Comments on: Corvino: 5 strategies to win gay marriage

By: Larry Brinkin

Larry Brinkin — Mon, 24 Nov 2008 23:06:15 +0000

Excellent article, John. I agree with you wholheartedly. One thing I would add, though, is improving outreach to communities of color and religious groups. Many people of color think of LGBT issues as relating to gay white men. There was not enough done in the No on 8 campaign to be inclusive. Starting with the need for our community to be supportive of issues important to African Americans and other people of color, working in coalition to build friendships, trust, and visibility. Also, almost all the faces in TV and ad campaigns were white. I would have liked to see the prominent African American ministers supporting No on 8 (like Amos Brown and Cecil Williams in San Francisco) featured in the ad campaigns.

By: rich

rich — Tue, 18 Nov 2008 01:20:59 +0000

Quasi,
Good points most definitely. However that’s just it. By redefining and simplifying the terminology we use, we would obtain what we and everybody wants. Retention of the term marriage as it pertains to the joining in holy matrimony. Civil Union also defined as a legally, governmentally recognized union of two people.

By: Quasi

Quasi — Mon, 17 Nov 2008 05:03:24 +0000

I always thought “marriage” was a secular contract approved by the state..

I thought “holy matrimony” was the “blessed religious” version of a marriage ceremony performed by a religious cleric/minitster/priest/whomever.

I 5thought “civil union” was a version of marriage applied to those whom the state did not necessarily want to grant full marriage rights, and thus made the decided class of personages as “second class citizens”.

But I am not a lawyer, so who really knows what the real legal definitions are?

I suppose it varies state to state, government to government, and country to country. Do you think it creates somthing that is legally semantical or legally real?

By: Rich Cooke

Rich Cooke — Mon, 17 Nov 2008 04:33:02 +0000

Um Bruce .. in case you weren’t watching, they did.

By: Rich Cooke

Rich Cooke — Mon, 17 Nov 2008 04:31:46 +0000

Hey John,
I would advocate a redefinition of marriage: “A religious sacrament.”

I would advocate striking the term “marriage” from governmental/public policy terminology. All couples (gay & straight) should be granted civil unions which would have the rights, privileges and responsibilities of what are currently referred to as government sanctified marriages.

We could undercut their arguments about “marriage” being redefined. It would put all relationships on equal footing in the eyes of the government. It would give the churches an opportunity to make the decision (as is their right) whom they wish to marry.

By: Paul Kowal

Paul Kowal — Sun, 16 Nov 2008 19:37:00 +0000

I think it’s time we tried a new approach: educate people on the difference between civil and religious marriage. The US is one of the few countries that lumps the two together, and it has hurt us by making religion our enemy, instead of making religious arguments irrelevant. People have to learn that the civil benefits of marriage are different from the religious benefits, and that it’s good for society to reward civil unions by giving them benefits.

By: Isaiah

Isaiah — Sat, 15 Nov 2008 17:20:28 +0000

We do have to stand up for our rights this is true. We also however need to be careful not to fuel the hate of those against us if so we are just like them. We have to focus on love and equal rights for all. Dr. King stated that “injustice anywere is a threat to justice everywhere”. I am hurting brothers and sisters and I know you are too but lets not pass on this hurt lets turn it into forgiveness and love. Continue to protest, write, tell your store even go to court but lets not be like the ones that hurt us. With much love!

By: Bruce

Bruce — Sat, 15 Nov 2008 15:00:27 +0000

your suggestions are crap!
You HAD gay marriage… and lost it, thru apathy, laziness and arrogance!
Articles such as this should have happened BEFORE the elelction!

By: Steve

Steve — Sat, 15 Nov 2008 14:04:29 +0000

1) I think we need to do a better job of showing gay families. Especially gay children. Children are affected when their parents can’t get married. There are increased costs to accomplish things that a simple marriage certificate can give. There are complications with health insurance, taxes are higher, medical decisions for children becomes complicated, and security is a crapshoot in the unfortunate event of a split up. All these things mean that the children in gay headed families do not have the same benefits and security as children in straight families. People need to know that if this is for the protection of children, then we need to allow gay people to marry.
2) We need to frame this like abortion. We will never get some people to like or even approve of gay marriage. But there is this mindset that if you don’t like it, you automatically should try to stop it. A lot of people don’t like abortion and they never will, I am one of them. But I would never try to stop someone from getting one. Not because I approve, but because its none of my business.

I think we can get the votes of people who don’t necessarily approve of gay marriage if they see it as an issue of privacy and benefit to children.

By: Pete

Pete — Sat, 15 Nov 2008 13:42:20 +0000

For strategy, how about matching some of our opponent’s techniques? For example, in San Francisco, predominantly Chinese districts voted 65% in favor of Prop 8 in part because of full page ads in Chinese language publications. Our side didn’t match that. Hispanics are 35% of the population, it’s crucial that we reach them with Spanish language radio spots. We didn’t do that. We had buy in from the NAACP and other African American organizations, so why weren’t they featured in our television ads?

Instead of one upping religious arguments with Bible quotes, stick to the common ground of America’s equality under the law that unites everyone. As long as civil rights are subject to a popularity contest, you never win votes with negative messages.

One of my favorite YouTube spots:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UtUlJel4RR8