Results Are In: The Issue Is Non-Partisan

Charlie Sykes, conservative radio talk-show host, announced yesterday the results of his poll of the right side of the blogosphere on the civil unions and marriage ban:

13 Opposed
6 Undecided (including Sykes, himself)
6 Leaning For
5 For

Of the poll results Skyes said, "I think this demonstrates a rather remarkable amount of intellectual diversity on the right side of the blogosphere."

It's true. And it's solid proof that this issue is not a partisan one. I've long believed that, and it has been a pleasure reading such thoughtful and intelligent arguments from the conservatives on this issue. Thanks Charlie, for posing the question, and thanks to all who rang in with their opinions.

I have a bit more to say on this and on yesterday's blog summit, but first have to finish working on my taxes. (Because unfortunately for me, gay people pay taxes too. But even more unfortunate, because I'm "single" I can't just leave my paperwork with my partner for her to file jointly. Oh the injustice! Oh how I hate tax time!)

Opposed:
Musings of a Thoughtful Conservative
Ask Me Later
Letters in Bottles
Gibbsville Unincorporated
I Am the Force
Random10
The World According to Nick
Spotted Horse
Ann Althouse
The Skeptic Eclectic
From Where I Sit
Subject to Change
Milwaukee World.com

Undecided
Sykes Writes
The American Mind
Wagner on the Web
Right Off the Shore.
Jiblog
Milwaukee Id10t

Leaning For
Lakeshore Laments
Rick Esenberg
Blogger Beer
Texas Hold'em
James Wigderson
Owen, at Boots and Sabers

For
Dad29
Holstein Grove
Dennis York
No Runny Eggs
John McAdams


Tags: ,

6 Comments:

At 6:07 PM, Blogger Larry in Gibbsville said...

Nice to meet you yesterday, Ingrid. Keep up the good work!

 
At 6:16 PM, Blogger Ingrid Ankerson said...

You too! Thanks Larry.

 
At 8:57 AM, Blogger Owen said...

Sorry I missed you, Ingrid. I didn't know you were there.

 
At 9:27 AM, Blogger Peter said...

Sorry I missed you as well. Would have liked to have gotten acquainted.

 
At 10:54 AM, Blogger Owen said...

Ingrid,

I would like to bicker with one of your points. You said:

"And it's solid proof that this issue is not a partisan one."

I disagree. If you look at the political parties, they are in lock-step with their respective positions. What this diversity opinion indicates is that the people are not in lock-step with the parties.

 
At 11:46 AM, Blogger Ingrid Ankerson said...

I sure wish everyone had to wear nametags with their blog name on it. I got there a little late so wasn't able to chat with anyone before the show started, and after tried to mingle and meet people as best I could, but obviously didn't do a very good job. Owen, nice work on the panel (and you too, of course Jay!)

Owen, point well taken. I'm sticking by what I claim, because, well… because I honestly don’t see this as a partisan issue. This initiative will not allow gay & lesbian couples to get married, instead it would change our constitution to single out a group of people. I don’t think this is a very conservative or liberal thing to do. True, the vote did (mostly) fall along party lines in the legislature, but as Sen. Carpenter said at the Senate floor vote, if the vote was cast by a secret ballot, it probably wouldn’t pass through the legislature. I believe that’s true.

 

Post a Comment

<< Home

A Fair Wisconsin Votes No
Add this banner to your website