I still don't see how this relates to [info]richardthinks original question about "well-meaning but uncertain people" have to fear from allowing same-sex marriage.
Fair enough. Let me try answering it this way: polls suggest that the nation's opinion on same-sex marriage rights breaks down into more or less equal thirds -- the people who love the idea, the people who hate the idea, and the people who don't have a problem with gay couples getting the social benefits desired so long as it's not called "marriage." I don't know what all their reasons might be for wanting the distinction. I highly doubt, however, that the people in the last group consider themselves naive or hateful, if for no other reason than they do, in fact, support the practice of gay rights.
Unfortunately, that's not the attitude taken by same-sex marriage activists, who tend to break out disparaging talk about "separate, but equal" -- which immediately links that well-intentioned middle third to vile racism we've worked 50 years to eradicate, and promptly loses their support. Even if we completely gloss over the details what "equal" means in this comparison, as a practical matter the only thing that's happened is that same-sex marriage advocates have maligned the people most likely to be swayed by their arguments. So far, this approach has failed every time in the 60% of states it's been tried (counting the current state of the do-over in Arizona between '06 and '08). If you go in knowing that there's not enough support to win an "all or nothing" fight but press for it anyway, should it really be a surprise when you get nothing?
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png)
momijizukamori
no subject
Date: 2008-11-14 06:48 pm (UTC)Fair enough. Let me try answering it this way: polls suggest that the nation's opinion on same-sex marriage rights breaks down into more or less equal thirds -- the people who love the idea, the people who hate the idea, and the people who don't have a problem with gay couples getting the social benefits desired so long as it's not called "marriage." I don't know what all their reasons might be for wanting the distinction. I highly doubt, however, that the people in the last group consider themselves naive or hateful, if for no other reason than they do, in fact, support the practice of gay rights.
Unfortunately, that's not the attitude taken by same-sex marriage activists, who tend to break out disparaging talk about "separate, but equal" -- which immediately links that well-intentioned middle third to vile racism we've worked 50 years to eradicate, and promptly loses their support. Even if we completely gloss over the details what "equal" means in this comparison, as a practical matter the only thing that's happened is that same-sex marriage advocates have maligned the people most likely to be swayed by their arguments. So far, this approach has failed every time in the 60% of states it's been tried (counting the current state of the do-over in Arizona between '06 and '08). If you go in knowing that there's not enough support to win an "all or nothing" fight but press for it anyway, should it really be a surprise when you get nothing?