Cleansing Fire

Defending Truth and Tradition in the Roman Catholic Church

avatar

Top gay blog laments: ‘WE ALWAYS LOSE’ when voters decide on marriage

July 2nd, 2011, Promulgated by Mike

From LifeSiteNews.com

June 29, 2011 – A prominent online gay publication has admitted the existence of a little-known but persistent obstacle to legalizing same-sex “marriage”: American voters.

A post on the Queerty blog Monday concluded that President Obama’s silence on gay “marriage” results from a recognition that most American voters oppose it.

“Even LGBT organizers agree that they’d rather pass marriage equality by legislature than at the ballot because at the ballot WE ALWAYS LOSE,” wrote Queerty’s Daniel Villarreal.

“People who oppose the ballot also like saying that if America voted on interracial marriage in the 60s, that still might be illegal too. But is that really our only defense against the ballot argument?” he continued. “If so, it’s no wonder that Obama hasn’t articulated a reason to support marriage that doesn’t fly in the face of the democratic process that had denied us our rights.”

Before New York legislators passed a same-sex “marriage” bill earlier this month, a poll by QEV Analytics found that 57 percent of voters in the state supported marriage as “only” between a man and a woman. The same poll, commissioned by the National Organization for Marriage, found that 59 percent favored putting the question on the ballot instead of leaving it to legislators.

When put to voters, measures to enshrine true marriage into law or a state constitution have won majority approval in all of the 30-plus states where they have been proposed.

Poll data on the issue have been found to be routinely misleading: a September 2008 survey found that lead-up polls on average vastly underestimated actual support for traditional marriage at the voting booth.

By shoving SSM through the State Legislature instead of putting it on the ballot, Governor Cuomo has made it abundantly clear that the wishes of the majority mean nothing to him.

Tags:

|

10 Responses to “Top gay blog laments: ‘WE ALWAYS LOSE’ when voters decide on marriage”

  1. I’d have to agree that SSM would not have the same success if voters cast their ballot at their local polling place.
    In regard to society’s notion in general- How much coverage do you think there would be if a royal, such as a prince (or king) married a man? Do you think there would be copies of the engagement ring made to be sold? Do you think there would be the same interest in what design or outfit the male bride would wear? (Perhaps out of an odd sort of curiosity, but not out of the same enthusiasm and delight for a female bride). Do you think it would be televised? Do you think people would come out in droves of support to view it? Do you think magazines would feature multiple photographs of the couple and their wedding and be able to sell it?
    The same thing goes if a Queen (or Princess) married a woman. There would not be the same support, enthusiasm, or delight as a wedding between a man and a woman, and from a business point of view, there would be difficulty selling it to those entrepreneurs and enterprises who would in some way, be trying to sell it to others.

  2. Additionally: I don’t know if legally, according to royals, if a man could marry a man, or if a woman could marry a woman, but could you imagine the outcry of the People? The citizens of England are already unhappy at having to foot most, if not all, of the bill for a royal wedding. Imagine their discontent if they knew they were paying for a royal homosexual wedding.

  3. avatar Louis E. says:

    While I reject the claim that the British royals live at the public expense (the money they get from the government is offset many times over by the Crown Estate revenue given to the government),I think that not engaging in homosexual relations is an important example all royals must set for their subjects.(In the current British legal climate,though,I can imagine the homosexual lobby demanding that anyone who criticized a homosexual “wedding” be locked up for a hate crime,and no major party leader daring to sound unsympathetic).

    Meanwhile,today’s NY Times has an obituary for former Congressman Richard Poff,who voted for segregation,against his conscience,in order to save his seat,but in admitting it was wrong said:
    “…it is one of the most lamentable frailties of mankind that when one’s wrong
    is most grievous,his self-justification is most passionate,perhaps in the pitiful
    hope that the fervor of his self-defense will somehow prove him right.But this
    doesn’t make it so.”

    Have you ever seen a better characterization of “Gay Pride” and the “gay rights” movement?

  4. I took a college course last semester with a professor (PhD.)who was an expert in the field of History. He discussed in class the expense of the Royal Wedding (William and Kate’s)-named a figure. He used class discussion to address the English citizens’ discontent at the expense of the royal wedding which taxpayers would be paying for. The Royals have their own wealth, which is old wealth, and do not live off of public expense, but a royal wedding causes a grand scale increase in security, as in police, guards,etc. and relies on taxpayer money. The estimate for the royal wedding was up to 64 million dollars, and security was noted as claiming the bulk of that estimate. Michael Middleton, Kate Middleton’s father, gave a six figure donation toward the royal wedding.The royal family usually pays for the actual wedding.

  5. Louis E.: I agree that the royals should set a good example for their subjects.
    But you can see my point, from a PR and business endeavor, how a homosexual royal wedding would not have the same enthusiasm, delight, or support, and selling capacity as a heterosexual wedding. That example is an illustration how the public at large views homosexual weddings, and most likely, would vote against gay marriage.

  6. avatar Bill B. says:

    All goes back to what the representatives of the pople at every level are given for thier support. As long as you understand that that it will not change, regardless, all you can do is pray. Those in power will still find a way to woo those who will vote for them and make it difficult for those are oppposed to get an advantage.

  7. avatar annonymouse says:

    Sadly, I am not confident that it will always be the case that “gay marriage” will lose when put to the voters. There is a decidedly greater acceptance of this lifestyle among younger people, likely a result of the prominence of homosexuality on network television (ABC seems to be the worst). And the young people who do go to church are unlikely to hear the alternative view (the truth) there (I haven’t ever heard the subject preached in the DoR).

    The only encouraging thing is that “gay marriage” betrays the truth of who we are and who we are made to be. You don’t need religion to tell us that, either. Even homosexual people know in their hearts that their affections are unnatural and that their homosexual behavior is sinful.

  8. avatar AnonymousII says:

    Annonymouse; When was the last time you were in a homosexual’s heart that you would know this??? Have you ever had a real, in depth discussion with a homosexual? Do you know any homosexuals intimately?? Probably not because with your attitude toward the issue, no gay or lesbian person would have the patience to deal with you and your perfection!!

  9. avatar CBD says:

    Gay marriage should always lose because there’s no logical or reasonable defense for it. But I also agree with A-mouse that our younger generations have become so corrupt through bad education and influence that the popular vote will shift towards acceptance. Gay marriage supporters today vote in favor of something that they can’t defend on a reasonable basis. Catholic supporters of gay marriage are far, far worse. It’s very difficult to have a discussion with Catholic supporters of gay marriage because they’re willing to violate simple logic and they expect everyone to accept that. It’s very much like “we want this”, and that’s all there is to it.

  10. avatar CBD says:

    Gay marriage should always lose because there’s no logical or reasonable defense for it. But I also agree with A-mouse that our younger generations have become so corrupt through bad education and influence that the popular vote will shift towards acceptance. Gay marriage supporters today vote in favor of something that they can’t defend on a reasonable basis. Catholic supporters of gay marriage are far, far worse. It’s very difficult to have a discussion with Catholic supporters of gay marriage because they’re willing to violate simple logic and they expect everyone to accept that. It’s very much like “we want this”, and that’s all there is to it.


-Return to main page-