This article is from the source 'guardian' and was first published or seen on . It last changed over 40 days ago and won't be checked again for changes.

You can find the current article at its original source at http://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/aug/06/same-sex-marriage-foes-fight-courts-opinion-polling

The article has changed 2 times. There is an RSS feed of changes available.

Version 0 Version 1
Foes of same-sex marriage fight on as courts and opinion turn against them Foes of same-sex marriage fight on as courts and opinion turn against them
(about 4 hours later)
When California voters – one of the largest and most liberal blocs in the US – voted in favor of the Proposition 8 same-sex marriage ban in 2008, it seemed like a death knell for supporters of the same-sex marriage movement. Six years later, the decision is set to be remembered as one of the last major successes for groups that oppose same-sex marriage.When California voters – one of the largest and most liberal blocs in the US – voted in favor of the Proposition 8 same-sex marriage ban in 2008, it seemed like a death knell for supporters of the same-sex marriage movement. Six years later, the decision is set to be remembered as one of the last major successes for groups that oppose same-sex marriage.
Groups like National Organization for Marriage (to which Mitt Romney donated $10,000 during the Prop 8 battle) and the Family Research Council (which was part of the ProtectMarriage.com coalition that helped pass the California bill) are now fighting a tide of swiftly shifting public opinion and judges in conservative and liberal states that say state bans on same-sex marriage are unconstitutional following the landmark ruling in June 2013 that struck down parts of the Defense of Marriage Act (Doma) and Prop 8.Groups like National Organization for Marriage (to which Mitt Romney donated $10,000 during the Prop 8 battle) and the Family Research Council (which was part of the ProtectMarriage.com coalition that helped pass the California bill) are now fighting a tide of swiftly shifting public opinion and judges in conservative and liberal states that say state bans on same-sex marriage are unconstitutional following the landmark ruling in June 2013 that struck down parts of the Defense of Marriage Act (Doma) and Prop 8.
“We’re not going away,” Brian Brown, president of the National Organization for Marriage, told the Guardian. “We’ve been hearing about our demise for the last 15 years. It hasn’t happened, and it’s not going to happen, even if the [US supreme] court is to do the unthinkable in an attempt to redefine marriage and the law.”“We’re not going away,” Brian Brown, president of the National Organization for Marriage, told the Guardian. “We’ve been hearing about our demise for the last 15 years. It hasn’t happened, and it’s not going to happen, even if the [US supreme] court is to do the unthinkable in an attempt to redefine marriage and the law.”
On Wednesday, the sixth US circuit court of appeals in Cincinnati was to hear arguments covering six gay marriage rulings in four states: Michigan, Kentucky, Ohio and Tennessee, where judges have variously ruled in favor of striking down bans.On Wednesday, the sixth US circuit court of appeals in Cincinnati was to hear arguments covering six gay marriage rulings in four states: Michigan, Kentucky, Ohio and Tennessee, where judges have variously ruled in favor of striking down bans.
America’s highest court has not accepted another same-sex marriage case, though the legal maneuvering across appellate, circuit and state courts is seen as part of an effort to push the supreme court to pick up a case, likely from Utah or Virginia. The earliest the court could make a decision is summer 2015.America’s highest court has not accepted another same-sex marriage case, though the legal maneuvering across appellate, circuit and state courts is seen as part of an effort to push the supreme court to pick up a case, likely from Utah or Virginia. The earliest the court could make a decision is summer 2015.
Patrick Egan, a politics and public policy professor at New York University, said that for observers like himself and for activists in the movement, the string of nearly uninterrupted same-sex marriage legal successes is a surprise, especially because a key driving factor is a swiftly turning public opinion: the most recent polls by Pew and Gallup show that support for same-sex marriage has been steadily increasing in the past few years. Their current figures show that 54% and 55% of Americans support same-sex marriage, respectively.Patrick Egan, a politics and public policy professor at New York University, said that for observers like himself and for activists in the movement, the string of nearly uninterrupted same-sex marriage legal successes is a surprise, especially because a key driving factor is a swiftly turning public opinion: the most recent polls by Pew and Gallup show that support for same-sex marriage has been steadily increasing in the past few years. Their current figures show that 54% and 55% of Americans support same-sex marriage, respectively.
“One thing we do know from political science, is although courts have some independence from politics and public opinion, they very rarely like to be on the opposite side of a changing public opinion tide,” Egan said.“One thing we do know from political science, is although courts have some independence from politics and public opinion, they very rarely like to be on the opposite side of a changing public opinion tide,” Egan said.
Researchers are still trying to figure out all the pieces that made for the shift, though Egan said some factors could be the increase in younger voters – who tend to have more liberal beliefs – alongside the decrease in older voters, that Americans are becoming less religious, and that more gay people are living their lives openly. “It’s really a kind of change you don’t see very often in American politics and one that I really think has surprised even the people most optimistic on the same-sex marriage side,” said Egan.Researchers are still trying to figure out all the pieces that made for the shift, though Egan said some factors could be the increase in younger voters – who tend to have more liberal beliefs – alongside the decrease in older voters, that Americans are becoming less religious, and that more gay people are living their lives openly. “It’s really a kind of change you don’t see very often in American politics and one that I really think has surprised even the people most optimistic on the same-sex marriage side,” said Egan.
Groups opposed to same-sex marriage, however, believe that this change is not happening in such a dramatic fashion and is instead the result of faulty polls and a news media sympathetic to same-sex marriage. NOM’s Brown also placed blame on the “Orwellian judges” and “elites”, who want people to support same-sex marriage.Groups opposed to same-sex marriage, however, believe that this change is not happening in such a dramatic fashion and is instead the result of faulty polls and a news media sympathetic to same-sex marriage. NOM’s Brown also placed blame on the “Orwellian judges” and “elites”, who want people to support same-sex marriage.
“I’m sure, probably, there’s been some increase in support for that agenda since 2008,” said Peter Sprigg, senior fellow for policy studies at Family Research Council. He also believes the news media is sympathetic to the movement and that the polls are written in a misleading way.“I’m sure, probably, there’s been some increase in support for that agenda since 2008,” said Peter Sprigg, senior fellow for policy studies at Family Research Council. He also believes the news media is sympathetic to the movement and that the polls are written in a misleading way.
“If the question is worded as a question of civil rights, constitutional rights, equality and so forth, those are broad principles Americans tend to sympathize with and so, framing it in that way is going to inevitably lead to higher polling numbers in support of that position,” said Sprigg.“If the question is worded as a question of civil rights, constitutional rights, equality and so forth, those are broad principles Americans tend to sympathize with and so, framing it in that way is going to inevitably lead to higher polling numbers in support of that position,” said Sprigg.
To Sprigg, the courts and media are misreading the Doma decision, which said that the law unconstitutionally permitted Congress to interfere in states rights. Legal experts agreed that it was an ambiguous decision and did not guarantee that courts and states would behave as they have. “That principle to federal deference of state definitions has to go both ways,” Sprigg said.To Sprigg, the courts and media are misreading the Doma decision, which said that the law unconstitutionally permitted Congress to interfere in states rights. Legal experts agreed that it was an ambiguous decision and did not guarantee that courts and states would behave as they have. “That principle to federal deference of state definitions has to go both ways,” Sprigg said.
Family Research Council’s efforts are focused on filing amicus briefs in support of marriage between a man and woman in state marriage cases that reach appellate courts, educating the public and pressuring political officials in states that have bans being contested in courts.Family Research Council’s efforts are focused on filing amicus briefs in support of marriage between a man and woman in state marriage cases that reach appellate courts, educating the public and pressuring political officials in states that have bans being contested in courts.
“We do not accept the theory that same-sex marriage is inevitable or that defeat in the supreme court is inevitable,” Sprigg said. “If that were to occur, we would respond to it at that time. I can say with certainty that we would continue to promote marriage between one man and one woman as the family form of greatest benefit to children.”“We do not accept the theory that same-sex marriage is inevitable or that defeat in the supreme court is inevitable,” Sprigg said. “If that were to occur, we would respond to it at that time. I can say with certainty that we would continue to promote marriage between one man and one woman as the family form of greatest benefit to children.”
The argument that a same-sex partnership is harmful to children has been discredited by judges and scientists, but is still a prime rallying point for opposition groups, including Focus on the Family. Its senior director of public policy, Carrie Gordon Earll, said in an email that it is a child’s right to have a mother and a father.The argument that a same-sex partnership is harmful to children has been discredited by judges and scientists, but is still a prime rallying point for opposition groups, including Focus on the Family. Its senior director of public policy, Carrie Gordon Earll, said in an email that it is a child’s right to have a mother and a father.
“In the last 12 months, some US judges have attempted to erase those votes,” Gordon Earll wrote. “The results of the upcoming mid-term elections may indicate what Americans who voted to keep one-man, one-woman marriage think about those court decisions.” “In the last 12 months, some American judges have attempted to erase those votes,” Gordon Earll wrote. “The results of the upcoming mid-term elections may indicate what Americans who voted to keep one-man, one-woman marriage think about those court decisions.”
If same-sex marriage continues its successes, NYU’s Egan predicted that opposition groups could attempt to derail the laws by taking advantage of precedents set by things like the supreme court’s June Hobby Lobby decision, which grants exemptions to closely-held corporations on religious grounds.If same-sex marriage continues its successes, NYU’s Egan predicted that opposition groups could attempt to derail the laws by taking advantage of precedents set by things like the supreme court’s June Hobby Lobby decision, which grants exemptions to closely-held corporations on religious grounds.
Conservative groups attempted, and failed, to use this ruling to get an exemption in an executive order signed earlier this month that prohibits discrimination against gay and transgender workers in the US government.Conservative groups attempted, and failed, to use this ruling to get an exemption in an executive order signed earlier this month that prohibits discrimination against gay and transgender workers in the US government.
NOM’s Brown said that with the Hobby Lobby decision, it was encouraging to see that “the court get such patently obvious cases right”, but said through laughter that his group is not interested in seeking religious exemptions. “We’re not going to be treated like bigots in the law,” Brown said. “We’re not bigots. It’s not bigotry to stand for marriage.”NOM’s Brown said that with the Hobby Lobby decision, it was encouraging to see that “the court get such patently obvious cases right”, but said through laughter that his group is not interested in seeking religious exemptions. “We’re not going to be treated like bigots in the law,” Brown said. “We’re not bigots. It’s not bigotry to stand for marriage.”