The San Francisco Chronicle has an article about a new poll that says registered voters are now in favor of same-sex marriage:
By 51-42 percent, registered voters said they believed same-sex marriage should be legal in California. Only 28 percent favored gay marriage in 1977, when the Field Poll first asked that question, said Mark DiCamillo, the poll’s director.
There are a couple of things I’m cherry picking from the piece:
It’s a “generational replacement, with older folks being replaced by younger voters very much in favor of same-sex marriage,” DiCamillo said.
Those younger voters “have grown up with people who are out in their lives, whether it’s politicians in the news or people they know,” said Geoff Kors, executive director of Equality California, one of the groups opposed to the proposed initiative to ban same-sex marriage.
Among my circle of friends, we’ve been saying this for quite some time. It’s not really a nice thing to say, but it would appear to be true none the less. There will be less discrimination as the older generation (many, but not all, of whom have grown and lived with long indoctrinated prejudices) dies off and the more of the younger generation begins to make their voices heard with their votes.
And now for a voice from the opposition:
“The Supreme Court ruling only just happened,” said Karen England, spokeswoman for the Capitol Resource Institute, one of the groups backing a ban on same-sex marriage, which is expected to be approved for the ballot in mid-June. “Once we have the measure on the ballot, the campaign can change everything.
That would be her scrambling to spin this in their direction. “The Supreme Court ruling only just happened” – meaning it is now illegal to discriminate against someone based upon their sexual orientation in any way in California. The ruling was not just about marriage – it was about completely equal rights. And now these people want to continue to try to take away a right that has been recognized by the Court. These were not “activist judges” (if that term can even be applied to a judge, given the very nature of their job). These were people finally delivering justice to those of us who have been scorned, shunned and discriminated against.
Why is it not illegal to write discrimination into a constitution? Why is it not illegal to take away someone’s rights? What happened to justice and liberty for all?