posted on November 10, 2005 07:13:38 PM new
Gay marriage ban crossed political lines, analysts say
By POLLY ROSS HUGHES and R.G. RATCLIFFE
Copyright 2005 Houston Chronicle Austin Bureau
AUSTIN - Blacks and Hispanics who traditionally vote Democratic strongly backed the state's gay marriage ban at the ballot box this week, sometimes outpolling Republicans, analysts said Wednesday.
That broad interest across political lines contributed to the highest participation in a constitutional amendment election since 1991, with roughly 18 percent of registered voters turning out for Tuesday's election.
Republican Gov. Rick Perry rallied his evangelical, socially conservative base on the issue, but political analysts said Proposition 2's success doesn't necessarily predict future success for individual politicians.
"I don't see how it can be useful for a party or a candidate because this so transcends all the political parties and the typical categorizations," said Kelly Shackelford, president of the conservative Free Market Foundation, which backed the amendment.
"We didn't even call Republican homes. We called Hispanics, African-Americans and rural Texas voters. That's where the numbers were," he said.
Others agreed, noting that religion and family values resonate in traditionally Democratic precincts with large minority populations.
On the single issue of defining marriage as between a man and a woman, minorities often voted as favorably and sometimes more favorably than higher-income Republican precincts, said political scientist Tim O'Neill at Southwestern University in Georgetown.
"They don't see it as much as a civil rights issue as they see it as a right of traditional marriage issue," he said. "African-Americans are by far the strongest supporters of the Democratic Party, but not on this issue. This is not a Republican/Democratic issue per se."
Statewide the marriage amendment won 76 percent of the vote.
Big approval on the border
Along the heavily Democratic, Hispanic and economically distressed border with Mexico, it passed by 81 percent in Hidalgo County, 75 percent in Webb County and 86 percent in Jim Hogg County.
Republican and suburban Fort Bend County backed Proposition 2 by 82 percent while Republican and upper-middle class Collin County in North Texas voted 74 percent in its favor.
Dave Welch, executive director of the Houston Area Pastor Council, said churches and pastors statewide made a significant push on the gay marriage issue.
Clergy participated in "marriage protection Sunday" and spoke of the importance of marriage and its biblical roots, he said. Others ran a 30-second television ad featuring the touching hands of a man, woman and baby.
"That message was probably stronger ... in the minority church community than in the Anglo church community," he said. "Many were more active and more visible in coming out on the issue than many were in the suburbs."
Harris County favored the marriage amendment by 72 percent overall, but that proved slightly higher in the inner city black neighborhoods, several analysts noted.
Rice University political scientist Bob Stein said the measure won easily in the Houston area because of black support.
"In black boxes, it was 75 percent to 25 percent in favor of Prop 2," Stein said. "That's explained by heavy black turnout by African-American women who go to church."
Former state Democratic Rep. Glen Maxey of Austin, who led opponents of the amendment statewide, said minority sympathies on the issue were reflected in a Houston poll conducted last August by the National Gay and Lesbian Task Force.
'It is religious based'
When asked whether lesbians and gays should be protected in the workplace, 64 percent of African-Americans said yes. But, asked whether gay and lesbian couples should be allowed to marry, 62 percent said no.
"Among that community, it's a total reversal. It is totally compartmentalized. It is religious based," Maxey said.
Perry's pollster, Mike Baselice, of Austin, said the governor has realized throughout the campaign that opposition to gay marriage was not limited to Anglo Republicans.
"I don't know how much effort was coming out of the pastors, but I know that Perry's been working on pastors, not just the traditional Baptist and Anglos, but also the African-American community," said Baselice.
The pollster said it is too early to tell how much the Proposition 2 turnout will help Perry.
But with a turnout of 1.7 million voters in favor of the proposition, Baselice said there are potential new Perry primary voters available.
He said that turnout was about 100,000 higher than the number of people who have voted in at least one GOP primary since 1998.
"It adds to the potential arsenal of votes for Perry," Baselice said. "They still have to more thoroughly be identified now that they've voted."
With Tuesday's vote, gay marriage has been decided in Texas in time to fade in the minds of voters before the March primary, so Baselice said the campaign will have to find ways to reinvigorate these voters.
Strategy to win votes
"We have to find out what information is going to get them back to the polls," Baselice said. "If it's a single-issue type vote, we've got to figure out how much we want to expend resource-wise to get these people back in March."
Stein said the Proposition 2 election probably did little to change the dynamic of the GOP primary for Perry because he already had the support of solid social conservatives.
"What Perry did with the evangelicals was an organizational effort," Stein said. "Liberals tend to view those people as rabid dogs. They're not. They're sophisticated. They're organized. Church is just another organization."
I gave my liberal neighbors son a book for his birthday. He went crazy trying to find where to put the batteries.
posted on November 11, 2005 09:08:44 AM new
History has shown public support for many ideologies that were later reversed. Slavery, Women's Equality, Civil Rights, Prohibition... Gay Marriage will be no different.
Conservative ignorance is nothing new in America and it always ends up on the losing end.
posted on November 11, 2005 09:29:41 AM new
"History has shown public support for many ideologies that were later reversed. Slavery, Women's Equality, Civil Rights, Prohibition... Gay Marriage will be no different."
Yes it will be different.
"Slavery" Was immoral and wrong and it was banned.
"Women's Equality" was a good thing and was enabled.
"Civil Rights" was a good thing and was enabled.
"Prohibition" was a good idea, but poorly enacted. It couldn't have worked and was ended.
In all cases, these decisions improved the country, and by example, the rest of the world. How does gay marriage do anything but legitimize immorality and unnatural actions?
I do disagree with the OP that it is a religious issue. Although religion plays a part in the issue, I think it's more of an issue of natural selection at work. It is the innate natural desire for all creatures to reproduce, and those who do not reproduce are looked upon as outsiders or as "defective" in some way.
As the original post shows, the majority sees homosexuality as unnatural and just wrong.
--------------------------------------
Quidquid Latine dictum sit altum sonatur.
posted on November 11, 2005 09:54:55 AM new
"How does gay marriage do anything but legitimize immorality and unnatural actions?"
That statement says it all.
Replay- your argument against gay marriage is a bit shallow. You may feel it is "immoral" and "unnatural", but the fact remains this is nothing more than your personal opinion. We are talking equal rights for all Americans. If a gay or lesbian couple want to commit to a permanent relationship, then they should be able to be bound by the same "rights" as those who have what you deem a "normal" marriage. Who are you to deem what is "immoral" and "unnatural"? Is that based on your religious beliefs? Do you support the right of every American to worship as they wish? And exactly how does marriage of two people of the same sex, who are committed to each other affect you directly other than you think it is "immoral" and "unnatural"?
Your basis that "'Slavery' Was immoral and wrong and it was banned," is an interesting argument, and begs to have the table turned on your argument. Slavery wasn't always viewed as "immoral" and "wrong", but that eventually changed. Women's rights??? The exact same thing.
Civil Rights was a good thing? How do you explain that, and then don't apply it to all Americans?
posted on November 11, 2005 10:19:17 AM new
"Civil Rights was a good thing? How do you explain that, and then don't apply it to all Americans?"
You can't choose the color of your skin or your sex. Discrimination based on these criteria are wrong. You CAN choose your "orientation." And no, there has been NO convincing evidence otherwise.
--------------------------------------
Quidquid Latine dictum sit altum sonatur.
posted on November 11, 2005 11:42:11 AM new
What could possibly happen if gays were allowed to marry? Would any of your lives fall apart? It's allowed here in Canada and I haven't heard of or seen anyone that's had any part of their life changed because of it. You guys need to get these frivoulus things off your books and start dealing with poverty and things that matter instead of wasting your tax money.
posted on November 11, 2005 12:52:53 PM new
Yes, chimpchamp is correct....in every state it's been put up to the voters.
We may end up with a marriage amendment somewhere down the line after all. It appears there is enough 'state' support to make that happen.
But that doesn't matter to those who think that the further deterioration of traditional marriage and the family unit, as they've always been and as what has been the foundation to our country, isn't important any more. Thank heaven they're in the minority.
"Whenever the nation is under attack, from within or without, liberals side with the enemy. This is their essence." --Ann Coulter
And why the American Voters chose to RE-elect President Bush to four more years. YES!!!
posted on November 11, 2005 03:12:40 PM new
"But that doesn't matter to those who think that the further deterioration of traditional marriage and the family unit, as they've always been and as what has been the foundation to our country, isn't important any more."
Typical rhetoric and propaganda from Queen Neocon.
Those who believe marriage is only for "their" people are the ones who don't support the importance of family structure. It is those like Linda who claim a family structure has to look like they want it to look, otherwise it is wrong. We should admire and uphold diversity instead of forcing biased, ignorant, and unconstitutional laws upon a certain group of people because you don't agree with them.
posted on November 11, 2005 03:43:36 PM newWhat could possibly happen if gays were allowed to marry? Would any of your lives fall apart? It's allowed here in Canada and I haven't heard of or seen anyone that's had any part of their life changed because of it. You guys need to get these frivoulus things off your books and start dealing with poverty and things that matter instead of wasting your tax money.
It has been legal now in MA for 18 months and the world has not come to an end. Even some politicians that previously voted for a ban on gay marriages have since changed their minds. The people who are still try to gain support to end gay marriage are in the minority.
The people of MA have shown that there is no harmful effect to allowing gay marriage. In 5-10 years things will start to change across the nation.
Traditional family structure - that went out the window in the 70's. It appears as some people keep wanting to live in the past and keep trying to regulate how everyone should live their lives.
Absolute faith has been shown, consistently, to breed intolerance. And intolerance, history teaches us, again and again, begets violence.
---------------------------------- The duty of a patriot in this time and place is to ask questions, to demand answers, to understand where our nation is headed and why. If the answers you get do not suit you, or if they frighten you, or if they anger you, it is your duty as a patriot to dissent. Freedom does not begin with blind acceptance and with a flag. Freedom begins when you say 'No.'
posted on November 11, 2005 11:02:20 PM new
What an unbelievably assinine statement:
""But that doesn't matter to those who think that the further deterioration of traditional marriage and the family unit, as they've always been and as what has been the foundation to our country, isn't important any more. Thank heaven they're in the minority.""
GAWD how stupid!
Could anyone explain what the marriage of one couple has to do with the marriage of another?????
DUH.....divorce has been around LONGER than even the thought of gay marriages !
posted on November 12, 2005 06:20:23 AM new
I wonder how the "traditional family" structure now applies to all those families that have had mothers and fathers killed in Iraq and Afghanistan.
Those are now one parent families. According to those on the right, those families structures are not good for raising kids.
Absolute faith has been shown, consistently, to breed intolerance. And intolerance, history teaches us, again and again, begets violence.
----------------------------------
The duty of a patriot in this time and place is to ask questions, to demand answers, to understand where our nation is headed and why. If the answers you get do not suit you, or if they frighten you, or if they anger you, it is your duty as a patriot to dissent. Freedom does not begin with blind acceptance and with a flag. Freedom begins when you say 'No.'
[ edited by logansdad on Nov 12, 2005 06:55 AM ]
posted on November 12, 2005 07:00:09 AM new
When faced with the truth, all she can do is reply with LOL.
She is very delusional again.
So Linda, speaking of the truth. How is a single mother able to raise 2 boys on her own? THAT IS YOUR SITUATION, CORRECT. Based on your prior comments, your husband is dead.
Now how does your situation fit into the "traditional family structure".
The truth hurts doesn't it.
Absolute faith has been shown, consistently, to breed intolerance. And intolerance, history teaches us, again and again, begets violence.
---------------------------------- The duty of a patriot in this time and place is to ask questions, to demand answers, to understand where our nation is headed and why. If the answers you get do not suit you, or if they frighten you, or if they anger you, it is your duty as a patriot to dissent. Freedom does not begin with blind acceptance and with a flag. Freedom begins when you say 'No.'
posted on November 12, 2005 07:24:29 AM new
You know, Mingotree, it is not the aberrant or the numerous deviations of marriage (divorce, etc.) you site that holds the fabric of society together; it is the other mundane millions who do keep traditional families intact.
posted on November 12, 2005 07:35:01 AM new
You know logansdad and mingotree, your posting style probably shows why the majority of America is against same sex marriage. No one wants to be told they "have" to do something. Also trying to equate same sex marriage with civil rights is just plain silly. I believe trying to link it as such has hurt the agenda more than helped.
Not one admendment has had less than 60% of the vote. Here in Oregon it was upheld through the courts. So thinking it will be overturned is not a rational thought. Thinking that just because you do something in one state it will carry over to another is turning out to be another illrational thought. All states do not have the same laws. The USSC will not in the near future even hear a case or will side with the state. I predict civil unions will be all the rage in 5-10 years.
These people should be allowed to married because it is a license they have to pay for and revenues generated for the state. Also who the hell cares who loves whom? Marriage seems like a try it period now anyway.
posted on November 12, 2005 08:19:04 AM new
"""You know, Mingotree, it is not the aberrant or the numerous deviations of marriage (divorce, etc.) you site that holds the fabric of society together; it is the other mundane millions who do keep traditional families intact.""
So, tell that to your poor friend Linda who, exercising her great powers of reason and logic, thinks if gays get married we'll all get divorced
posted on November 12, 2005 08:25:56 AM newSo, tell that to your poor friend Linda who, exercising her great powers of reason and logic, thinks if gays get married we'll all get divorced
No. It shouldnt matter what Linda or anybody thinks. You keep towing the line in some stupid defense for gay marriage, that straight marriage is so f/u'd. Maybe you should rather embrace the good things about it, if your so eager to have, or be part of it.
btw, whats with the we'll all? Shouldnt that be they'll all?
You slippen mingotree?
.
[ edited by dblfugger9 on Nov 12, 2005 08:27 AM ]
posted on November 12, 2005 10:10:16 AM new
For those who can't read :
no, I meant what I typed ..WE'LL , meaning heterosexuals.
linduh "reasoning" is that if gays are allowed basic human and equal rights, which is what America stands for, then other marriages will fail. No logic, as usual, no defense, as usual, no reply, as usual
For those who can't comprehend written words:
"""Maybe you should rather embrace the good things about it, if your so eager to have, or be part of it. """
Here's one you can't answer:
WHERE did I indicate in any way that I wanted to be part of gay marriages....here's the answer you won't give....I didn't.
I believe in the American ideal of equal rights for every citizen.
posted on November 12, 2005 10:34:20 AM new
Neither group can marry anyone they WANT to....can't marry sisters, mothers, fathers, brothers, in some states - first cousins, take more than one spouse...etc. So....oh boy are they missing out on their 'civil rights' too. NOT!!!
"Whenever the nation is under attack, from within or without, liberals side with the enemy. This is their essence." --Ann Coulter
And why the American Voters chose to RE-elect President Bush to four more years. YES!!!
posted on November 12, 2005 01:00:18 PM newNeither group can marry anyone they WANT to....can't marry sisters, mothers, fathers, brothers, in some states - first cousins, take more than one spouse...etc. So....oh boy are they missing out on their 'civil rights' too. NOT!!!
I bet that is a big disappointment to those that live in your part of the country.
Absolute faith has been shown, consistently, to breed intolerance. And intolerance, history teaches us, again and again, begets violence.
---------------------------------- The duty of a patriot in this time and place is to ask questions, to demand answers, to understand where our nation is headed and why. If the answers you get do not suit you, or if they frighten you, or if they anger you, it is your duty as a patriot to dissent. Freedom does not begin with blind acceptance and with a flag. Freedom begins when you say 'No.'
NOT!!!