More Hispanics than ever say that they are in favor of gay marriage, according to an NBC News/Wall Street Journal/Telemundo oversample of 300 Latino voters.

By a 49 percent to 43 percent margin, Latinos say they are in favor of allowing gay and lesbian couples to marry. That’s the widest margin for Hispanics in the NBC/WSJ poll’s history, but it lags behind other traditionally Democratic-voting pillars.

Click here to view full poll results

Views on gay marriage have evolved rapidly since 2004, but not among Hispanics. All respondents said they supported same-sex marriage by a 53 percent to 42 percent margin, a 43-point turnabout from 2004 and up 2 points from this past December.

But Hispanics, along with rural voters, have been either consistent with their opinion, or less in favor of gay marriage since George W. Bush’s re-election campaign. This is the first NBC/WSJ poll with as wide a spread. In 2009, Hispanics said they were in favor by a 45 percent to 40 percent margin. In December 2012, they were split, with 46 percent in favor, 47 percent opposed.

A majority of Hispanics –  56 percent  –  believe that there should be a federal standard for marriage. And a solid majority believes that marriage should be defined as a union between one man and one woman – 56 percent to 33 percent. 

This is more conservative than the rest of the country. By a 48 percent to 47 percent margin, among all adults, Americans said there should be a federal amendment defining marriage as between one man and one woman.

This movement toward more Hispanics being in favor of same-sex marriage could be related to the significant uptick in Hispanics who say they know someone who’s gay.

In just a year’s time, there’s been a 22-point shift on the question. In May 2012, a majority – 51 percent – said they didn’t know anyone who was gay or lesbian (versus 46 percent who said they did).

But now, that’s reversed with nearly six-in-10 – 58 percent -- saying they know someone who’s gay.

Just 35 percent of Hispanics said they know a gay couple; 53 percent of all Americans said they do.

Half of Hispanics – 50 percent -- believe that people are born gay, and 29 percent say that individuals chose to be homosexual. That’s almost identical to the views of all Americans.

When Americans hear the phrase “social and cultural issues,” first on the list of what comes to mind is gay marriage or gay rights.

But for Hispanics, it’s very different. “Cultural differences” are listed first, followed by “gay marriage” and then “tolerance.”

That’s noteworthy when trying to understand the differences between Hispanics and the rest of the country on values issues. Yes, Hispanics are more socially conservative on preserving the family unit, abortion, and pay for women in the workplace, but cultural acceptance and immigration are big parts of their values make up. And they agree more with Democrats.

“Their numbers on how they rate the Republican Party are negative,” said Republican pollster Bill McInturff, who conducted the survey with Democrat Peter D. Hart. McInturff added, “It’s clear they’re talking about tolerance of culture that’s very different than white respondents.”

Hispanics, one of the largest-growing groups in the country, do not ideologically fit neatly into either party’s mold, showing themselves to be more socially conservative than the rest of the country, but also more economically liberal.

A majority – 52 percent – of Hispanics believes that promoting greater respect for traditional values is more important than encouraging greater tolerance, which is slightly wider than the rest of the country.

There’s evidence for this in Hispanics views on same-sex marriage, abortion, and even women’s rights. This is likely because of Hispanics’ deeply held religious views with 60 percent identifying as Catholic.

But when asked which party they most agree with on social and cultural issues, Hispanics side with Democrats – 42 percent agree with Democrats’ approach, versus 30 percent who say they disagree with it.

When it comes to Republicans, just 23 percent of Hispanics agree with the GOP, while 45 percent disagree – despite how much more liberal Democrats are on traditional social and cultural values.

That is at least partially because Hispanics trust Democrats more on immigration and issues of cultural tolerance.

In addition, a majority – 50 percent – say that economic and financial pressures are even more serious than a decline in moral values. This is similar among all Americans and is a reversal from 1996 when a majority of Americans thought a decline in moral values was more important than economic pressures.

It’s even more acute for Hispanics. More so than all adults in the wider NBC/WSJ/Telemundo poll, they believe economic pressure to make-ends-meet is higher – 91 percent of Hispanics called that a serious problem versus 84 percent of all Americans.

And Hispanics agree more with Democrats on their approach to who’s looking out for the middle class – 44 percent agree, 31 percent disagree. When it comes to Republicans, just 21 percent agree with the GOP and 54 percent disagree.

The family unit and community are very important to Hispanics. They believe that declines in various social areas are serious problems like divorce (77 percent vs. 65 percent), community and neighborhoods (75 percent vs. 59 percent), and the rise in texting and use of social media (60 percent vs. 43 percent).

This story was originally published on Fri Apr 12, 2013 12:57 PM EDT

Two weeks after the U.S. Supreme Court heard oral arguments in two highly publicized gay-marriage cases, a majority of Americans continue to say they support same-sex marriage, according to a new NBC News/Wall Street Journal poll. 

Fifty-three percent of respondents favor allowing gay and lesbian couples to marry, which is up 2 points since the NBC/WSJ survey last asked this question in December, though that increase is within the poll’s margin of error.

Forty-two percent oppose gay marriage – also up 2 points since late last year.

By party, 73 percent of Democrats and 54 percent of independents back gay marriage, while 66 percent of Republicans oppose it.

Strikingly, nearly 8-in-10 respondents (79 percent) say they know or work with someone who is gay or lesbian, which is an increase of 14 points since December and 17 points since 2004.

However, only 15 percent say that knowing or working with someone gay makes them more likely to back same-sex marriage; 4 percent say it makes them less likely to support it, and more than half say it doesn’t make a difference.

Win Mcnamee / Getty Images file photo

Equal rights supporters demonstrate in front of the U.S. Supreme Court on March 26, 2013 in Washington, DC. The Supreme Court is hearing arguments March 26, in California's proposition 8, the controversial ballot initiative that defines marriage only between a man and a woman.

These numbers come after numerous Democratic politicians, plus a handful of Republicans, have recently announced their support for gay marriage. They also come as the Supreme Court is expected to decide two different cases this summer – one on the Defense of Marriage Act, a federal law which prohibits the government from recognizing gay marriages performed in states where they are legal, and the other on California’s Proposition 8, which bans gay marriage in that state.

The poll also finds that 63 percent of respondents believe the federal government should recognize same-sex marriages in states where they are legal, and 56 percent think that the question of allowing gay marriage should be left to a federal standard rather than to the states.

In reversal, majority thinks abortion should be illegal
At the same time that general support for gay marriage has increased – albeit within the margin of error – so has opposition to abortion.

According to the survey, a combined 52 percent say that abortion should be illegal either with exceptions or without them, versus a combined 45 percent who say it should be legal either “always” or “most of the time.”

This is a reversal from the NBC/WSJ poll in January, when a majority – for the first time – said abortion should be legal in some form or fashion.

Measuring the values debate
The poll also gauges public sentiment on other questions involving social and moral issues.

Asked to choose what should be a more important goal for society – either promoting greater respect for traditional values or encouraging greater tolerance – 50 percent picked traditional values, and 44 selected greater tolerance.

That’s a significant change from when this question was last asked in 1999, when 60 percent chose traditional values and 29 percent sided with tolerance.

Notably, this movement toward tolerance comes from Democrats and self-described independents – but not from Republicans. (In 1999, 76 percent of Republicans said promoting traditional values was a more important goal vs. 77 percent say that now.)

In another change, half of respondents (50 percent) say that society’s most serious problems stem primarily from economic and financial pressures.

View full poll results here

But in past NBC/WSJ polls – in 1994 and 1996 – majorities said those problems came mainly from a decline in moral values.

And Americans give the Democratic and Republican parties either mixed or poor marks when it comes to social and cultural issues.

By 47 percent to 22 percent, respondents say they disagree with the GOP’s approach to social and cultural issues, and they disagree with Democrats by a 38-percent-to-37 percent margin.

On the parties’ approach to looking out for the middle class, the numbers are even worse – they disagree with Republicans by 51 percent to 24 percent, and with Democrats by 42 percent to 33 percent.

The NBC/WSJ poll was conducted of 1,000 adults (including 300 cell phone-only respondents) from April 5-8, and it has an overall margin of error of plus-minus 3.1 percentage points.

And then there were three.

On Monday, Sen. Tim Johnson, D-S.D., became the latest senator to announce his support of same-sex marriage.

"After lengthy consideration, my views have evolved sufficiently to support marriage equality legislation," he said in a statement. "This position doesn't require any religious denomination to alter any of its tenets; it simply forbids government from discrimination regarding who can marry whom." 

Johnson, who declined to run for re-election next year, joins Sens. Heidi Heitkamp, D-N.D., and Joe Donnelly, D-Ind., who on Friday declared their support for gay marriage.

With these new announcements, a total of 54 senators now support it -- 52 of them Democrats or Democratic-leaning independents and two of them Republicans. 

Only three Democratic senators now remain opposed: Sens. Joe Manchin, D-W. Va.; Mary Landrieu, D-La.; and Mark Pryor, D-Ark.

But three different aspects of home-state politics suggest that the remaining Dem senators might not be changing their position anytime soon – 1) the percentage of constituents who say that religion is important to them, 2) pending re-elections, and 3) Mitt Romney’s margin-of-victory in the state.

Residents of Arkansas and Louisiana are among the most committed to religion in the nation, according to a 2009 state-by-state analysis by the Pew Forum on Religion & Public Life. (The data represent the most current state-level information available.)

Seventy-four percent of Arkansas respondents and 73 percent of Louisiana respondents said religion is very important to them. That’s compared with just 56 percent -- the national average -- who said that in both Johnson’s South Dakota and Heitkamp’s North Dakota. Sixty percent of residents in Manchin’s West Virginia agreed that religion is very important to them, which is tied with the percentage who said that in Donnelly’s Indiana.

In addition, both Landrieu and Pryor are up for re-election next year (while Manchin doesn’t face re-election until 2018). And Romney easily won in West Virginia (getting more than 62 percent of the vote there), Louisiana (58 percent), and Arkansas (61 percent) in 2012.

So bottom line: The states where Democratic senators continue to oppose gay marriage -- by one measure or another -- are slightly more conservative than states where Democratic senators have recently changed course.

Joe Manchin (D-W. Va.)

• % Who say religion is important: 60
• Election year: 2018
• Mitt Romney: 62%

Mary Landrieu (D-La.)

• % Who say religion is important: 73
• Election year: 2014
• Mitt Romney: 57.8%

Mark Pryor (D-Ark.)

• % Who say religion is important: 74
• Election year: 2014
• Mitt Romney: 60.5%

Illinois Sen. Mark Kirk on Tuesday became the second Senate Republican to support marriage rights for same-sex couples, saying that "government has no place" in blocking loving marriages.

Kirk, in a statement released by his office, joined Ohio Sen. Rob Portman, R, in supporting gay and lesbian couples' right to marry. Portman announced his support for same-sex marriage following the public revelation that his son was gay.

"When I climbed the Capitol steps in January, I promised myself that I would return to the Senate with an open mind and greater respect for others," said Kirk, who missed almost a year on Capitol Hill after suffering a serious stroke.

"Same-sex couples should have the right to civil marriage. Our time on this earth is limited, I know that better than most," Kirk added. "Life comes down to who you love and who loves you back-- government has no place in the middle."

Kirk's announcement comes amid a steady flow of Senate Democrats who have announced their support for same-sex marriage. Just seven Senate Democrats, who mostly hail from conservative or swing states, have yet to endorse marriage rights; in the past 24 hours alone, two Democratic senators -- Bob Casey of Pennsylvania and Tom Carper from Delaware -- have joined those ranks.

Republicans have been much slower to back same-sex marriage rights. Social conservatives and Christian leaders who oppose same-sex marriage figure much more prominently into GOP politics, making it more difficult for Republican lawmakers to break from the party's base.

Just this past weekend, for instance, Arizona GOP Rep. Matt Salmon reiterated his opposition to gay and lesbian marriages despite the fact that his son is gay.

Illinois, though, is a more reliably Democratic-leaning state, and Kirk has fashioned himself as a more moderate Republican throughout his career.

Nine Democratic senators have declined to back same-sex marriage amid a wave of announcements by their colleagues this week in support of marriage rights for gay and lesbian couples.

The political climates in each of these senators' home states -- where some of these Democrats must stand for re-election in 2014 -- helps explain why so many of them seem inclined to stay mum on the issue of same-sex marriage.

Mark Pryor, Arkansas

WHAT HE’S SAID: Per the Arkansas Democrat-Gazette, Pryorspokesman Michael Teague said that Pryor, whose seat Republicans are already circling as a pick-up opportunity next fall, has a “moral belief that marriage is between a man and a woman.”

WHAT’S GOING ON IN THE STATE: Wednesday, the Arkansas House passed a resolution reaffirming its opposition to same-sex marriage; the state approved an amendment barring same-sex marriage in 2004, which passed with 75 percent percent of the vote.

A University of Arkansas poll found in October 2012 that 18 percent of the state's likely voters supported same-sex marriage and just 20 percent supported civil unions. 55 percent of Arkansans opposed any legal recognition of a gay couple’s relationship.

Mary Landrieu, Louisiana

WHAT SHE’S SAID: "According to the U.S. Constitution, marriage and family law are reserved for the states," Landrieu, who will likely face several gay marriage opponents in her battle for re-election, said, per the New Orleans Times-Picayune. "The people of Louisiana have made clear that marriage in our state is restricted to one man and one woman.”

The New Orleans-based Forum for Equality, which advocates for same-sex marriage rights, acknowledgedthe “political realities that exist in Louisiana” and said they were glad Landrieu supported legislation that bans discrimination based on sexual orientation (the Employment Non-Discrimination Act).

WHAT’S GOING ON: Louisiana passed a constitutional ban on same-sex marriage in 2004, with 78 percent of the state's voters in favor of it.

Heidi Heitkamp, North Dakota

WHAT SHE’S SAID: "I think that this is a state issue," Heitkamp said during her 2012 campaign, according to local affiliate KVRR. "I think that this is a distraction…here we go again talking about things that aren't about jobs and improving the economy and getting this country moving."

WHAT’S GOING ON: North Dakotans approveda gay marriage ban in 2004, with 73 percent approving of the ban versus 27 disapproving. The state also has the lowest percentage of residents who openly identify themselves as LGBT, according to a six-month Gallup survey released in February 2013.

Joe Manchin, West Virginia

WHAT HE’S SAID: Manchin still supports the Defense of Marriage Act, while his Democratic Senate counterpart, Jay Rockefeller, announced his opposition Monday, according to the Charleston Daily Mail.

Manchin was also the only Senate Democrat to vote against a bill that included the repeal of the Pentagon’s “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” policy in 2010. That bill failed, but he missed the vote on a subsequent, standalone version of the repeal, citing a family obligation.

WHAT’S GOING ON: West Virginia passed a law defining marriage as between a man and a woman in 2000. A constitutional ban on gay marriage was thwarted by Democrats in the House of Delegates in February 2010, and another attempt in 2012 also failed.

One Democratic delegate, John Doyle, introduced a civil unions bill in February 2012. He said at the time, “I'm not going to introduce a gay marriage bill simply because it has no chance of passing the West Virginia Legislature. We just might be able to get a civil union bill through, so I'm going to give it a shot.”

Tim Johnson, South Dakota

WHAT HE’S SAID:  The office of the retiring senator toldthe Huffington Post this week that “he has not changed his position on marriage equality,” which amounted to a “no,” the office clarified. Politico reportedthat Johnson’s spokesman noted that Johnson now opposes DOMA.

WHAT’S GOING ON: South Dakota passed a constitutional ban on same-sex marriage in 2006 by a relatively narrow margin, 52 percent of the vote. According to the LA Times, the state was divided at the time: “A poll released Friday by the Sioux Falls Argus Leader found a virtual deadlock; 47 percent of likely voters oppose the amendment, 46 percent support it.” 

South Dakota Attorney General Marty Jackley was one of 19 state attorneys general to signan amicus brief in support of the states’ rights position in the Prop 8 case. But a former South Dakota senator, Larry Pressler, who voted for the Defense of Marriage Act in 1996, joinedthe amicus brief signed by Republicans in support of same-sex marriage.

Joe Donnelly, Indiana

WHAT HE’S SAID: Donnelly told Fort Wayne affiliate WANE last week that he is still against same-sex marriage but supports giving them all the benefits of heterosexual couples.

WHAT’S GOING ON: Lawmakers in Indiana, which currently bans same-sex marriage by statute, are planning a vote on a proposed ban but will wait to hear what the Supreme Court has to say on the subject before putting it up as a ballot referendum.

But a ban might not make it past voters in 2014 – a December WISH-TV/Ball State Hoosier survey found that only 38 percent of respondents would support a ban, versus 54 percent who would oppose it. That doesn’t mean voters are ready to legalize gay marriage though, as they are split at 45 percent on each side of the issue.

Bill Nelson, Florida

WHAT HE’S SAID: “My personal preference is that marriage is between a man and a woman,” he said, according to CBS Miami.

WHAT’S GOING ON: Florida voters approved a gay marriage ban in 2008, with 62 percent in favor. But a Washington Post poll in October 2012 found that 54 percent of Florida voters thought same-sex marriage should be legal, with 33 percent in opposition.

Tom Carper, Delaware  

WHAT HE’S SAID: Carper’s office emphasized the positions he’s taken in support of same-sex couples. His team wroteto the Huffington Post, “Sen. Carper was proud to support Delaware’s efforts to enact Civil Union legislation and earlier this month he joined 211 of his Congressional colleagues in co-signing the Amicus brief that urges the Supreme Court to invalidate Section 3 of DOMA.”

WHAT’S GOING ON IN THE STATE: Delaware, which approved civil unions in 2011, could soon see a same-sex marriage bill, Gov. Jack Markell (D) predicted Tuesday: “Our legislative session ends in June. I’d say at this point, there’s a good chance a bill will hit my desk. I can’t be certain with how the legislation goes,” he told CBS Philadelphia.

Public opinion in Delaware matches the latest national numbers (NBC/WSJ’s December 2012 poll found that 51 percent of Americans support same-sex marriage). A poll conducted by Global Strategy Group on behalf of pro-gay marriage Equality Delaware found that 54 percent of Delawareans favored legislation granting equal marriage rights for gay and lesbian couples.

Bob Casey, Pennsylvania

WHAT HE’S SAID: Casey, who was re-elected in 2012, “has supported civil unions and he is closely following the debate around DOMA,” his spokesman, John Rizzo, toldPennLive this week. “He intends to thoroughly review any legislation on this when it comes before the Senate.”

WHAT’S GOING ON: Progressive organizations say their supporters bombarded Casey’s office with 10,000 calls and emails Wednesday urging him to support same-sex marriage.

A Franklin and Marshall poll found earlier this year that 52 percent of registered voters in Pennsylvania supported same-sex marriage and 41 percent opposed it, a swing of 19 percentage points since 2006. 

Urging the Supreme Court to act on the pair of gay marriage cases it has heard in the past two days, President Barack Obama on Wednesday said that it is “consistent with our Constitution to recognize same-sex couples.”

“I think it is time for the justices to examine this issue,” Obama said in an interview with Telemundo.

The court heard oral arguments Tuesday and Wednesday about the constitutionality of California’s Proposition 8, which banned same-sex marriages in the state, and the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA), which grants federal benefits only to married heterosexual couples.

In the Proposition 8 case, some of the justices appeared reluctant to make a sweeping ruling about the constitutionality of gay marriage. But the majority of justices appeared to indicate at the arguments Wednesday that they are prepared to strike down DOMA’s limitation of federal benefits to heterosexual couples.

In the interview, Obama reiterated that the federal government should recognize the unions of couples in states that allow gay marriage.

“I certainly believe that those states that have made a decision to recognize these couples as being married, that the federal government has to respect that decision by the states,” he said. “That's traditionally been how it works. States have defined marriage and the federal government has followed the lead of the states.”

Chip Somodevilla / Getty Images

George Washington University students and hundreds of others rally outside the Supreme Court during oral arguments in a case challenging the Defense of Marriage Act March 27, 2013 in Washington, DC.

“I think not only is it right and fair but also consistent with our Constitution to recognize same-sex couples,” added Obama, a former professor of constitutional law. “It doesn't mean everybody has to agree from a religious standpoint about this issue. It does mean that it is very important for us to remember that we're a nation where everybody is supposed to be equal before the law.”

The  administration has long argued that DOMA is unconstitutional on the basis that it discriminates against same-sex couples by depriving them of federal benefits even if they are legally married.

In arguments before the court today, Solicitor General Donald Verrilli said that, if DOMA is struck down on those grounds, it would be “difficult” to defend any state’s ban on gay marriage.

The plaintiffs in this morning's landmark Supreme Court hearings challenging California's ban on same-sex marriage, Proposition 8, spoke personally on Tuesday about how the case would personally affect them.

“Jeff and I long to be married and start a family of our own and have the equal rights that are guaranteed to all Americans that are in loving and committed relationships. Today marks the final chapter of a long, four-year journey toward that goal,” said Paul Katami, who, along with his partner, Jeff Zarrillo, makes up one of two couples that filed a federal lawsuit challenging the same-sex marriage ban, approved in November 2008.

Katami, appearing with his fellow plaintiffs and Human Rights Campaign President Chad Griffin outside a Washington, D.C. townhouse, added that he and Zarrillo have “faith in our country’s judicial system.”

Kris Perry said she and her partner Sandy Stier were “hopeful” that they will “finally feel the equality and inclusion that will come with the reversal of Proposition 8.”

There are several potential results of the Proposition 8 case, among them are: upholding the ban; ruling that same-sex marriage should be legal in the states that already allow them plus California; or ruling that Proposition 8’s defenders do not have legal standing to argue in its favor because they are not elected representatives of the state. (Gov. Jerry Brown and Attorney General Kamala Harris both refused to defend it.)

Seeming to acknowledge the variety of possible outcomes, Griffin, the HRC president, said that “while today marks a milestone on this journey towards a more perfect union, we are all mindful that our work is not done until these plaintiffs and every single American, regardless of state borders, can truly realize that promise of equal justice under the law.”

A decision on the case is expected in June.

Historic gay rights cases arrive at the Supreme Court this week as even opponents of same-sex marriage acknowledge that public opinion has shifted against them.

Vote now: March Madness - Senatorial edition

As the court prepares for oral arguments in two cases – one challenging the constitutionality of California’s ban on same-sex marriage, the other challenging the 1990s-era Defense of Marriage Act – the trickle of support among political leaders for marriage rights for gays and lesbians has continued to grow.

Speaking Sunday on NBC’s “Meet the Press,” Ralph Reed, the head of the socially conservative Faith and Freedom Coalition, admitted that the political divide over same-sex marriage was “basically a jump ball.”

“It's clearly moved,” Reed said of popular opinion, though he disputed any notion that Americans have come to universally back same-sex marriage.

But the shifting politics appear to be accelerating even more quickly. When former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton formally announced her support for same-sex marriage a few weeks ago, the announcement was met in some quarters by surprise – usually that Clinton hadn’t made such a pronouncement already.

On the cusp of this week’s oral arguments – and, potentially, a Supreme Court decision later this June dramatically expanding gay rights – more political notables have announced their support for marriage rights. 

Sen. Mark Warner, a Democrat representing swing state Virginia, wrote on his Facebook page on Monday that he now backs gay marriage "because it is the fair and right thing to do." 

 "Like many Virginians and Americans, my views on gay marriage have evolved, and this is the inevitable extension of my efforts to promote equality and opportunity for everyone," he wrote. 

Warner's comments came the day after Sen. Claire McCaskill, a Democrat from GOP-leaning Missouri, also announced her support for same-sex marriage. 

“My views on this subject have changed over time, but as many of my gay and lesbian friends, colleagues and staff embrace long-term committed relationships, I find myself unable to look them in the eye without honestly confronting this uncomfortable inequality,” McCaskill wrote Sunday evening on her tumblr page.

Missouri is one of 38 states that prohibits same-sex marriage, either through legislation, ballot initiative or state constitutional amendment. Those state-level prohibitions could still stand in the aftermath of a Supreme Court ruling, depending on how expansive the court’s eventual decision might be.

It’s also banned in Ohio, where Republican Sen. Rob Portman’s endorsement of same-sex marriage rights (prompted by his own son having come out as gay) earlier this month served as an even bigger watershed moment. Nine whole years after President George W. Bush proposed a constitutional amendment to ban gay marriage, Portman – a member of the Bush administration, and a serious contender for the GOP’s vice presidential nomination in 2012 – had offered high-profile support to same-sex marriage.

Moreover, Bush’s own former political adviser, Karl Rove, said this weekend on ABC that he could envision a Republican candidate (though not necessarily the nominee) for president in 2016 supporting same-sex marriage. Already, Jon Huntsman, a 2012 contender for the GOP nod who could seek the nomination again in 2016, has announced his support for marriage rights.

And while the shift might hearten gays and lesbians who hope to marry their partners, the tide toward supporting same-sex marriage is certainly driven in part by political considerations. Fifty-one percent of Americans nationwide said in December’s NBC News-Wall Street Journal poll that they now support the right of gay and lesbian couples to marry. Just 30 percent of Americans backed marriage rights in spring of 2004, by comparison.

Republicans’ post-election autopsy last week noted, for instance, that “certain social issues are turning off young voters.”

“Already, there is a generational difference within the conservative movement about issues involving the treatment and the rights of gays — and for many younger voters, these issues are a gateway into whether the Party is a place they want to be,” the report read.

Political leaders looking to complete their political “evolution” on gay marriage (to borrow a phrase from how President Barack Obama described his own shift toward backing marriage rights) could receive political cover this summer. A Supreme Court ruling that effectively legalizes same-sex marriage across the country – a possible outcome, though not necessarily the likely one – could hasten the number of lawmakers who feel comfortable to publicly back same-sex marriage, or at the very least, abandon it as a wedge issue.

NBC's Carrie Dann contributed to this report. 

A day after his administration formally weighed in on an upcoming Supreme Court case on gay marriage, President Barack Obama said he felt the issue required a response that reflected "what I believe." 

"I felt it was important for us to articulate what I believe and what this administration stands for," he said during a press conference at the White House. 

After first indicating that it would not get involved in the case, the Justice Department on Thursday filed a friend-of-the-court brief in the case over the constitutionality of California's "Proposition 8," which banned same-sex marriage in the state after thousands of gay couples had already legally tied the knot. 

Obama, who publicly changed course and embraced same sex marriage last year, said that he hopes that the court rules to strike down not just California's ban on gay marriage but equivalent restrictions in other states. 

"The court may decide that if [a ban on same sex marriage] doesn't apply in this case, it probably can't apply in any case. There is no good reason for it," he said. "If I were on the court, that would probably be the view that I'd put forward." 

"But I'm not a judge. I'm the president," he added. "The basic principle, though, is let's treat everybody fairly, let's treat everybody equally, and -- and I think that the brief that's been presented accurately reflects our views."

The Justice Department Thursday urged the US Supreme Court to uphold same-sex marriage in California and went even further, suggesting it is unconstitutional to block gay couples from getting married in half a dozen other states.

States violate the Constitution, the administration argued, if they offer civil unions to gay couples but deny them the right to marry.

While that position clearly applies to the legal dispute in California, it would also apply to at least seven other states -- Delaware, Hawaii Illinois, Nevada, New Jersey, Oregon, and Rhode Island. Each offers civil unions but not same-sex marriage.

And while the administration takes no position in its brief beyond those states, its reasoning would have even broader implications. 

If the administration's legal theory were ultimately accepted, no state could, under constitutional guarantees against discrimination, deny same sex couples the right to marry.

After first suggesting it would not get involved in the California case, the Obama administration late Thursday filed a friend-of-the-court brief in support of the two gay couples who launched the fight over the issue four years ago.

In a statement, Attorney General Eric Holder said, "In our filing today in Hollingsworth v. Perry, the government seeks to vindicate the defining constitutional ideal of equal treatment under the law ... The issues before the Supreme Court in this case and the Defense of Marriage Act case are not just important to the tens of thousands Americans who are being denied equal benefits and rights under our laws, but to our Nation as a whole."

Related: 100 Republicans sign brief to the Supreme Court arguing that gays and lesbians should be allowed to legally wed

The Supreme Court hears oral argument in late March to decide the fate of Proposition 8, an amendment to the state constitution approved by 52 percent of California voters in 2008. It banned same-sex marriages in the state and went into effect after 18,000 gay couples were legally married earlier that year.

A federal judge declared the ban unconstitutional, and a federal appeals court last year upheld that ruling, though on narrower grounds that apply only to California. In December, the Supreme Court agreed to take up the issue.

The Justice Department is not directly involved in the case, because the gay couples that brought the lawsuit are challenging a state restriction, not a federal one.  But each side had urged the government to file a brief in support of its position.

After voters approved the measure stopping same-sex marriage, state officials in California declined to defend it in court.  That defense has been carried on by the original proponents of Prop 8.

The Obama administration last year signaled it would stay on the sidelines.  In May, when President Obama first said that "same-sex couples should be able to get married," he added that it was not a matter for the federal government.

"This is an issue that is going to be worked out at the local level because historically this has not been a federal issue. Different states are coming to different conclusions," he said in an interview with ABC News.

Related: Obama administration to express support for gay marriage before high court

But he appeared to express a different view in January, urging legal equality for same-sex couples during his inaugural address.

"Our journey is not complete until our gay brothers and sisters are treated like anyone else under the law, for if we are truly created equal, then surely the love we commit to one another must be equal as well," he said.

In a separate case the administration is urging the Supreme Court to strike down the Defense of Marriage Act, known as DOMA, a law passed by Congress in 1996 that prohibits federal agencies from recognizing same-sex marriages in states where they are legal.  As a result, married gay couples are denied over 1,000 federal benefits available to traditional couples.

"The law denies to tens of thousands of same-sex couples who are legally married under state law an array of important federal benefits that are available to legally married opposite-sex couples," Solicitor General Verrelli wrote last week in urging the court to overturn DOMA.

The law is unconstitutional, he said, "because this discrimination cannot be justified as substantially furthering any important governmental interest."

Nine states currently permit same-sex couples to marry -- Connecticut, Iowa, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, New Hampshire, New York, Vermont, and Washington. It is also permitted in Washington, D.C.

This story was originally published on Thu Feb 28, 2013 6:38 PM EST

President Obama’s spiritual adviser, Rev. Joel Hunter, said he disagrees with the president’s support for gay marriage. “I can’t find this in scripture.” Hunter said on MSNBC's "Andrea Mitchell Reports" today.

Hunter said that the president’s announcement was likely prompted by Vice President Biden’s endorsement on "Meet the Press." When asked if he thought Obama’s announcement was personal or politically driven, the pastor said, “When you’re in that office it’s always political. But that doesn't mean it's devoid from a sense of personal responsibility and personal morality.”

When Hunter spoke with the president after last week’s announcement, Hunter said that the president told him he changed his views based on personal anecdotes, gay friends, and servicemen. Hunter said, “He wants to do the right thing. But for him, that doesn't come straight just from scripture.”

Hunter said he did not discuss politics, policy, or even gay marriage with the president before last week. “We had not talked about this specific subject.” Hunter said. “I just talk about his personal life and his understanding of the scripture.”

When NBC's Andrea Mitchell asked if the pastor would preach against gay marriage and what the president said, Hunter said, “I don't preach political matters. I preach scriptural standards. And so, when I preach about marriage, I will say that it's between a man and a woman. And give scriptural references for that. But I simply stay away from politics when it comes to preaching, because the word of God is too important on its own to communicate. And I can't really get detoured from that.”

Hunter’s admiration of Obama has not been changed by his announcement, “The president's a man. You know? And I love him. He's a friend. But with the rest of my congregation -- I never know how much of my counsel they're going to take or not take."