The first thing that I though was interesting was that a new poll came out that confirms that a majority of people in New York support gay marriage. They found that 56% supported it, while 37% did not. The study was done by Quinnipiac University, and is the highest level of support ever that the University has recorded. The most interesting part about this, though, is that on April 15, 2004, which is not that long ago in my opinion, the poll showed that 55% opposed the legalization of same-sex marriage, and only 37% were for it. That's a complete one-eighty, and I think that's pretty cool that in 7 years the state of New York could change their opinions so drastically. This is definitely a big step for the gay rights movement, because if the majority of the people support it, although it is only in one state, how much longer can we really ignore that?
(http://blog.timesunion.com/capitol/archives/54885/poll-affirms-majority-support-for-same-sex-marriage/)
I found this second article, written on Tuesday of this week, very interesting because it's something I have been thinking about for a while now. It's about President Obama and his views on same-sex marriage. Obama has always said in his speeches that he supports civil unions and domestic partnerships, but not gay marriage. However, I have always thought that if he weren't the President, he would be all for gay marriage. The article says that in 1996, Obama routinely stated that he supported same-sex marriage, and opposed an amendment to the Constitution saying that marriage was only between a man and a woman. Obama also favored repealing the Defense of Marriage Act, causing some states to recognize marriages that were legal in other states. The writer of the article, Austin Cline, says this:
"So, to recap: President Obama -- who has in the past said he supports same-sex marriage, who has consistently opposed any effort to block same-sex marriage, and who says he might support it (again) in the future -- opposes same-sex marriage. The Washington Post, speculating in its news pages about Obama's future evolution to open supporter of same-sex marriage, sounds a cautionary political note: 'Indeed, public opinion is so divided on the issue that the president would probably need months to sway voters to his position.' Once he decides, what it is, of course."
"So, to recap: President Obama -- who has in the past said he supports same-sex marriage, who has consistently opposed any effort to block same-sex marriage, and who says he might support it (again) in the future -- opposes same-sex marriage. The Washington Post, speculating in its news pages about Obama's future evolution to open supporter of same-sex marriage, sounds a cautionary political note: 'Indeed, public opinion is so divided on the issue that the president would probably need months to sway voters to his position.' Once he decides, what it is, of course."
I wasn't aware that Obama had showed this much support for this movement in the past. Ever since I first heard Barack Obama say that he did not support same-sex marriage, but only civil unions, I suspected that he was a "closeted" supporter. He knew that if he were "all for" gay marriage, he probably would not have been elected, and that is a definite problem.
(http://atheism.about.com/b/2011/01/25/obamas-hypocrisy-on-gay-marriage-civil-rights.htm)
One more thing: Jason Mraz is engaged, but he has announced that he will not get married until gay marriage is legal, following in the footsteps of Brad and Angelina. Mraz actually announced this at the same benefit concert that Elton John made his comments at last week, but for some reason the news about Jason Mraz didn't come out until this week. More and more celebrities are making this statement, but I don't think Mraz's comments specifically will really cause a stir because it's no secret that a LOT of celebrities have spoken out about legalizing same-sex marriage.
(http://marquee.blogs.cnn.com/2011/01/24/jason-mraz-no-wedding-till-gay-marriage-is-legal/)
I've noticed that most of the articles I'm reading, even if they highlight a setback in the gay rights movement, seem to be for gay rights and gay marriage. Maybe that's because those are the articles that I've been looking for? I'll try next week to maybe find articles from people who are not supporters, and see what those articles have to say.
In terms of the rhetorical situation, the exigence is obvious: that gays/lesbians do not have many of the same rights that heterosexual people do. This is a situation that calls for action to be taken. The audience of this social movement is really everyone. I think my social movement is trying to reach out to children, young adults, middle-aged adults, and senior citizens alike. Their biggest audience is probably those who identify themselves to be gay or lesbian, but my social movement is trying to convince gay people and straight people alike that gays and lesbians deserve to be treated with respect and deserve to have the same rights as everyone else. Another big audience could be lawmakers and politicians, because these are the people that have the power to implement the necessary changes. The constraints that are used to compel the audience into action might be their morals, how they grew up, who their parents are, whether they know someone who is gay or not, whether they are gay themselves or not, and religion and politics. The list could be endless.
