« Go back a post || Return to G-A-Y homepage || Haul tail to next post »
02/10/2011
This 'right to live' is not yours to grant, NOM
Of all the lines (give or take an "n") that we've heard out of Rhode Island, the highlighted one from the following NOM-RI flyer might just annoy us the most:
Because I don't know about you, but I don't remember asking whether or not NOM-RI supports might right to live as I am. I don't remember getting in a time machine and regressing back to a day when such was open to debate. I don't remembering expressing any concern over whether or not Chris Plante, Maggie Gallagher, or any of the rest hold personal support in their hearts for me and mine (Especially since Maggie is on record calling my "behavior" "unfortunate"; Plante on record calling my potential parenting "tragic"). In short: I don't remember forfeiting my equal worth to the whims of a well-financed special interest!
Now, clearly this is A poll-tested line that NOM-RI thinks shows their "tolerance" for same-sex couples. Heck, NOM staffers fully admit as much in the "marriage talking points" section of their national site:
THE MOST EFFECTIVE SINGLE SENTENCE:
Extensive and repeated polling agrees that the single most effective message is:
"Gays and Lesbians have a right to live as they choose,
they don’t have the right to redefine marriage for all of us."
This allows people to express support for tolerance while opposing gay marriage. Some modify it to “People have a right to live as they choose, they don’t have the right to redefine marriage for all of us.” [SOURCE]
But while the line may have polled well in the past, it would seem to give those of us on the side of equality a key "in" to move our own poll numbers. A chance to show how fully these NOM folks cultivate an "us" vs. "them" mentality -- a mentality that puts religious, socially conservative LGBT rights opponents in a self-appointed drivers' seat, with all of the rest us merely/aggressively drug along for whatever Sunday drive our guardians feel like taking. If we react intelligently, we can very easily flip this, a line that so egregiously puts NOM in an undeserved place of intercession and mediation, and turn it into a liability rather than a boon.
Your thoughts
comments powered by Disqus
