RECENT  POSTS:  » And now NOM is literally pleading with its (theoretical) supporters » Add 'professional advocate for anti-gay scouting' to list of bygone career choices » NOM to lasso the White House with a rosary. Or something. » NOM's new plan? To beat up its org-crushing loss until it becomes a win. » By the time you read this headline, we'll be ten more seconds beyond stagnant anti-gay 'culture wars' » Video: America cannot wait—to purchase American Family Association radio equipment? Huh?! » Huckabee 2016: 'cause church and state aint gonna marry themselves » EEOC does wonky, under-radar thing that could lay groundwork for definitive nondiscrimination protections » Maggie Gallagher, now that you've lost on marriage, might you lose these deceptive ways as well? » Crowdfunding discriminatory business owners: Perfect statement on anti-gay movement's current affairs  

« Go back a post || Return to G-A-Y homepage || Haul tail to next post »

04/30/2010

3 out of 4 SCOTUS watchers agree: Focus on the Family's is the 'non-starter' position

by Jeremy Hooper

Focus on the Family might consider an openly LGB Supreme Court nominee to be a "non-starter," regardless of merit or qualification. However, a new WaPo/ABC News poll shows just how out of touch this organization is when it comes to the majority of Americans.

71% say "gay or lesbian" is no factor, 4% say it's a positive, and only 25% say it's a negative (and only 22% say it's a strong negative):

Screen Shot 2010-04-30 At 11.39.42 Am-1
Washington Post-ABC News Poll -- SCOTUS

So keep it up, FOtF. Barking such unabashedly homo-hostile job requirements might still sound advantageous within your Colorado Springs walls, but don't be surprised if it's your own stance (and public support) that ultimately gets "Borked."

space gay-comment gay-G-A-Y-post gay-email gay-writer-jeremy-hooper


Your thoughts

comments powered by Disqus

G-A-Y Comments Policy


 
Related Posts with Thumbnails