Jews are more likely than LGBT voters to favor marriage equality

[dsc]

My source is the Gay and lesbian review (Jan/Feb 05 issue)

Among LGBT voters 51% favor same sex marriage, 31% civil unions without marriage rights, and 17% are against any legal recognition. For Jewish voters the numbers are 64% in favor of marriage, 28% in favor of civil unions, and only 4% against any recognition.

Those numbers simply amaze me. LGBT voters are over 4 times as likely to oppose any recognition than Jewish voters are, while Jewish voters are just about 1.25 times as likely to favor marriage equality. There is something seriously wrong with that picture. It should be noted that both liberals and those in favor of no restrictions on abortion also are more likely to favor marriage equality than are LGBT voters. (though both groups are within the MOE of LGBT voters). We must stand up for our own rights at least as strongly as others do.

While I certainly can't condone the fact that 23% of LGBT voters voted for Bush, at least that can be explained. The fact that nearly as many LGBT voters believe that there should be no legal recognition of their relationships defies explanation. Anyway you look at it, close to 1/5 of LGBT voters are a fifth column who not only is willing to vote against our interests but apparently don't even share our interests. Simply astonishing.

[mairceridwen]

1. Do they include

the numbers of gays who believe that marriage is an antiquated institution and that the fight for marriage rights smacks of assimination into heterosexist and patriarchal norms?

I'm of the opinion that there should ONLY be civil unions (which should be recognized via the full faith and credit clause) and that the churches can keep *marriage.* But this idea of blatantly opposing marriage in our current social atmosphere seems pretty futile. I feel as though you can examine *marriage* critically, but it is also esential to hold our society to the it's own standards.

of course, we need to do that in almost every walk of life now.

[dsc]

2. I honestly don't know

though the fact that they don't choose civil unions but instead no legal recognition tells me that they likely aren't in that class.

[noamnety]

3. marriage isn't the church's to keep

Marriage is a secular tradition that churches have borrowed.

[HockeyMom]

5. Said that too

All civil licenses issued by the government should be Civil Unions - straight or gay. Leave the words, sacred, holy, SACRAMENT of marriage, for the churches and those who want them.

[Newsjock]

4. Bumper sticker time

"If you don't like gay marriage, then don't have one."

[mairceridwen]

8. nice.

Keep your laws off my ring finger (or keep them ON my ring finger)

Keep Gay Marriage Safe and Legal

Love Gay Marriage Don't Eat It

Women Take Back the Gay Marriage

Gay Marriage, the Radical Notion that Gays are Citizens Too

Support Our Gay Marriage: Bring Them Home Alive

Gay Marriage Not Drugs

My Other Car is a Gay Marriage

Gay Marriage is Patriotic



okay, those are just silly. yours is better.

[beyurslf]

6. Bad poll. Where is the option for civil unions WITH marriage rights?

Marriage is a religious institution and I want no part of it.

[dsc]

7. They do ask for closet to your views

and while that may be a problem it isn't the reason that no legal recognition takes in 17% of the respondents.

[Boomer]

9. Depressing, isn't it?

Judging from the comments I've heard from other gay women, there is a substantial minority of lesbians who disdain all talk of marriage, including civil unions. They believe in more fluid relationships, less formal arrangements for emotional entanglements, which they consider to be ultimately transitory. And, in point of fact, some of them can be obnoxiously condescending in their attitude towards gay women who "settle" for what they consider to be traditional restrictive, proprietary and mundane coupledom.

These women don't seem to care that the *option* to marry, even if it's one they don't want, is a basic right that is being denied gays as a group. They're too busy feeling superior to those of us who DO want the protection of law to provide benefits such as hospital visitation, medical coverage, right of inheritance and all sorts of other protections for the person we consider our primary family.

I get especially hot over this issue because my partner of 15 years has MS, and it's only through the generosity of my most recent employer that we've finally obtained partner benefits, including medical coverage. And it could be yanked out from under us at any moment, leaving my partner uninsured.

[dsc]

10. thank God for your employer

I hope things go well for your partner. It amazes me the utter selfishness of some people.

[Boomer]

11. It's still touch and go

I work for a company in Virginia, a state which does NOT allow partner benefits, but fortunately we're owned by a corporation in another state that has not ruled specifically against this arrangement.

So, I can't use the (superior) medical benefits available to everyone in the Virginia office, but I have been allowed to sign on to the plan available to employees of the corporation. It's more expensive, has a higher deductible, and offers less comprehensive coverage, but beggars can't be choosers. It's a heck of a lot better than not having anything at all.

[dsc]

12. Wow of all the places to be

I really hope things work out for you. VA is such a bad state. My employer actually charges spouses no matter what but I wouldn't even be able to do that here I presume. In any case I hope God blesses and keeps you both well.

[Boomer]

13. Thanks, dsc

I lived in Virginia for almost ten years, and I never warmed up to the place. It seemed a state of such unpleasant extremes: wealth concentrated in a tight circle of old money families, small middle-class, widespread ignorance and poverty in the general population. Too many people, rich and poor, are conservative and highly insular.

These days I live in West Virginia, and frankly, I like it whole lot better. Not so many "precious" and self-consciously quaint areas, although religious fundamentalism has a hold here, too. But we'd still rather live in Canada...

[xchrom]

14. surprising though it may be -- seeing as how this is the gay forum

there is precedent for that kind of forward thinking in the jewish community.

think of what this could do for yentas.