.]
So let's see what is the context of Lev. 18:22?
...apparently Gays view Lev. 18:22 as purely a ritual violation. But they base that interpretation upon decontextualized verses, whereas I view it as primarily an ethical violation and secondarily as a ritual violation. I derive my interpretation from the context. So why is the Gay interpretation wrong? Here's why - the writer of Lev. 18:22 connects same sex behavior with adultery/fornication/immorality. And those are first and foremost ethical violations."

Muslims and atheists have no illusions desires about marrying in a Christian church. However, there is a subgroup of homosexual activists who are seriously seeking to change the church and its policies in regard to sexuality.

Presbyterians were split almost 50-50% over homosexuality some few years ago - yes - there is a VERY active effort to influence the church and religion.

THIS is what Christians so strongly resist. We are now being pushed from "accept us in Christ" to "accept us or else !"

My own church accepts everyone without hesitation - but we also speak the truth to ALL sins and offenses to the God and the witness of the church....(not just homosexuality) .but there is NO exclusion of ANYONE based on ANYTHING.

But sooner or later, someone will be offended when truth is taught or spoken. But speaking the truth in love is what we are called to do. And the Church can never be backed into a corner that compromises that mission....

Just in case someone who suffers from same-sex attraction and wants help to change comes across this blog, here is a site that may be able to help:

While we're on the subject, here's an article that reports the insanity of the homosexual view of the world. It really should be placed in the "Truth is stranger than Fiction" column.


Gay Softball World Series Hit By Heterosexual Cheating Controversy
Just how gay is gay enough for gay softball?

The North American Gay Amateur Athletic Alliance (NAGAAA) is now facing a lawsuit following a decision from the 2008 Gay Softball World Series to strip the second-place team of their title because the team was apparently composed of not enough homosexual players. According to The New York Times, the five players in question were taken into a small conference room and interrogated about their sexual preferences.

Ultimately, three players were deemed at least "not gay enough," to play.

From The New York Times:

According to court records, one player declined to say whether he was gay or straight but acknowledged being married to a woman. Another answered yes to both gay and heterosexual definitions. A third asked if bisexual was acceptable and was told, "This is the Gay World Series, not the Bisexual World Series."
However, the three men who were deemed as cheaters, are suing, writes NESN. Steven Apilado, LaRon Charles and Jon Russ have taken to court, suing the NAGAAA for $75,000 in emotional damages, and a restoration of their title.
According to USA Today, a federal judge ruled in early June that the NAGAAA can limit the number of heterosexual players on the GSWS teams, but also allowed for the ongoing lawsuit to continue."

[Ahhhahahaaa! Oooooooo..ahuh, ahuh...Please,[ahuh, ahuh] someone help me [ahuh, ahuh]. I'm on the floor and I can't stop laughing. Yeeowwww! I just broke a rib. But I still can't stop. Ahhaaaa!]

Just think if a heterosexual team did this!
Truth is stranger than fiction, but it is because Fiction is obliged to stick to possibilities; Truth isn't. - Mark Twain

God created a male and a female species, in order to reproduce. The countries who have strong family bonding, will always endure. Countries that do not will fail. Do the right thing, and allow your children to grow up in a healthy enviroment, and keep America as it was founded. On a Christian belief, and with men marrying women.

To say that answering the question “I believe marriage should be defined only as a union between one man and one woman.” actually reflects whether or not someone supports same sex marraige is just plain asinine.

Many people would answer yes to that question and still support same-sex marraige. Just because someone believes something, doesn't mean they can't be open to the fact that other people believe differently. These people would in essence be saying that although they believe something, they are not going to force those beliefs on others.

So basically, this ADF poll is completely useless in determining support for or against same sex marraige.

The real point is that this ship has already sailed. 70%+ of people under 35 support same sex marraige and that number goes up with every poll. Within 10 years, it will be legal and people will wonder what all of the fuss was about.

Same sex marriage is completely to biased on religion. I'm a 17 year old girl (not a lesbian) and I'm appauled by you people basing your opinions solely on religion. Think about other people. How would you feel if YOU yourself were homosexual and you wanted to marry someone of the same sex. Or how about your son or daughters.What if you has to hear them cry about how they can't publicaly announce who they love because either it's "wrong" in your community, or because you shove religion down their throats.