Is Legal Same-Sex Marriage Inevitable?

| Polling guru Nate Silver has built a regression model, based on demographic and political trends, to forecast when a majority of the voting public in each of the 50 states might vote against a gay-marriage ban, or vote to repeal an existing one. His findings: by 2016, most states will have legalized gay marriage, with Mississippi alone holding on until 2024. His analysis is loaded with caveats but, in light of the Iowa Supreme Court’s ruling against the state’s gay-marriage ban, raises an interesting question: is legal same-sex marriage inevitable? [%comments]

Leave A Comment

Comments are moderated and generally will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive.

 

COMMENTS: 51

View All Comments »
  1. c. perry says:

    I certainly hope this whole discussion is soon over. Having been married to one woman for over fifty years, I fail to see what two other people of any sex have to do with our marriage. Is there something here I am not seeing? Why not let it alone. Marriage is a civil, not a religeous act unless a religeous ceremony is desired. Certainly members of a church can keep gays out of their church but not out of city hall.

    Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0
  2. Tim says:

    Definitely inevitable unless the government totally divests itself from marriage.

    Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0
  3. Plat says:

    This is something that should decided by the people via thier legislators, and not by a court ruling. Of course if a federal consitutional admendment on the defination of marriage, it is all over.

    Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0
  4. Valpey says:

    @3

    You aren’t the first to suggest that a “state will stop issuing marriage licenses and will only issue monogamous civil union licenses”. And I’m sure you won’t be the last. But those of you who come to this ridiculous conclusion strike me as the same out-of-touch idealists who thought we could just imagine no possessions and then there’d be world peace.

    The inevitable equilibrium will be equal marriage rights for all. Once it becomes law in any one place – it ceases to be an issue there within a fairly quick pace. (albeit not quickly enough in California) It just takes too much energy to be a bigot for most people.

    The reason is that people are far more interested in their own relationships than other people’s (although you might not know it by some of the vitriol we hear). Everyone wants the right to have their own relationship ratified by civil law as a “marriage”.

    Even the SCOTUS will probably soon agree that rules for things like “married filing jointly” tax status and citizenship rights for spouses will have to apply evenhandedly nationwide and thus extend marraige rights to everyone. This might be called judicial activism, but it would really just be judicial pragmatism.

    Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0
  5. russ says:

    > “when the world economy is falling apart stopping two guys from getting married is less of a worry.”

    > Same goes for gals.

    True true, although most anti-gay-rights people seem far more upset and bothered about gay guys. Lesbians are sexy while gay guys are gross, and all that.

    Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0
  6. Matthew R. says:

    Inevitable isn’t what it used to be. Just ask President Hillary Clinton.

    Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0
  7. Matthew R. says:

    One of the most dangerous phrases in the world: “If present trends continue.”

    Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0
  8. Casey says:

    Have they done the freakonomics to determine what the suicide rate in CA will be for the children of people who voted for Prop 8 yet?

    Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0