Blog Master G

Word. And photos, too.

Blog Master G random header image

Marriage Poll

Thursday, December 18th, 2003 · 15 Comments

Update: Recent entry on the topic: Gay Marriage (posted 2.25.2004)

The anti-gay American Family Association (“America’s Pro-Family Action Web Site!”) is conducting a poll on gay marriage. Apparently, the organization plans to share the results of this poll with Congress. Of course, they’re expecting that the only people to vote in the poll will be those who visit their site and believe in “traditional” values. Let’s show them otherwise. I’ve received two email forwards so far today about this, so figured I’d spread the word here, too.

Visit to cast your vote.

After I voted, the results showed the following:

  • I oppose legalization of homosexual marriage and “civil unions”: 51.45% (118227 votes)
  • I favor legalization of homosexual marriage: 41.72% (95871 votes)
  • I favor a “civil union” with the full benefits of marriage except for the name: 6.83% (15685 votes)

This seems to be a word-of-mouth Internet effort that is working and can have a positive impact. (The first forward I received said that when the sender voted, it showed 93% in opposition and only 3% in favor; the one after that showed 30% in favor.) Perhaps the poll results will even show that the majority of Americans favor gay marriage. I’ll bet AFA won’t be so excited about sharing the results with Congress then.

Tags: politics

15 responses so far ↓

  • 1 Dave Reed // Dec 18, 2003 at 4:38 pm

    Well, I certainly screwed that one up. Fortunately, I could re-vote under a different e-mail address to correct myself. 🙂

  • 2 Anonymous Coward // Dec 18, 2003 at 5:53 pm

    There should be neither benefits nor penalties for marriage. Why should my non-working spouse or partner get benefits that aren’t available to my non-working parents and siblings? I vote to associate benefits with dependents, not spouses or partners.

  • 3 Dan // Dec 19, 2003 at 1:37 pm

    We’re winning! I just voted and they are at 49% for gay marriage, 43% against, and 8% for civil unions.

    A clear majority for some form of gay unions.

  • 4 beerzie boy // Dec 22, 2003 at 9:08 am

    Way to go. The best way to undermine this kind of crap is to beat them at their own game.

  • 5 Eric Julian // Jan 22, 2004 at 1:33 pm

    This poll is just one of the ways the AFA is trying to ban gay marriage. Look at the link below or go to I encourage people to fill out the online form below with their views on gay marriage.

  • 6 // Jan 22, 2004 at 4:06 pm

    Marriage Poll Follow Up

    Wired has posted an article related to my post back in December about (as an aside check out the random anti-gay comment that someone made). As both myself and many others figured out, this was an attempt by the

  • 7 // Jan 22, 2004 at 4:08 pm

    Marriage Poll Follow Up

    Wired has posted an article related to my post back in December about (as an aside check out the random anti-gay comment that someone made). As both myself and many others such as Gabe A_nderson figured out, this was

  • 8 Neal // Jan 22, 2004 at 5:20 pm

    I love this – poor homophobes are on the run

  • 9 Taaffe Klaas // Feb 25, 2004 at 12:27 am

    I think gay marriage is wrong and unholy. God created marriage for a man and a woman to share their lives, to love one another and to raise a family. Why should we allow our constitution(a document that was founded on the basis of God and christianity)to be made into a joke?! NO ON GAY MARRIAGE!

  • 10 gabe // Feb 25, 2004 at 8:50 am

    Allow me first, Taaffe Klaas, to state the obvious: The Constitution says nothing about marriage, nor should it ever. Bush’s proposal this week to add an amendment to the Constitution is preposterous.

    The only place that says marriage should be between a man and a woman is in the Bible. And that’s the way it should stay.

    Ever heard of separation of Church and State? It’s one of those incredibly important fundamentals on which this country is founded. I’m proud to be an American, and that’s one of the reasons why.

    But when government tries to get too involved with people’s lives — and tries to define the nature of a loving relationship between two people — that’s when I get angry. And that’s when the government needs to butt out.

    As you say yourself, marriage between TWO PEOPLE is “to share their lives, to love one another and to raise a family.” Who are you, or even God, for that matter, to declare that two people of the same sex who happen to fall in love can’t do exactly this? I have many gay friends who have happy, healthy, loving relationships. Why should they not be entitled to the same benefits and legal and societal recognition to which I am entitled in my marriage? Why should I benefit any more just because I happen to be straight?

    I’m proud to have called myself a San Franciscan for the past five years (and always will in my heart) and only wish I were still there now to give my full support to the historical same-sex marriages taking place every day.

    By the way, if your God is as loving and inclusive as you probably think He is, do you really think He would approve of discrimination against His people? Don’t you think He would want for all people to be happy and to raise a family together?

    Think about that.

  • 11 Dave Reed // Feb 25, 2004 at 1:17 pm

    Backing up Gabe on this one:

    The Constitution was written by religious people, not necessarily on a basis of god and christianity. Sure, it contains many elements that are common with christianity, but these elements existed so very long before anyone named Jesus lived in Israel around the Roman era.

    Neither idiots like Bush nor the ultra-religious should dictate how people should live their lives when it comes to love or personal preference. The Bible is a book (or, a collection of books, if you will) that, too many times, has been used for hate and ill-will. People like you, Taaffe, need to learn to truly embrace the core values of christianity: love and acceptance. Too many people tout Jesus and his values, yet most people never live it.

    Recently, on the news, a clip from an interview with Bush before his election (I’ll let the reader choose whether to put quotation marks around that) showed him refusing to answer anything about gay marriage, stating that it should be a state issue. The pot calls the kettle black concerning his own allusions to Kerry.

  • 12 chris // Feb 25, 2004 at 6:32 pm

    I’m a high school track coach and I just informally polled each of my runners as we ran around the track. 43 supported gay marriage and only 3 opposed it. Most of them didn’t even hesitate to answer. I’m beginning to think this is a generational issue. A constitutional ammendment is going to look idiotic in a ten years! And the argument apposing gay marriage is entirely indefensible.

  • 13 IOD // Mar 14, 2004 at 9:14 am

    NO! on gay marriage and no on gay people adopting kids!

  • 14 gabe // Mar 14, 2004 at 9:18 am

    Thanks, IOD, for the very well-argued and insightful commentary. Please do stop by again to grace us with your brilliance.

  • 15 Pamela P // May 26, 2004 at 1:00 am

    As a conservative, I want to express support for those who believe in lasting love and committed relationships. Blessings on those struggling to have their unions recognised and honoured.