http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/11/06/gay-marriage-results_n_2074188.html

On Election day 11-6-2012, the states of Maryland, Maine and Washington State all legalize Same Sex marriage by vote of the people.  This is the first time it has passed a vote of the majority of the state – and passed in 3 states.

So the ‘National Organization of Marriage (Discrimination)’ often calls on ‘votes of the people’ against same sex civil marriage rights. They were the ones behind changing the constitution of Hawaii in the 90’s and Prop 8  in California.  Their last win was banning same sex marriage in North Carolina the day before President Obama became the first sitting president to offer his support for full equal marriage rights.  

Now that they have lost, and lost badly in 3 states, is it time to stop voting on people’s rights?  Or is this just the trend of the future that Marriage Equality will be the law of the land?  Or a blip of current times and temporary will go away soon?

What is your opinion and thoughts?

Good news. I'm proud to say my home state of CT was one of the very first to conduct same-sex marriages.

In answer to your question, same-sex marriages will soon be legal in all of the United States. As more and more young people, who support same-sex marriage, are elected to public office, the laws will change. Nearly two thirds of adults born during or after 1981 support same-sex marriage.

*Thumbs-up*

Sounds good. Hopefully this goes to a Federal level soon, and we get marriage equality in all 50 states. But this is a big, big step in that direction.

Here is the poll questions:

I support Full Equal Marriage Rights for all Adults.

I support Domestic Partnerships, but not Marriage Rights for same sex couples.

I support only one Man and one Woman, and no Domestic Partnerships.

I support one Man and many Woman. (some Traditions)

I support one Woman and many Men. (also Traditional)

Domestic Partnerships for all Only.

I think nobody should get married.

Other.

I think nobody should get married. It shouldn't be an issue of the state. Those that get married should not deserve any benefits above those who choose to stay single.

I support it all, man and woman, woman and woman, man and man.

Not big on the 1 man, multiple women or vice-versa, as it kind of defeats the point, but if peeps want, more power to them.

Having said all that, I don't ever want to get married.

I'll maintain that middle america largely doesn't care about homosexuality one way or another, but fewer of them are creeped out by it now than not. If Americans don't thing it's wrong, they're likely to just go ahead and allow people to do it.

As long as it's federally mandated and there are federal rights and benefits given to married couples... gay people should be allowed to get married.

Meanwhile, if there isn't any government interference in marriage... well then there will be plenty of people who will marry gay people anyway.

So i guess that counts as marriage for all.

I believe in marriage equality, and truthfully there isn't any good reason for why someone should be against it in the first place. The arrangement isn't being forced upon you against your will, and acknowledging a same sex couples desire to proudly proclaim their monogamous relationship is just a matter of basic human respect. We already make it a point to respect the rights of people to have different religions, creeds, and political views. This isn't in any way fundamentally different.

We as a society have rejected this notion of some are more equal then others. That some are somehow entitled to more rights then others. It is a persistent trend that will continue forward, because it is a logical conclusion. If you start out saying that there are unalienable rights, and that all people are created equal. Then at the end of the day you have to concede that everyone has the same rights that you have.

You cannot offer up a heartfelt belief, and then ignore indefinitely the implications. Either you are going to end up living up to your belief, or you are going to concede that you are full of shit. Ironically this has to be the hardest opposition to a civil rights issue to maintain in all our history. It is easy to oppose the other, and to generate some kind of stereotype to justify your position. Homosexuality is far more insidious when it comes to its opposition. It comes at the opponents from within their own ranks.

When bigotry comes into conflict with protecting ones own. Bigotry really doesn't stand much of a chance. It is easy to be against gay rights up until someone in your family announces that they are gay. It is damned hard to be hateful to someone you love, and just as hard not to protect them. Once homosexuals started to refuse to be shamed into silence the writing was on the wall. It isn't just that the younger generation see no reason to be at all threatened by homosexuals.

The older generations are having to contend with members of their families coming out of the closet. It is getting harder to find anyone who doesn't have a family member that hasn't admitted to being gay. In the end I think it is really a matter of love trumping hate. People are far more inclined to love, and protect the members of their own families, and to protect their close friends. Then they are to act against their loved ones best interests.

This is just another sign that the damn is giving way. The other side cannot possibly maintain a resistance. It isn't even a choice really. This bigotry no matter the justification comes at too high a price for the bigot. Anyway I am going to give it ten to twenty years. Either the states will do it on their own, or the changing public sentiment will force a federal intervention. I think it is more likely the states will do the majority of it on their own.

Good news. Also liking the polling numbers for this site!