Is the US becoming a divided country along the lines of sexual makeup?

Gee. I hope not. Maybe these other states will buy a calendar, realize that it’s 2012, and decide that civil rights is important.
This really shouldn’t be an issue for the states to decide.

@Hypocrisy_Central: “Will it eventually lead to those not wanting same-sex marriages and union to relocate…”

Also, the great thing about progressive states like Massachusetts (where I live) is that people who don’t want to marry someone of the same sex don’t have to.

Not likely. Connecticut followed Massachusetts as the third state to permit same-sex marriage, and only the second where the decision was not later repealed.

However, it is not necessary to be gay to live (or marry!) in Connecticut. In fact, most of my best friends are probably not gay. I’m not certain because I don’t ask.

@Hypocrisy_Central Your own state happens to have a significantly large and active gay population, including in the town where you live. But since California approved Proposition 8, I don’t see a lot of anti-same sex marriage people moving here.

Sexual makeup? Is that like costume paint?

No, I think you have cause and effect wrong. The RESULT of an already divided country is that the way that different states think about sexual orientation. It’s the effect of an already existing cause.

The deeply underlying cause (behind the issues of taxation, gay marriage, birth control, hatred of unions and organized labor, and even black-white relations) is the bible belt mentality of the southeastern US.

There’s a good reason why the phrase “white trash” came into being.

Gay people already live in certain cities and communities in large numbers. Ironically some of those places, like southeast FL, have very red areas of the state, especially up north where it is basically like being in southern GA. IL is a good exampke of a very blue Chicago, and bible belt in the southern part of the state. Some states the Republicans are more likely to be more moderate on social issues and go against “the base” of the party. From what I can tell this is seen more in Northern states that are more likely to have very large diverse communities and cities.

The country is already divided, one division is bible belt vs. Other, and there is also a division between big city and small town. Gay rights is just a biproduct of those divisions, but the divisions already exist. As far as gay marriage, if eventually there is some sort of federal law or ruling making it egal, then even the states who are against it will have to conform, much like they had to let the black kids into the schools, and let the black men sit at the lunch counter.

It’s more about ideology in general, sexuality is just a component of that. Christianity has a mistaken view against same sex attraction, mostly due to a mis-translation and compounded by an inability and/or unwillingness to question and research further.

This must mean bisexuals have the best of both worlds, whoopie fuckin doo for them.

It’s not that serious. Although it seems like it, people won’t put that much effort into oppressing others when there’s a bad economy. There’s simply too many other things to worry about. I know very conservative and republican people that don’t care about gay people at all.

Most people are logical, it’s only people in the media or people that run their mouths the loudest that appear to be speaking for their entire ideology.

You left out North Carolina. Amendment One passed yesterday. It would have been nice to show the world that at least one “southern” state no longer held on to ignorance and bigotry, but I guess it wasn’t to be.

@Blackberry NC has the 5th highest unemployment, yet still spent time and money on this piece of shit legislation. Oh, and it has the added benefit of harming more than just gays and lesbians. It also puts at risk the children of unmarried straight couples, for example.

“Most people are logical, it’s only people in the media or people that run their mouths the loudest that appear to be speaking for their entire ideology.”
@Blackberry That is a very generous statement. How refreshing.

I think it’s accurate, though, @Trillian (and @Blackberry).

Recently when I spent a lot of time with my 87-year-old uncle we talked about a lot of things that came up on the nightly news. This topic came up once. I was interested where a discussion might lead, because he is from a much older generation, served in the Navy in WWII, raised a family, worked in the field in construction, and I’m sure he has told more than his share of “gay jokes”. So I was only interested in seeing “how much against” he would be. He’s voted Republican for his entire life, and he still likes girls, and always did.

He surprised me.

“What the hell should we care who marries who?” was his chief refrain. “It’s not like they’re going to reproduce, overpopulate and make the whole world gay, is it?” was another.

The anti-gay marriage/anti-gay crowd is going to flame out in the next 50 years, just like the anti-civil-rights crowd did. Different decade, different bigotry, same reason and same end result.

As far as our country becoming divided, I live in Ohio, one of the states that as you pointed out has an anti-gay marriage amendment. There are actually petitions going around right now to get a repeal of that amendment, or a change to make it legal (I forget which) on the 2013 statewide ballot. So IMO all you’re really seeing is that back-ass-wards bigotry is taking a bit longer to go away the further away from the shore line you get.

It’s hard to remember that fifty or one hundred years are really short periods of time in human history. When you live in it, you want justice now! But justice is a long term thing. Some people never get it, but due to their struggles, others will get it, eventually.

@CWOTUS Where does your uncle live out of curiosity? Republican his whole life. Republicans 60 years ago were a different sort of Republicans. Some of the party is still like them, and then there is a whole bunch of people who aren’t. The ones who aren’t are called the Republican base now. Most of them had parents and grandparents who were Democrats in the south.

Yeah, I was generalizing, or being too optimistic, who knows. I still recognize it’s a big problem (not gay people, the anti-gay people). Target, Chick Fil A, and other companies spend millions of dollars on oppresing gays. I don’t get it, I thought we were supposed to be being fiscally conservative in these hard times…...

Yeah, okay, Nevada, ban same-sex marriage but allow prostitution, gambling, and quickie marriages in Las Vegas. You’re really keeping up the “sanctity” there. (I was born in Nevada, I can make fun of it).

To me, this, for the most part, just reflects already the division between conservative and liberal states, a division which does seem to be getting stronger…

No

No, the gay thing is just a sign of how we are divided in general. On the one hand, we have people who want a nation of freedom like the one that our forefathers envisioned, and that our soldiers, sailors, and marines died for. On the other, you have those that want a nation of God where gays are punished, women are submissive, and those below you on the socioeconomic ladder are property.

At this rate, I see no way the United States can remain united as a free, First World nation; either we will become a Third World banana republic, or we will have secessions and/or civil unrest that will rip us apart, all because Conservatives cannot control their rabid dogs.

I think we are divided on many issues as a country. If we want to go down that road than I guess we could divide the nation on other issues such as gun rights, drug laws, abortion, interventionalism, etc.

Personally I think the opposite will happen since I expect the issue of gay marriage to be accepted by most people in the near future. This issue, unlike most other issues, seems to be fueled by its opposition through religion. As a result I expect the increased acceptence of gays and their rights to be synonymous with the growing loss of faith, especially among Bible literalists that is.

I hope this will be the tie that binds, rather than a divider.

@Yetanotheruser Most of those who oppose gay rights also oppose Obama and most other Democrats, so I doubt it will change anything.

@jerv I’m hopeful. This might swing some of the normally Republican-leaning libertarian.

@Paradox25 I think the issue of gay marriage will dissolve as younger voters (who tend to be more accepting of these things than older voters) grow older.

@Yetanotheruser Many of the Libertarians I know lean to the left. I guess Northern and non-Northern Libertarians are very different.

@jerv Sometimes it’s hard to tell. The Libertarian Party, for example, usually acts like “the-libertarian-wing-of-the-Republican-party.

First of all, as a Nation we’re really Not that divided (scroll down to “Purple States” and you will see that there are only a few red & blue areas of our country).
The only real division is caused by the media portrayals via opposing argument interviews.

To answer your question:
No.

I think what we are witnessing is a backlash from ignorant people that have been given legislative power. With elections and time, things will change for the better.

@tom_g Also, the great thing about progressive states like Massachusetts (where I live) is that people who don’t want to marry someone of the same sex don’t have to. That goes without being said. However, if you are not comfortable or agree with same-sex marriages you might want to go where you will not see them. If you don’t want to be on a walk with your kids and see two men making out on a park bench with PDA, even though you don’t have to be gay to live there, you would be exposed and that is why some would choose to go where they did not have to deal with it.

@zenvelo*But since California approved Proposition 8, I don’t see a lot of anti-same sex marriage people moving here.* Prop 8 is somehow not settle yet. California has enough toxic stuff to keep newbies out, the stifling environmental stuff, inept leadership, etc.

@JLeslie As far as gay marriage, if eventually there is some sort of federal law or ruling making it egal, then even the states who are against it will have to conform, much like they had to let the black kids into the schools, and let the black men sit at the lunch counter. The Black kid gets rough up in the bathroom and the Black man has peas flicked at him behind his back. Being allowed doesn’t equal acceptance.

@Trillian Christianity has a mistaken view against same sex attraction, mostly due to a mis-translation and compounded by an inability and/or unwillingness to question and research further. If one takes that off face value, if you were no of God, or any religion, you could not or would not have any aversion behind gays. I would think that some who don’t care for gay living, or to be around, it care just as less for being around anything that has to do with God.

@Hypocrisy_Central: “However, if you are not comfortable or agree with same-sex marriages you might want to go where you will not see them.”

…or seek therapy.

@Hypocrisy_Central: “If you don’t want to be on a walk with your kids and see two men making out on a park bench with PDA, even though you don’t have to be gay to live there, you would be exposed and that is why some would choose to go where they did not have to deal with it.”

Wuh? What just happened here? Gay marriage -> two men making out on a park bench?

I’m not exactly following here. Let me ask you a question or two: the whole African Americans sitting at the lunch counter thing doesn’t come up when you consider this at all? Also, have you actually been to a modern state like Massachusetts. You know what has changed since 2004 (when the state stopped discriminating)? I’ll tell you. Nothing. Except that more couples were able to marry.

@Hypocrisy_Central Once again you completely miss the point and try to twist things to whatever left field you’re in.
Nice to know that some things never change.
I’m not going to waste one more moment trying to have a rational conversation with you. Trills out.

Absolutely not. Just a couple decades ago, sexuality was SO polarizing that you didn’t even talk about it for fear of being ostracized from your social circles or business relationships.

Now it’s a hot topic, which I feel will eventually lead to more acceptance rather than less.

I don’t think there were less gays a few years ago, I think there were just as many. Society is just finally willing enough to acknowledge it.

In that thought train, I say society will become less divided over time as all the varieties of sexuality become more discussed and “more normal.”

@Hypocrisy_Central I was not talking about acceptance, although eventually more acceptance will follow. There certainly is more acceptance of black people should be equal and are equal today than 75 years ago. My point really has to do with gay people having equal rights under the law to marry, having all the legal protections and benefits married people have. So sure there might be a homosphobic person or two who might harrass the gay couple, or picket during a gay wedding, but at leas there will be law to entitle the couple to inheritance with rights of survivorship, and property rights, and being able to see their spouse during a medical emergency (I recently was taken away in an ambulance, and the only person they let near the ambulance to talk to me was my husband).

It’s been legal here in Massachusetts for long enough that I think we can definitively rule our straight flight. The opponents always claim it’s a “War on Marriage” and it will destroy traditional marriage if allowed. Guess what. Not a single couple I’ve ever known here caught the gay and suddenly changed their sexual orientation just because it was now legal to marry a same-sex partner. I do think it is likely that couples wishing to marry and prohibited by their state from doing so might choose to relocate. We tend to flee oppression far more often than we flee freedom.

@ETpro Also, if pornography is banned, homosexuality will disappear within months.. according to Rick Santorum.

@jerv Santorum is a portmanteau for sanctimonious nostrum. How many 3 and 4 year olds realized they were gay or transgendered because they found porn on that at the local adult book store.

relevant

@tom_g Same old same old. And it’s coming from the same old crowd.

The states are becoming divided but not because of sex. We have the regressive south and west that want to go back to pre-civil war status with immigrants in place of slaves, restrictive rights for women, abolish civil rights legislation, abolish public schools, and to insert religion into the state’s legal and social environment. Then you have both coasts and Northeastern states that want civil liberties, freedom from religious politics, women’s rights, equal rights despite race religion, sexual preference, and ethnic origin. The believe that government has a place in America’s life and want it to operate responsibly.

These differences are deeper than prior to the war between the states. I believe that the republicans will keep their word and violently oppose the re-election of Obama and most other Democrats. If they don’t win the elections they my well take up arms against the rest of us.

@Ron_C I always predicted that I would live to see the end of the United States :(

@jerv I hope we’re both wrong.

@Ron_C I saw the Berlin Wall coming down even before Reagan challenged Gorbachev to do so in 1987, and I saw Iraq becoming a Vietnam-style logistical nightmare with some guerrilla action on the side before Desert Storm turned to Desert Shield. In both cases, I was laughed at at the time but things turned out just as I expected, though the latter took ten years before it actually came true in almost exactly the same way I predicted.
I also predicted another revolution or civil war sometime within the next 30–40 years… and that was over 25 years ago. I hope for all of our sakes that I am as wrong about that as I was right about the other two, but you can see why I am a bit spooked by the events of the last couple of years, especially recent legislation in certain states and some of the stuff said by various Conservatives.

@jerv If it is any comfort I felt and wrote about the same things except that I don’t give Reagan credit for what Gorbachev did. My training in the military showed that the perceived affluence in the Soviet union was false in the early 70’s. Other than that, we are on the same page. I don’t think it it a psychic ability it just following situations to their logical conclusion. What is strange is that people in our government can’t do the same thing.

I’m too old to fight in a revolution and I really hate the idea of killing anyone, especially a fellow American. Maybe it will be a peaceful revolution and we’ll all sit around and see who can get the highest.