Proposition 8 in California would overturn the California Supreme Court decision allowing same sex marriage. Andrew Sullivan notes that every ethnic group voted against the Proposition 8 (and therefore in favor of same sex marriage) except blacks, who voted 69 to 31 in favor of Proposition 8.
This divergance between ethnic groups would be interesting by itself. But when one considers that blacks tend to adopt liberal positions, their opposition to same sex marriage is striking.
Update: There is an irony here. Obama's candidacy may have led more blacks to vote this year, and those same voters who supported Obama may also have helped contribute to the elimination of same sex marriage. Of course, there is less irony if one believes that Obama is against same sex marriage. Obama claims to be against same sex marriage, yet he opposed proposition 8. Positively Clintonian. Meet to the New Democratic boss; same as the old Democratic boss?

It's not actually all that surprising. Surveys have long shown that blacks are, on average, more socially conservative than whites, and more likely to be homophobic. They rarely prioritize these issues over racial and economic ones in their voting decisions (thus the pattern of overwhelming black support for the Democrats). But when offered the chance to vote on "social issues" as a separate category, their latent social conservatism comes out.
Posted by: Ilya Somin | November 05, 2008 at 01:13 AM
That particular segment of the population is heavily traditionally religious. That pretty much explains it.
Posted by: krome | November 05, 2008 at 06:29 AM
It is possible to square obama's positions on same sex marriage. he's against same sex marriage but opposed to amending the California constitution to define marriage as between a man and a woman. Simply because one doesn't want to amend the state constitution doesn't mean that he can't personally be against the particular issue.
More likely, and frankly, is that he didn't want to risk losing any votes by revealing his true thoughts on gay marriage, which are that he probably is ok with it. i think he recognizes that the country isn't quite there yet to elect a president who openly favors gay marriage. sadly, the fastest way to get there is through the boldness of a dynamic candidate going out on a limb and supporting it.
I understand why Barack took such a stance. In his mind, the ends (the change on more important issues that he'll be able to effect as new President) justify the means (potential dishonesty about the issue of same sex marriage).
Pointing out such contradictions in ANY politician's repertoire is like shooting fish in a barrel.
Posted by: jean paul | November 05, 2008 at 02:06 PM
Yes, shooting fish in a barrel. But it has a purpose. The public needs to know when politicans are being misleading and so it is necessary to do it. But I certainly agree we should acknowledge that all politicians do it.
Posted by: Mike Rappaport | November 05, 2008 at 02:51 PM
All pols do it but some do it much more than others. Clinton in his prime was egregious. Obama seems to be more egregious, if that is possible.
Posted by: Jonathan | November 06, 2008 at 04:04 AM