Prop. 8 poll: Evangelicals, Republicans were biggest backers of gay marriage ban

A new poll by the Public Policy Institute of California shows that the ballot measure banning gay marriage in California received its strongest support from Republicans and evangelical Christians.

The poll was taken after the Nov. 4 elections and found that despite the heated debate over Prop. 8, opinions in California about gay marriage have not changed very much.

"When voters are asked the separate question of whether they favor or oppose same-sex marriage, they are divided, with 47 percent in favor, 48 percent opposed, and 5 percent unsure," according to the PPIC poll results statement. "[It's] a result consistent with responses in the October PPIC preelection survey."

The PPIC survey, which received funding from the James Irvine Foundation, polled 2,003 California voters, who were contacted by phone November 5–16, 2008. The poll has a margin of error of 2%, perhaps more for subgroups surveyed.

Among the findings:

-- Evangelical or born-again Christians (85%) were far more likely than others (42%) to vote yes.

-- Three in four Republicans (77%) voted yes, two in three Democrats (65%) voted no, and independents were more closely divided (52% yes, 48% no).

-- Voters without a college degree (62%) were far more likely than college graduates (43%) to vote yes.

While there has been much made about the strong support for Prop. 8 among African Americans, the sample size for blacks was too small in this poll to report separately.

-- Shelby Grad

Comments

[Flex]

I think that these self described religious people are the largest group of fools on the planet. They are subscribers to a weird cult whose central interest is the denial of gay rights. They can't attract anyone to their cause without gay scapegoats. They're a sexually starved, out of shape, and abnormally dumb in some respects. I would have more tolerance for them if they kept their pious views out of my intimate life. I don't care what they think about me as long as their opinions don't have teeth.

[JJ]

So, statistically Blacks voted like Republicans. The Republican party has an opening to enlarge their tent.

[Mott]

Education has very little to do with why people voted to ban homosexual marriage. Many people see same sex marriage as being the same as a son marrying his mother, an abomination. As far as education goes, you'd think the more education a person has, the better they would understand the design of the reproductive system. Now, as far as biology goes, the "backside"(putting it in street terms)of a person is a part of the digestive system. It wasn't designed to be used as a sexual organ and using it as such IS seen as an abomination. This was the Digestive System/Reproductive System difference of the human body(biology) they used to teach in school. That was real education.

[busytimmy]

So the folks who voted to take away equal protection under the law from their gay neighbors were generally uneducated, Christo-fascists? Great. Egged on by Mormons from Salt Lake and the Rove style Frank Schubert (Yes on 8)? Even better. Jesus, save me from your followers.

[Very simple]

Surprise, surprise. Ignorant, less-educated, so-called "Christians" and Republicans supported Proposition 8 by a wide margin. Who would of guessed?!

[cbk16]

The Bible condemns two men sleeping together, people were just voting on what they believe. If people believe less in the bible in the future, Gay marriage will pass. Anti prop 8 backers can attack the Mormons who supported this, but this is a Christian vs a not Christian issue, there are still a lot of Christians in California, Mormons only make up 2% of the population. Mormons were just more likely to donate money to stand up to their beliefs then other Christians were, however African American churches preached the pro 8 virtues from their pulpits more than other churches, this is why African Americans votes for prop 8. The anti 8 crowd spent lots of money to convince voters of voting against this, people looked at both sides, the Christian way of thinking won out. To expect Christian churches to go against their beliefs is silly, this doesn't mean Christians hate Gays, they just don't believe a man should be married to another man.

[Very simple]

". . . this doesn't mean Christians hate Gays, they just don't believe a man should be married to another man."

On the contrary. According to this bible these so-called "Christians" base their beliefs on ". . . If a man has sex with another man, kill them both."
Leviticus 20:13

If that is not codified hate, please explain otherwise

[Mark]

It's proof that the base of the Yes on 8 organization was uneducated, Evangelical Republicans. Not the kind of people I like to associate with.

[sean K]

cbk16: The bible says a lot of things. Half the things it forbids are archaic nonsense that was based on some obsolete social or political circumstance of the time. Like Mr. Black said in the youtube vid, you socially conservative Christians "pick and choose" which tenants to follow and which to ignore, which is what leaves you open to criticism. And furthermore, I suspect that your ilk would be against gay marriage regardless of your religious affiliation just out of general homophobia, and you therefore use these obsolete archaic bible passages to justify you views after the fact.

[Trevor Kiel Ballard]

I don't blame the ignorant who voted their prejudice, they shouldn't have the opportunity to vote on other peoples rights. I'm sure there are many who would vote to take away their rights too.

I do believe that the cult of Christianity is very dangerous to society, largely because of it's contradictions, but also because it's easily manipulated for the purposes of power.

It's such a simple issue. The legal institution of marriage must be a right for all citizens. The religious institution can be whatever each church wants to recognize. Are we forgetting that prohibiting gay marriage infringes on a church's right to preform one.

Civil marriage MUST be open to all citizens! And dictating who they marry is unlike any other law I know of in the United States. Or, we can just do away with civil marriage because it discriminates against single people and those who love more than one person.

[Sean K]

Very simple: Thank you. I'd like to see them weasel their way out that one.

[Michichael]

I find it amusing how often the educated persons are not only democrat they're also on the fair side of equality issues. Anyone else notice the link between being uninformed, uneducated, and outright ignorant to being Republican, religious, or bigots? Hmmm...

[Jay]

It is clear that the Christians and the Republicans are the bigots who are opposed to equal rights. They ought to be ashamed of themselves.

[Kevin]

Christians cannot hide behind their beliefs and say it is their right to vote against other people's rights. Christianity and the Bible were used in the past to support SLAVERY and to support SEGREGATION. It doesn't make it RIGHT.

[P J Evans]

These "Christians" need to spend more time reading the lessons of Jesus and less time reading the lessons of Moses. (That would also cure their fondness for 'prosperity gospels', which are as 'Christian' as their bigotry.)

[how typical]

I find it very ironic that the same groups that have been discriminated against in the pastt, do the same to others when given a chance.

[Lewis]

If your religious, you're just plain dumb.

[Christine B]

Since the bible also condemns eating shellfish (Leviticus 11:11) we clearly need a Constitutional amendment that bans the eating of prawns, crabs, clams and lobster. After all, the bible says so, right? And while we're at it, since the bible clearly condones slavery, we should bring that back as well. Plus a woman must be subservient to her husband (and therefore shouldn't have the right to vote), and unruly children should be beaten. If we're going to write theocracy into our laws, why not go all the way?

[CA LDS]

I see a large number of comments making the reference to the people that supported traditional marriage (pro-Prop 8) as uneducated or ignorant. Are we to assume that if you do not have a college degree you are ignorant, that is typical of the elitist few of most of liberal and gay marriage supports.
There are a lot of successful businesmen and women who do not have degrees and had enough financial success to contribute to Yes on 8.
On the other hand with the way our Colleges and Universities are pushing the liberal agenda it should be no wonder that many graduates voted No on 8 but that does not make them smarter but rather more indocrinated by the Left.
Just my opinion as a Christian with a college degree.

[Jeff]

There is a great misunderstanding and much stereotyping of those who voted for Proposition 8. I have a PhD and I am a Democrat. I read the Bible from a Christian perspective, and I believe in it.

To accuse me of hating gays because I believe in the Bible, and especially to quote Leviticus, shows a lack of sensitivity to Christian teachings, as well more than a smattering of anti-Semitism. It is very offensive to call orthodox Jews, who love the Torah, "Christo-fascists," and it is religiously illiterate to suggest a Christian hates gays because of the Bible, when a Christian's most distinctive doctrinal tenet (held among all Christian sects) is love of God and fellow man.

To regard a practice as sinful neither requires nor encourages hatred of sinners--if one is a Jew or a Christian.

[pc53]

You have to read the Bible as a whole and understand it to be able to properly quote it. Before Jesus was born, there was a system of laws in place. The archaic rules are in the Old Testament. Jesus allowed people to receive mercy through the grace of his own death. Thus, we don't need to follow the archaic old laws to be saved from sin.

Still, there is nothing in the Bible that can be reasonably interpreted to allow same sex marriages. The marriage model in the Bible is only for a man and a woman.

[PD]

The ignorance on this whole issue is that this is a CIVIL issue and not a religious one. We have seperation of chuch and state for a reason. No one is saying that chuches have to recogize the marriage only that the state does. You can not get married in ANY chuch without getting a civil marriage license for it to be recognized. There is a difference between a civil marriage and a religious marriage and people do not understand thatt.

Also if people insist on taking the religious stance and were truly "Christian" they would not be judging others as that is reserved only for God. Hypocrites.

Tobit 4:15 Do to no one what you yourself dislike.

Sirach 31:15 "Recognize that your neighbor feels as you do, and keep in mind your own dislikes."

Matthew 7:12Therefore all things whatsoever ye would that men should do to you, do ye even so to them: for this is the law and the prophets.

Luke 6:31And as ye would that men should do to you, do ye also to them likewise.

[Mary]

Thank you LATIMES, now because I'm a Christian and attend church on Sundays, I have to fear being attacked by gays?? Are you serious?? Stop printing this stuff, you're constant attempts to stir the pot are going to make California a horrible place to live for everyone!!

[Eric]

All this anti-religion stuff warms my heart. I'm curious, though - where are the "yes on 8" voices? Do they not wish to defend their position? Perhaps they know that their perspective is rationally indefensible.

[Very simple]

"To accuse me of hating gays because I believe in the Bible, and especially to quote Leviticus, shows a lack of sensitivity to Christian teachings, as well more than a smattering of anti-Semitism. It is very offensive to call orthodox Jews, who love the Torah, "Christo-fascists," and it is religiously illiterate to suggest a Christian hates gays because of the Bible, when a Christian's most distinctive doctrinal tenet (held among all Christian sects) is love of God and fellow man."

Well it is in your bible. Where exactly does it say later on in your bible that you can pick and choose what is and what is not accepted dogma? Do you mean you have to second-guess everything that is written in that book?