Mission America

Christian Commentary on the Culture

When Voters Understand LGBTQ Agenda Most Say No

It’s not a secret that activists driving “LGBTQ” rights in America are grand manipulators of public opinion, policy and facts.

So when it comes to polls on this subject, it turns out that depth of voter understanding is key. When Americans comprehend the outcome of granting homosexual or transgender policy demands, most respond with a resounding “no.”

This became apparent in several recent polls in Ohio and Arizona when respondents  were asked about the impact of gender identity policy on women and children. In Ohio, a poll conducted by Citizens for Community Values by the Resolute Group surveyed 800 registered Ohio voters in March 2020. This poll included a question new to recent public polling, and the responses should strike terror into the hearts and goals of gender-bending activism.

When asked about cross-sex hormones prescribed to minor children for the purposes of gender change, an overwhelming 73.3% in Ohio oppose this practice. So recent bills that would ban these mutilating treatments for children, such as H.B. 513 in Ohio and similar legislation in other states, would be supported by most voters. Only 13.6% supported this practice, with others undecided.

In Arizona, a poll of 600 likely voters by Resolute last December did not ask that question but did ask this one: “These non-discrimination laws have also had the effect of threatening the safety and privacy of women and girls by giving biological males access to gender-specific locker rooms, showers, and bathrooms. With the potential effects of these laws in mind, would you support or oppose passing this same type of law in Arizona?” Opposing such laws were 63% of respondents; those who would support such laws were 23.8%. In Ohio, a similar question yielded these responses: 67.3% opposing, with 20.0% supporting.

Would it be fair to assume that most of the thinking, voting public is not impressed with the claims of gender change advocates when provided specifics about a law’s impact?

Human Rights Campaign claims broad American support for the morality-and-freedom-smashing “Equality Act,” now before the Senate after passing the Pelosi-led U.S. House of Representatives. This dangerous law would implant “sexual orientation” and “gender identity” into U.S. civil rights law and thereby sweep away religious freedom as well as parental rights to prevent aggressive corruption of children even beyond the outrages already happening.

The “Equality Act” would likely empower confused minors the ability to consent to the permanent physical damage of gender treatments even if parents disagree, and would result in “trans” identifiers entering opposite sex restrooms and locker rooms, as expressed in the polling question above.

But public response largely depends on how questions are asked. The survey instruments behind HRC’s claim of broad public support use extremely biased phrases. For instance, a 2018 survey cited by HRC, conducted by Public Religion Research Institute, found that 46% of those surveyed thought business owners should be “allowed to refuse” wedding services to gay and lesbian couples, while 48% thought they should not be permitted to refuse. But HRC must have been disappointed with the results, because these numbers in 2017 had been 41% and 53%. So people expressed growing support for freedom in the later poll, an unwelcome trend for the totalitarian goals of homosexual activism.

Gallup questions also reflect bias. In 2019, a Gallup poll asked this question: “Do you think new civil rights laws are needed to reduce discrimination against lesbian, gay, bisexual or transgender people, or not?” Those in favor were 53%, with those opposed, 46%.

But pollsters have to know that asking people about “reducing discrimination” guarantees a certain level of knee-jerk approval. Doesn’t everyone want to “reduce discrimination”?

In 2017, an HRC Ohio poll claims this result: “A majority (53%) of Ohio voters support a federal Equality Act that would make it against the law to deny services to LGBTQ people and would ban discrimination against LGBTQ people in employment and housing.”

But the sample was 400—half as many as the recent Ohio CCV poll. And what happens when people hear a question about the same policy issue, with a bit more detail and minus the misleading implication that “LGBTQ people” possess immutable, neutral traits and are arbitrarily “denied” jobs and homes?

In view of pending Ohio bills on these issues, here’s how the CCV Ohio poll posed the question to voters: “Do you support creating new protected classes in civil rights law, similar to what exists for race, sex and religion, by adding sexual orientation only, gender identity only, both, or neither?”47.5% would add neither of these categories to current law, with only 32.9% saying they would add both.

And CCV asked a more detailed question that pertains to the same potential “non-discrimination” policy-- “Would you support or oppose a law that undermines religious freedom, defined as one’s ability to peacefully live and work freely according to one’s deeply held religious beliefs?” Only 26.3% would support such a law, with 62.7% opposing.

So once voters get a clear picture of how “LGBTQ rights” affect other Americans, especially where religious beliefs or children are concerned,  high support wanes quickly. And this may explain a fall-off in homosexual public approval in recent years, as revealed in a GLAAD 2019 survey, where millennial comfort for being in certain situations with homosexually-inclined or gender-confused people dropped sharply, even as the larger agenda continued to receive support.

The reality is that the closer people get to the expression of these behaviors/lifestyles and their impact on other people, the more unsavory, unequal and undesirable they appear—and the more phony so-called “non-discrimination” bills appear.

Many people are predicting that as “LGBTQ” voices and demands grow, general population support will continue to wane. Spite, wrongful accusations and ingratitude don’t help their cause, like the New York City ejection of Samaritan’s Purse over nasty speculation that the Christian group’s gracious volunteer medical relief efforts would be tinged with “anti-gay” attitudes.

And many believe the addition of  “T” to the “LGB” cause has soured many potential allies on the movement. When people see the physical changes of mutilating gender surgery, or hear that confused young children are being urged to medically interrupt the natural progression of puberty, most parents and grandparents react with alarm and immediate gut-level revulsion.

It’s pretty easy to get away with a shallow “love is love” theme for “LGBTQ” goals. Yet when people encounter the “trans” activist movement, they pretty quickly perceive that “delusion is delusion.”

And Americans really don’t want radicals messing with their kids’ minds, hearts and bodies. The “drag queen story hours” that some taxpayer libraries insist are “inclusive” are frankly nauseating to most parents. Even if one is inclined to give a break to “LGBTQ” expression, having a bearded man in an evening gown who hasn’t passed a background check snuggle with your four-year-old on his lap is just not going to happen.

It’s time to trust the American people and give them more information in polls, so they understand what they are choosing to affirm—or not.