30% of Americans still oppose same-sex marriage


Weaker support among Republicans, black Americans, white evangelicals. After dominating culture wars and state legal battles throughout the 2010s and early 2010s, the question of the legality of same-sex marriage was suddenly put to rest by the Supreme Court in 2015. no longer a politically useful rallying point, it quickly faded. public view. So it’s easy to imagine that beyond certain hyper-religious communities, Americans today have no problem with same-sex marriage. But a new survey from the Public Religion Research Institute (PRRI) is a sobering reminder that this is not the case.

Around 30% of those polled by PRRI still believe that gay and lesbian couples should not be allowed to marry. Among Republicans alone, this figure climbs to 50%. Yeah.

The good news is that 68% of respondents support same-sex marriage, and that number is growing steadily and rapidly. In 2014, only 54% supported the right of same-sex couples to legally marry. That figure rose to 58% in 2016, 61% in 2017, and 67% in 2020. Republican support is up from 35% in 2014.

Support among older Americans has also increased, with nearly 60% of people 65 and older saying same-sex marriage should be legal. Among those aged 50-64, support was 64%, rising to 72% for those aged 30-49 and 76% for those aged 18-29.

The figures come from the PRRI Atlas of American Values, a series of annual public attitude surveys. The 2021 sample included a total of 22,612 adults.

“The majority of Americans from nearly every major racial and ethnic group support same-sex marriage,” notes the PRRI.

Support was lowest among black Americans (59%). Sixty-nine percent of white Americans support same-sex marriage.

The majorities of many major religious groups are also in favor. This includes American Jews (83%), White Catholics (74%) and Catholics of Color (80%), White Protestants (76%), Black Protestants (55%), Orthodox Christians (58%) , Hindus (86%). ), Buddhists (81%) and Muslims (55%).

The only major religious groups without majority support were Latter Day Saints (46%), White Evangelical Protestants (35%) and Jehovah’s Witnesses (22%).

The PRRI survey also includes findings on anti-discrimination laws relating to sexuality and gender and denial of services based on religion. You can find the full results here.

Survey respondents were more likely to support non-discrimination laws than support same-sex marriage:

Nearly eight in ten Americans (79%) support laws that would protect gay, lesbian, bisexual and transgender people from discrimination in jobs, public accommodations and housing, including 41% who strongly Encourage them. One in five Americans (20%) oppose such laws, with only seven percent who strongly oppose them. Support for these protections has grown in recent years, with about seven in ten Americans supporting the non-discrimination provisions in 2015 (71%), 2017 (70%), 2018 (69%) and 2019 (72%) , up to 76% in 2020.

Nearly two-thirds opposed “religion-based refusals to serve gays and lesbians.” The survey did not dig deeper to see if this changed when a refusal was related to a same-sex marriage ceremony (as the cases that have been challenged in court have been) rather than an outright refusal to serve. LGBTQ customers.


Neuroscience studies are largely unreliable, according to new research. “The results of most studies are unreliable because they involved too few participants,” reports the Washington University School of Medicine in St. Louis, citing new research published March 16 in the journal Nature.

Using publicly available datasets – involving a total of almost 50,000 participants – the researchers analyzed a range of sample sizes and found that brain-wide association studies require thousands of individuals to achieve higher reproducibility. Typical brain-wide association studies enroll only a few dozen people.

Such so-called underpowered studies are likely to accidentally uncover strong but spurious associations while missing real but weaker associations. Regularly underpowered brain-wide association studies result in a glut of surprisingly strong but non-reproducible findings that slow progress toward understanding brain function, the researchers said.

The study was spurred on by two researchers who could not replicate their own relatively large study (1,000 children). The median sample size in published neuroscience articles is 25.

“We were interested in finding out how cognitive ability is represented in the brain,” said Scott Marek, professor of psychiatry at the University of Washington. “We did our analysis on a sample of 1,000 children and found a significant correlation and we thought, ‘Great! But then we thought, “Can we replicate this in another thousand kids?” And it turned out that we couldn’t. It just blew me away because a thousand sample should have been big enough. We scratched our heads wondering what was going on.

So Marek and a team of other researchers from the University of Washington and the Masonic Institute for the Developing Brain at the University of Minnesota began looking at neuroimaging datasets and trying to replicate the results.

“Our findings reflect a systemic and structural problem with studies designed to find correlations between two complex things, such as the brain and behavior,” said lead author Nico Dosenbach, associate professor of neurology at the University of Washington. . “It’s not a problem with any individual researcher or study. It’s not even unique to neuroimaging. The field of genomics discovered a similar problem about a decade ago with genomic data and took remedial measures.”


Democrats are calling for greater powers for antitrust authorities and an end to the consumer welfare standard. New legislation by Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D–Mass.) and Rep. Mondaire Jones (D–NY) would allow antitrust authorities at the Federal Trade Commission and the Department of Justice to break up companies and block mergers without court order. The woefully illiberal bill — dubbed the Anticompetitive Merger Prohibition Act — would allow the DOJ and FTC to retroactively reject previously approved mergers if they “materially harm” competition or lead to a market share of more than 50%. The bill effectively removes the existing consumer welfare standard for antitrust enforcement, which is to determine whether commercial antics actually harm consumers. The nonsensical replacement standard would consider whether the activity harms competitors, i.e. exactly what the company is supposed to do.

The law banning anti-competitive mergers would also automatically block mergers valued at more than $5 billion, those that result in highly concentrated markets, or those that result in market shares above a certain threshold.

“The proposal is backed by a coalition of progressives in both houses, including Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) and Alexandria Ocasio Cortez (DN.Y.), and follows a series of proposals before Congress targeting the market power of tech giants,” reports The hill. But the bill does not yet have any Republican co-sponsors.


• In the three weeks following Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, at least 7,000 Russian soldiers were killed, according to an estimate by US intelligence.

• The Federal Reserve approved an interest rate hike, the first in three years, of a quarter of a percentage point. The Federal Open Market Committee “anticipates that continued increases” will be required, it said in a statement Wednesday.

• Why is the United States so slow to process Afghan refugees?

• Mississippi passed a ban on critical race theory in education:


About Author

Comments are closed.