Polls Show Support For Same-Sex Marriage Wavering

Citizenslink.com is reporting today, that a "new poll finds only 33 percent of Americans favor [same-sex marriage], a 9-point drop since April". Now that's really good news! What this means, is that the more we keep educating about WHY it is important to preserve traditional marriage in society, the more people are forced to THINK about what such a fundamental change would mean to the future of THE FAMILY!

"The number of Americans who support same-sex marriage has plunged over the last few months, according to a new poll.

The CBS News/New York Times study found that 33 percent of respondents favor same-sex marriage. That represents a 9 point drop since April.

Everett Rice, legislative coordinator for the California Family Council, said he has a theory about the decrease.

"People really recognize their core and their values, their heritage," he said. "When people want to go in and redefine that, it really goes against everybody's individual cultural understanding."

I also believe that when people begin to understand that same-gender "unions", without the designation of "marriage", can actually obtain the same benefits -- and in many states already -- they begin to think a little more clearly on the subject. For some, IF this is about "equal rights", it is becoming more and more evident that "rights" are not being taken away from the gay community, simply because they are not allowed to rewrite the definition of marriage.

Most people ultimately agree, that legal unions should be made available to those who desire them, and such should benefit by law in the same ways as those who are "traditionally" married. However, changing the definition of marriage, which is between a man and a woman is not necessary, for those who practice homosexuality to get what it is - that they claim to really want.

It's also interesting to note, that President Obama has just recently backed off his earlier determination to repeal the "Defense of Marriage Act", on the federal level. Perhaps he got wind of this most recent poll -- and is finally realizing that Americans at heart, are still a fairly conservative, and religious bunch of folks. Needless to say, Mr. Obama is not nearly as popular with the gay community as once hoped.

Another positive indicator, as a result of this recent poll, shows that most people are not getting their information by which they are forming their opinions - through mainstream media. That tells me, that what many of us are doing online via social media, may be having a more powerful effect than we realize.

With that, I say keep blogging, keep sharing on Facebook and Twitter, etc...

Kathryn Skaggs


  1. Thank you for bringing the results of this recent poll to my attention. It is welcome news.

    I predict that the homosexual community will never be content with insurance, healthcare, and other benefits stemming from legally recognized partnerships because their ultimate goal is to normalize their sexuality. They know that they will not be able to normalize homosexuality in our society until they overthrow the federal Defense of Marriage Act.

  2. Hi Dave -

    I agree with you completely. I too, believe that the only reason that the homosexual community pushes for the word "marriage" to be applied to their union, is for societal acceptance. I do not believe, that most are really all that interested in "marriage" and what it means to the family.

    My hope, is that the more we educate about this fact, the more average folks that really do value traditional marriage, will begin to see through the gay agenda and their true intention for redefining marriage.


  3. Just wanted to chime in here. Ther IS NO gay agenda except to have the same rights as everybody else. We love just like you love and want to enter into legal committments just like you do. Whether or not we get married does not effect you or your children. You're against it? Tell your children you're against it and raise them to believe that--just as you would with any other issue in the world.
    The other point I'd like to make is that many proponents of same sex marriage are advocating that civil unions become the legal committment of any couple. This would allow those who want a blessing from the church/God to get "married" in the church. That is what marriage is about, right- a religiousy sanctioned union. We have a wonderful thing here in the US called "separation of church and state". Allowing government to stay out of the marriage business by sticking to the legal side of things (with civil unions for all) is really a very smart idea. And it doesn't interfere with your desire to be married within the church.

  4. Anonymous -

    Not to be disrespectful, but I just don't buy the "no gay agenda" position. I've spoken, honestly - with gays who have openly admitted to me - personally - what they want, and that is to be accepted as "normal" by mainstream society. Having "marriage" to validate their same-sex unions, would in their minds - help to make that happen. In these open discussions, I am also convinced, that most gays are not trying to hurt those who are traditionally married; they are just desperate for some type of communal validation.

    BTW, marriage is not a "right". Marriage is a privilege granted by society, in order to protect the traditional family, in society. I get it... that this "exclusive" privilege is at risk of becoming extinct in society, and for exactly the reasons that your are mentioning.

    As a child, when I wanted something really bad, and couldn't have it -- that anger and frustration caused feeling inside of me that made me think that IF I can't have it, then I don't want anyone else to have it! Pretty immature - don't you think?

    At the heart of this issue, are children. Children who naturally are intended to have the love and influence of BOTH a mother and a father. Two women can only make two good mothers. Two men, can only make two good fathers. Marriage between a man and a woman create a balanced and natural set of parents for the best family situation, possible.

    Society has a responsibility to ensure what is best for the whole; and our children depend on us as adults to put our selfish wants aside and do the right thing.


  5. I am LDS and am fine with same-sex marriage. The notion that The Divine Institution of Marriage needs protection from the LGBT community is, quite frankly, absurd.

    Marriage is being destroyed from the inside. There's a 50% divorce rate in the U.S. and LDS Church leaders often tell us this rate is the same even for LDS Members. The LGBT community aren't the ones causing an increase in the heterosexual divorce rate.

    Additionally, there's a growing number of people in our country choosing not to marry and to co-habitate instead. 9 out of the 10 Million Americans who cohabitate are straight couples. Shouldn't you be blaming straight couples who choose not to marry for destroying the family unit?

    Furthermore, I believe as is stated by Elder Wickman in an interview which you can find on LDS.org that, "marriage is neither a matter of politics, nor is it a matter of social policy. Marriage is defined by the Lord Himself." Your argument that Marriage is not a right, but a privileged granted somehow by the inherent powers of 'society' is contrary to that position. God defines marriage and no secular definition can change that. So why are you so worried?

    Do you think that broadening the secular definition of marriage will make your marriage have less meaning?

    Your argument that children need both a mother and a father is weak as well. Millions of children grow up with single parents. Should 'society' take them away and place them in two-parent homes? Of course not! That's ludicrous. All a child needs is love whether that love comes from one mom, two dads, a grandparent, or a foster parent it doesn't really matter.

    I know this comment is getting really long, but I also want to say that marriage and civil unions are not equal. Certain states do grant similar rights to same-sex unions, but none have equal rights, especially when it comes to federal law. Custody issues are especially tricky under civil unions. Federal tax benefits given to married couples aren't given to couples who are 'civil unionized.' Until just a few days ago, federal employees could not share their benefits with their same-sex partners. It's also hard for same-sex couples to will their assets to each other. Civil unions don't provide any other protection. Also, if you are married in Utah your marriage is recognized by Massachusetts through 'Full Faith and Credit' in the Constitution. The reverse is not true; civil unions are not recognized by states that don't have civil unions. How is that equal?

    I think that the LGBT community deserves our love and respect, not biterness and intolerance.

  6. Hi Chris -

    No one has said anywhere, that I am aware of, that "The Divine Institution of Marriage needs protection from the LGBT community". However, you being LDS must understand that marriage is ordained by God, and is only to be between a man and a woman. If SSM doesn't bother you personally, that's fine. Marriage is a sacred union, which when honestly entered into, demands fidelity. Because so many couples end up failing at marriage, it does not discredit or devalue the pure intentions of what a marriage is, or what it is intended to accomplish for the progress of individuals.

    Whether we are discussing divorce statistics, choosing not to marry, or to co-habitate with another individual, etc... none of these have anything to do with the issue of same-sex marriage being right or wrong. These are simply diversions and/or justifications that don't really even make sense, as to why same-sex marriage is not good for the family.

    An argument as to whether a child needs both a mother and a father is not even necessary. However, it does need to be stated over and over again, because so many have decided to ignore the plain fact. There is more than ample evidence that supports this natural truth.

    I agree, that from state to state, civil union benefits vary, and much more can and should be done. And, I do believe, that this is precisely where the gay community should be focusing their energy. There seems to be much more support for homosexuals in achieving what they claim to want, through these means.

    Lastly, it is wrong to assume, that those who desire to preserve traditional marriage in society, are either bitter or intolerant toward gays. Once again, that assumption only creates a diversion and division, where it is not necessary or true. Love and respect should be a mutual relationship, between those who want to do the right thing in society.

  7. No one has mentioned the eternal perspective so I will. The only marriage contracts that are binding and legible for time and all eternity are the ones solemnized in Mormon Temples, anything else is fake even vanity. A same gender proposal is forbidden in God's Temples'. People who do not obtain the necessary ordinances for salvation(inc a Temple marriage) will forfeit .

  8. LDSNana:

    You show great ignorance in your argument. You are rather determined to keep believing what you believe in. It's not your job to "protect" all of society. That's what our government does. I respect your right to believe in whatever you want to believe in for you and your family. But you don't get to use your religious beliefs to legislate on other people's lives not bound by your beliefs.

  9. Mustard -

    Members of the LDS Church have a belief in eternal marriage. Many more, do not. In the secular discussion on the merits of SSM, what the Church teaches about the eternal perspective of marriage, holds little weight. Most proponents for SSM are actually offended when religious beliefs are brought into the discussion. As members of the LDS Church, we must be respectful towards those who do not have our same understanding or belief in eternal marriage.

    However, in our desire to preserve traditional marriage in this "world" we can and should discuss the morality of same-gender marriage, and its effects on society; and ultimately the family.

    With that said, I do appreciate your making that statement.


  10. The H -

    Actually, I disagree with what you believe the role of government should play, in the lives of "The People". Government, is "of" the people and for the people. In other words, the government, governs by and through the voice of the people.

    My vote, which is my voice - is equal to yours; regardless of its origins.


  11. LDSnana,

    The overt support for gay marriage among LDS rank and file members is somewhat disturbing, isn't it?

    While I sympathize with those who struggle with same-sex attraction, the Lord is very clear on this issue - homosexuality is a sin and marriage is between a man and a woman. End of story.

    We all have our weaknesses and struggles, yet I cannot understand why the Lord permits people to struggle with same-sex attraction (note: I am referring to those who appear to have been born that way). But all the rationalizing and twisting of church doctrine is not going to change the fact that it is immoral and unacceptable in the eyes of God.

    But what about plural marriage? It is immoral yet at other times it is acceptable to God. Or what about killing? It is immoral yet at other times it is acceptable to God? So can we not say the same about homosexuality? No. I have never seen in the scriptures a time when homosexuality was ever sanctioned by God.

  12. Dave -

    It most certainly can be disturbing. However, I try to give them the benefit of the doubt, in that they most likely do not have sufficient understanding/testimony/faith regarding LDS doctrines.

    In my opinion, the "official" position of the LDS Church in regard to those who struggle with homosexual tendencies, is among the most compassionate of approaches. In fact, it is exactly the right position that should be taken - from a any Christian perspective.

    Agreed -- there is no precedence in any known religious text, where God has sanctioned, even briefly -- homosexual behavior. We must look for the "good", if there has ever been a period of time in history, where God appears to contradict his teachings. It is not possible to find such - in the practice of homosexuality.