MN Marriage amendment: Majority support one man-one woman definition, says new survey

Categories: GLBT
same sex marriage rect.jpg
A majority of Minnesotans don't approve, according to a new survey.
SEE ALSO:
-- Minnesotans United for All Families raised $3.1 million this year, MN for Marriage $588,000
-- Support growing for gay marriage in Minnesota, new polling suggests
-- MN for Marriage previously endorsed Leviticus 'death to gays' passage it now says is "garbage"


Polling in May and fundraising numbers in June suggested supporters of marriage equality had the wind at their backs. But a new SurveyUSA/KSTP survey indicates Minnesota may not become the first state to reject a constitutional amendment restricting marriage to one man and one woman after all.

The poll, released Friday, found that 52 percent of Minnesotans favor defining marriage as between one man and one woman. That's a substantially higher percentage than the 37 percent of Minnesotans who told SurveyUSA they're against the amendment. Eleven percent are either undecided or not voting on the issue.

The survey results were published just two days after the mid-June-to-mid-July fundraising numbers were released. Those numbers show amendment opponents continue to dominate the money battle -- Minnesotans United for All Families, the main group fighting the amendment, raised $750,000, compared to a puny $32,000 for Minnesota for Marriage, the main pro-amendment group, during the same timeframe.

But if the new SurveyUSA poll is accurate, then Minnesotans United for All Families' money huge advantage may not be enough to swing the vote. After all, even if the entire 11 percent of undecided/not voting Minnesotans decided to vote against the amendment, that would only amount to 48 percent of voters, compared to the 52 percent who have apparently already decided they don't like the idea of same-sex couples tying the knot.
My Voice Nation Help
9 comments
jayjaythetooth
jayjaythetooth

Keep in mind that "undecided" and "not voting on the amendment" are two very different things, and probably should have been separated for the poll. Any ballot with no marking for or against the amendment (or any amendment) will be considered a vote of "no". 

jordanbalaski
jordanbalaski

its ADAM and EVE. NOT ADAM and STEVE. their are to many fagets in this country already. i strongly support the marriage amendment in MN. lets keep it between 1 man and 1 women!

Gorman
Gorman

Reporter’s question: Are you against gay people?

 

My Response: Are you against straight people?

 

Reporter’s response: I’m the reporter: I ask questions, you answer.

 

My Response: You have a pulse, I have a pulse. You can ask questions of me and I can ask questions of you. I am not against people. I against ignoring a scientific principle: the principle that a male and female fish are required to produce another fish, a male and female bird are required to produce another bird, and a male and female human being are required to produce another human being. This is the way it has been for billions of years, and laws or wishes will not change the basic principles that science, as well as observation, has shown us.

kfishburn
kfishburn

Vote Yes to keep things as they should be!!.   Nice job Rupar in continually ramming the gay agenda down people throats...    pun intended.  

bethann.bloom
bethann.bloom

The poll questioned only 552 "likely voters" using recorded questions. Margin of Sampling Error for this question = ± 4.3%. While 52% (48-56%) said they would vote for the amendment, 48% (44-52%) said they would vote against it or not vote at all. No votes and skipped votes are counted against the amendment. If you take the margin of error into account (as you should) the 2 sides are overlapping and it is unclear whether the amendment will pass or not. There will be many polls between now and November, but the only one that counts is the one in November, so we can work extra harrd from now until then to remind folks to VOTE NO in NOvember.

point
point

 @jordanbalaski It's*, There*, faggots* I*, Let's*, woman*... Learn to use proper grammar and spelling before voicing your hate-filled opinion.

jayjaythetooth
jayjaythetooth

 @Gorman I don't think anyone is denying that in order for a couple to biologically reproduce, one of them must be a man and one must be a woman. You have done a wonderful job of erecting and then knocking down a straw-man, Gorman. Thanks for your input. Now, if we could return to the topic at hand...

no.te.deje.agarrar
no.te.deje.agarrar

 @kfishburn "As they should be?" You mean, like back in the days when men could rape and beat their wives and their wives were property? Because that's where we'd be if we just kept things as they were. Marriage is completely different now than it was 100 years ago, and that's a good thing.

bonnettjustin
bonnettjustin

 @kfishburn I want to understand how "keep[ing] things as they should be" benefits you or me (a married, heterosexual man with four kids).  In your opinion, how will you or I ever be affected if someday same-sex marriage is accepted?  I honestly want to know because I cannot think of anything. 

Now Trending

Minnesota Concert Tickets

From the Vault

 

Loading...