What struck me about the poll results was the relationship of government power to the questions’ premises.
The Civitas Poll question asks voters whether they would support an amendment that places a definition of marriage into the state constitution. Since the definition as provided jibes well with the traditional definition of marriage, roughly 70 percent of respondents supported the idea. The question says nothing about government benefits or restrictions.
In contrast, the Elon Poll question does not address the constitutional amendment itself. It instead focuses on a potential government restriction that could flow from the amendment. In other words, the person crafting this poll question assumed that a constitutional provision defining marriage in the traditional sense would be tantamount to an act to “prevent any same-sex marriages.” In this case, responses are almost entirely based on the question of whether government should interfere with personal lives.
What these results tell me is: a) most North Carolinians think traditional marriage is marriage; b) a minority in the neighborhood of 21 percent disagrees and thinks same-sex couples ought to be able to marry; c) a larger minority, around 44 percent, thinks same-sex couples should have no legal recognition; d) a third group, larger than b but smaller than c, thinks traditional marriage is marriage but doesn’t mind same-sex couples getting some sort of civil unions or partnerships that aren’t called marriage; and e) unlike the people captured within groups b and c, who have well-defined views on this topic, the folks in group d can be swayed by the tenor of a poll question.
Ask the people in group d whether marriage is marriage, and they’ll say yes. They’re willing to put that definition into the state constitution. Ask them on the other hand whether government should prevent people from doing something that affects mainly their private, personal lives, and some of them will say no.
