'Marriage still wins when equally funded'
Since election day, the social conservatives who saw their desire to discriminate within the confines of marriage receive a major drubbing at four state's polls and in the embodiment of our equality-supporting President have been working the idea that this latest round was somehow unfair because their side took in less cash than the opposition. They say it as if those of us who support marriage equality got some sort of unfair handicap, cheat code, or gypsy bottle that blessed us with a pot of gold. They make it sound like the potentiality was unbalanced, with our side having some sort of bias working in our favor.
What they fail to realize (or at least admit) is that the funding component is itself a statement on where we are as a nation. The truth is that those of us on the side of equality have a larger donor base because equality is an exciting prospect that people are itching to support. We have more corporate backing because companies are increasingly realizing that peaceful nondiscrimination is better for business than is inequality. We are more in line with celebrity consensus because folks in the arts tend to actually know (and enjoy) LGBT people. Even with the other side's built-in network of churches and parachurch organizations, we are still out raising them because our side is the one of the uptick. Their fight comes with diminishing returns.
Would they do better if they were still able to out raise us? Perhaps, since money is still a powerful campaign tool. However, the reality in regard to bankrolling speaks to greater truths about this debate itself. Citizens—from lay to famous, poor to rich, freelance to CEO—are voting with their dollars. Peaceful civil equality is a winning bet.
comments powered by Disqus