Your point would make since except for the fact that straight couple don’t solely raise straight children.

So no, you won’t out-breed us. You actually will be breeding us. Thanks for the help.

There is a difference between making special rights for homosexuals, and being opposed to equal rights for homosexual. And homosexuals have long been able to marry, they just have had to follow the common rules for marriage: marry a person of the opposite sex. Such an arrangement gives the benefits of lower health insurance, lower life insurance that would be provided by an heterosexual marriage.

I know this may astonish you, Michael, but conservative homophobes are far more likely to be amused than “angered” or “embarrassed” when you call them homophobes, since in their minds the very concept of “homophobia” is ridiculous.

On the other hand, non-homophobic conservatives possibly WILL get angry if you think it’s appropriate to call them homophobes simply because they think same-sex couples should have “civil unions” rather than “marriage,” or because they think that Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell should remain in place, or because in some other way they disagree with the policy positions of gay orgs like HRC and GLAAD. And they’re right to get angry, because in some cases they’ve gone to a certain amount of trouble and taken grief from other conservatives for taking a gay-friendly stance, only to be told that they’re “homophobic” at heart because they took a political position that left-wing gays don’t like.

If you REALLY want to anger or embarrass someone with the charge of “Homophobe!”, say it to a self-professed liberal.

I’ll bet we’ll outbreed you.

Winning an argument is about talking to people and telling them you are right, then telling them why you are right. If you have better ideas and are right, civil conflict is not something to be afraid of. The purpose is to changing their minds. Realize, though, that your opposition has rational arguments too. Until you can deal with those rational arguments in a rational way (not calling people homophobes or religous nuts or google-mapping their houses) you cannot win. You need 50% +1 of the voters to agree with you, or a majority of the state house. Strong arm tactics, hate mongering, ignorance of rational arguments and anti-religous bigotry will not bring people to you. It will only push them away and make your goals much harder to accomplish.

All I’m saying is that if “the movement” were to embrace Cheney and his daughter and uphold their example, then it would have a very powerful argument against conservatives that are fearful. And a potential ally that is a formidible and tough bastard.

Right now the biggest barrier to same-sex marriage rights is homosexuals that behave very badly. Until “the movement” can develop good leadership which is capable of controling the radicals, the fear mongering and hate on both sides will continue.

I mean what is pro-family legislation anyway?

If I said you supported pro-family food-stamp-aid legislation then you are pro food-aid for families. But if I said you supported pro-Iraq legislation, that doesn’t mean you are pro-Iraq. That is because there are multiple sides that claim to be pro-Iraq that have different views.

This is similar to the argument by the christian right that they were “preserving marriage.” What marriage were they preserving?

They equate anti-gay marriage with pro-marriage. Do you understand how subjectiveness cannot be a factor in that statement?

If you can find someone who is against family then I would be surprised. That is why it is not a suitable comparison. No one is against families in the entirety of the word. They simply have different definitions and actions for them.

Some people are against gay families. Some people are against single parent families.

If labeling our opposition what they really are is delaying the advancement of gay rights, then it is the oppositions fault, not ours. We are not going to appease the other side simply because we want to trick them into supporting us.

If you are a homophobe, I’m going to call you a homophobe. If you are embarrassed or angered by that fact then maybe you should stop being homophobic.

I never intentionally embarrass anyone. My goal is not to humiliate the opposition. I mean for gods sake I want to change their mind. But I’m not willing to dilute my message because they suffer from an Allegory of the Cave complex.

The point of the Gay rights movement isn’t necessarily to change peoples minds about gay people. We know that there will always be anti-gay people out there. The point of the Gay rights movement is the advancement of gay rights. And if that means going around the mentally crippled anti-gay rights fools, then we will.

If we can’t convert you, we will defeat you. End of story.

Replace the word “gay” in the above sentence with the word “family” and you have the conservative Ad hominem.

I am in favor of gay marriage. I voted as such on our state’s ballot inniative in 2004 (which failed badly here in liberal Wisconsin). Gay marriage will pass eventually. It is a matter of time, in my opinion.

There are some significant issues that are delaying the acceptance of gay marriage in this country, though. First, labeling your opposition as evil, intollerant and homophobic. Second, attacking the personal religious beliefs of your opposition. Third, using straw men and ad homimum attacks that lack substance (emotion killing logic). Fourth, attempting to out opponents, personally embarassing them and their families. Simply put, the raw anger and disrespect for the opposition to these iniatives leads people to simply say “see, homosexuals are just too radical”.

The irony, of course, is that if supporters of same sex marriage were to use the example of Cheney and his daughter as a model for good beahvior, this might calm the fears of many in the middle and on the right. But, it’s not as fun as using Google Maps to target your opposition or marching in a parade with butless leather chaps and a leash, because that will bring them right around to your side.

It is 100% relevant and completely true. If you support anti-gay legislation then you are, in fact, anti-gay.

It’s very similar to supporting Jim Crow laws in the mid 20th century. You may not be an openly racist person, but supporting racist laws implies your racism.

Remember, actions speak louder then words. And prop 8 was screaming at us.