August 2006 Weddings
Dear Community,
Our tech team has launched updates to The Nest today. As a result of these updates, members of the Nest Community will need to change their password in order to continue participating in the community. In addition, The Nest community member's avatars will be replaced with generic default avatars. If you wish to revert to your original avatar, you will need to re-upload it via The Nest.
If you have questions about this, please email help@theknot.com.
Thank you.
Note: This only affects The Nest's community members and will not affect members on The Bump or The Knot.
Our tech team has launched updates to The Nest today. As a result of these updates, members of the Nest Community will need to change their password in order to continue participating in the community. In addition, The Nest community member's avatars will be replaced with generic default avatars. If you wish to revert to your original avatar, you will need to re-upload it via The Nest.
If you have questions about this, please email help@theknot.com.
Thank you.
Note: This only affects The Nest's community members and will not affect members on The Bump or The Knot.
s/o Gay marriage arguments that work
I'd be interested to hear what resonates with you from the thread below, 2V, and also anyone else who's changed their mind on the issue, the more recent and raw the better.
I've thought a lot in the last few days about what went wrong with the No campaign and what we need to do next time to succeed. There's so many different angles; those of us who strongly believe in equal marriage rights have an army of arguments and I'm not sure they all help, at least with the target audience.
Just interested in hearing what works.
Re: s/o Gay marriage arguments that work
Yes. That's a pretty big order to fill for gay people. Would you want to reach out to people who think that you're lesser-than?
Since it's gay marriage proponents that want the current rules changed the onus is on them to convince others the change is worthy. The majority doesn't need to convince the minority of anything in order to win.
I didn't post what I said b/c I thought it's the easy way. This isn't a staples?commercial?and there's no easy button. It's a tough issue and it will take some time to convince people. I just posted what I think is the most effective way. Also, when I opposed gay marriage I never thought I was better than gay people. It's that attitude toward people who oppose it that makes them defensive and unwilling to see your viewpoint.?
caden, that is a really rough position to take. why is the onus on gay people to reach out to those who condemn them?
it doesn't matter what you thought. it's not a matter of how one side perceives it. anti-gay marriage folks support laws that make gay people "lesser-than" in the eyes of the state by denying them the rights that straight people have.
if someone is a bigot, they are a bigot -- regardless of whether that fact makes someone defensive and unwilling to see another viewpoint. people choose how to respond to things. for an example of someone being awesome and trying to see the other side, even while being told why her views could be seen as bigoted, check out 2Vermont's thread. it doesn't have to get ugly and defensive.
The question was - what resonated with you that changed your mind on the issue. The answer was - getting to know gay people.?
I'm sorry the answer wasn't "calling them bigots until they repent," but it wasn't. By all means, continue doing that. Maybe after a few more years that will have a different result. I don't think that will be the case but I can't predict the future.
Speaking of defensive...
No one suggested anything like "calling them bigots until they repent".
You suggested that gays have to go convince people they aren't worth discriminating against. All we're saying is that that's a pretty brutal responsibilty to put on people who have been discriminated against all their lives, simply for being who they are.
I still *really* do not understand the opposition - apart from the religious angle - to gay marriage. And since so many smart people (in both parties) are able to separate religion from politics otherwise, I find it completely perplexing. I'm not saying that those that oppose gay marriage aren't smart - just that it seems that there is an emotional, rather than an intellectual, reason for the opposition.
Are there ANY non-religion based reasons to oppose it?
I am a runner, knitter, scientist, DE-IVF veteran, and stage III colon cancer survivor.
I honestly don't think the gay marriage debate will be won by talking to people, etc. ?It's going to need to be legislated in the courts, a la Loving v. Virginia. ?
Unfortunately, Americans need to be?legislatively?beaten into being accepting. ?Everyone (mostly) will get there eventually.
Without Loving, ?we might never have seen interracial marriage.
Outlawing gay marriage = inherently unconstitutional. ?This is why I'm not that broken up over Prop 8. ?I guarantee it will be struck down.?
BB, i agree with you -- it should be legislated first b/c the civil rights issue is so egregious. The "winning the hearts and minds" will take much longer. But on an individual level, I believe that is what it takes to convince a single person that gay marriage isn't awful.
There is actually a huge debate among the pro-gay marriage groups as to how to best approach this. I've just been reading a friend's thesis on this exact issue -- here's a short excerpt:
I found that the gay and lesbian organizations developed from two different ideological positions, assimilationist and liberationist, and that the two viewpoints gave rise to very different methods of achieving gay rights, particularly regarding same-sex marriage. Assimilationists seek to enact incremental change through the existing legal and political systems, while liberationists believe that only the acceptance of gay Americans, which would require sweeping social change, would result in expanded gay rights.
I'm turning over a new leaf with you soprano and I'm not going to get sucked down into these petty arguments based on twisted meanings. I was clear in what I said and I think most everyone else on here understands what I meant.
Have a pleasant evening. I'm off to bed. ?
caden, please don't do this. brookles and sibil had the exact reaction I did -- and they posted it first. it's not fair to single me out. especially when multiple people read it the same way, it can't just be Evil Soprano twisting your words.
have a pleasant evening.
I wish I had the answer to what would work. Obviously for many it is a religious reason they are against gay marriage and that makes it hard to argue with them. How do you get someone to change their mind when asking them to go against a very fundamental part of their being?
My DS and I have talked about this. Surprisingly he takes the anti-gay marriage view pretty well. He truly believes it will take time for people to become more understanding. He has faith in the younger generation becoming more accepting even though he never expects full acceptance by everyone. He looks at how far gay rights have come and he has hope.
So yes we can legislate it but it won't change how people feel. That is the sad part. What we are doing with legislation is just forcing them to live with it. I'm not saying that is a bad thing at all but it is not a true acceptance of gay marriage and gay rights.
What we are doing with legislation is just forcing them to live with it. I'm not saying that is a bad thing at all but it is not a true acceptance of gay marriage and gay rights.
Isn't this the same thing with the civil rights act? there are still people who don't accept blacks as their equals, but they are equals under the law. That's why it's a two-pronged approach: 1) give gays full rights under the law immediately 2) educate people and win the hearts and minds of as many as you can.
I agree with your son that it will take a while. By the next generation, it won't be a big deal at all. Btw, you seem like you have an awesome relationship with your son. Kudos for being such a great source of support for him. Being a teen is hard enough. Being a gay teen must be all the more challenging, but he seems really level-headed and wise -- that comes from having such a loving mom
Did the abolitionists have to personally know a slave in order to know that slavery was wrong? Did American soldiers in WWII have to personally know a Jew in order to realize that concentration camps were wrong?For that matter, does a soldier today have to personally know an Iraqi in order to support "operation Iraqi freedom"?
I think when it comes to matters of great importance, particularly those matters surrounding civil rights, those of us who are living without misfortune have a duty to rise above our own preconceptions and do what is right for those of us facing extreme adversity. We need to resist the tyranny of the majority even if we hardly know the minority that we affect. It simply isn't good enough to rest on our laurels and wait for the persecuted minority to extend an olive branch.
JMO.
Thanks! I am very lucky he is as well-adjusted and he has plenty of friends who accept him.
I do agree it has to be legislated but if legislation is going to cause more hatred because it is being forced on people - well I admit that scares me. I don't want riots like they did afer civil rights were forced. I don't think it will be that extreme but it still gives me a bit concern.
I agree that a huge portion of the prop 8 supporters probably just don't know gay people (well, my MIL does, but I'm hoping she's in the minority here).
And, this was actually the argument made today by gay sort-of-conservative blogger Andrew Sullivan.
http://andrewsullivan.theatlantic.com/the_daily_dish/2008/11/scrapping-the-c.html
I think it's a fair point, but it's not the only solution.
It's one thing to be out in San Francisco, but it's quite another to be out in cities and states where you can legally be fired for being gay or where hatred runs high and your physical safety would be at risk. Not to mention, it becomes much harder for gay people to prove their worth as parents in states where they aren't legally allowed to adopt. So, they can't reach out to everybody. It's got to be a two way street.
caden, sure it would be ideal if gays could not feel personally hurt and betrayed and seek out straights to be friends with in hopes of convincing them they're not evil because it might just work. ?My point was that's just a completely unrealistic thing. ?I could never ask that or have it as part of a master plan. ?It's just kind of ridiculous in practice. ?Should black people seek out the Klan to try to teach them they're just people, not n-rs? ?Sure, people might be less racist once they know people of another race, but that doesn't mean the solution is for them to seek to befriend the racists.
I think I agree with others that seeking to convert bigots isn't going to work. ?It has to be done with the courts, and eventually, in a few generations, the rest will follow. ?Same way it was with racial rights. ?And, yes, people who are opposed to rights for another group are bigots. ?You say you never felt that you were any better, but you did feel you deserved rights they didn't. ?How is that not "better?"
The point is that many, many people are not quick to reach out to those that they don't understand. There are many of us that have been "won over" by personal experience. Heck, I won my Mom over by basically taking the example of one of my gay friends that she adored and showing her how his inability to marry affected him. So it doesn't just have to be gay people that reach out. If everyone out there that knew someone against gay marriage worked to "expose" them to individuals that it affects, it could make a huge difference. It's effective to put a face to issues. Hoping that those against gay marriage are going to reach out to gay people is pretty unrealistic--but if every person for gay marriage worked to give a face to this issue and appeal to their friends and family who oppose it on a personal level, I think it would be extremely effective.
<a href="http://www.thenest.com/?utm_source=ticker&utm_medium=HTML&utm_campaign=tickers" title="Home D
It's tricky, because the main reason for being against gay marriage is based in religion. And let me tell you, nothing makes me more defensive than someone who doesn't share my faith using it to argue against me. That is sure to make one defensive as no matter the intent, it comes off as mocking. So, if you're not the same religion, don't use religious reasoning (unless your intent is to mock and not convince).
So then where do you go? I think stripping it away to the basics of 'what is true for all marriages in this country' approach.
BUT I've been pro-gay rights pretty much since I learned there were gay people, so I may not be the best authority on this issue.
My super-idealistic side would love to believe this would work, but every day on the interwebz we see idiots who parrot the "I'm not racist, I have black friends," or the "I don't think gays should marry, but I have gay friends so I'm not a bigot" line. I don't really believe that "exposure" works on people who are plain-and-simple close minded.
Just my thoughts at 11pm and after a glass of Gewurtzraminer.
I don't know Soprano. It might work for some, but I don't know if I ever mentioned this....but my cousin is gay and I love him and his partner. Knowing a couple does help to better understand, but with strong religious convictions it's still tough for me.
Sorry I'm just replying without reading the others, so I'm probably repeating things.
Basically the institution of marriage has got to be completely separated from religion. Getting married in a church does not make a marriage legal, you need an actual legal certificate.
I agree with those who say that this never should have been a ballot measure. It needs to be legislated from the top down. Many people listen to their pastors/priests on this issue and that's how they vote.
Big ditto on this. I wish we could drop the word marriage all together from government usage. Everybody gets a civil union certificate, which allows you to file joint taxes, inhereit each other's stuff and all the other legal benefits that come with 'marriage'. Done. If marriage is such a religiously and culturally charged word, then take it away from the government and leave it with everybody's own religion and culture to define.
In conversations with conservative friends, it's also been effective to point out that there ARE churches that will perform gay marriages. So it's all well and good to say that your church doesn't recognize them, but you really want to have the law start telling MY church what it can and can't do? Because if you start down that road, yours might be next.
My Goodness...another food blog. Featuring: Macarons from a old post with a photo taken by my mom for a break from my crappy food photos!
I see what caden is saying here. The question was asked, what arguments made you change your mind. It's what actually influences someone, not the way it SHOULD be.?
Sure, the onus really shouldn't be on gay people to convince others that they deserve the same rights. I totally agree with that. It's unfair and wrong. But, that's the way it is for a lot of people - it takes a personal experience to understand the issue from another point of view. And unfortunately, those tend to be people who aren't going to reach out to gay people in an effort to see their side.?
I think a lot of people here are thinking about what would convince them, not what would convince someone else. It's easy for me to think "well, this makes sense to me" but that may not make sense to someone else and thus there's no point in trying to use it to argue the point to them. ?
Edited. I posted something in the wrong thread and the Nest won't let me delete posts anymore.
THANK YOU! That's exactly right. If ads and arguments worked then Prop 8 wouldn't have passed. Yes it would be great if we lived in a world where a reasonable argument made everyone see the light. But we don't. It's not right, it's not the way it should be, but it's the way it is.
Interesting. This sort of reminds me of how it is when someone like myself might describe her experience with religion (ironic, huh?). I may feel very strongly about it and it makes a lot of sense to me, but that doesn't mean the other person is going to "get it".