My Congratulation Letter To Those Against Gay Marriage
Seth Godin writes about business and marketing, so his newest blog post isn't about Prop. 8 at all. But maybe there's some deep wisdom in marketing.
I read Godin's post Two Ways To Deal With 'No' this morning and like most of what Seth writes it's quick, easy to read and thought provoking. He's talking about dealing with rejection in business, like being turned down for a job or contract. He writes...
You could be more gracious than if you'd won the work. You could send a thank you note for the time invested, you could sing the praises of the vendor chosen in your stead and you could congratulate the buyer, "based on the criteria you set out, it's clear that you made exactly the right choice for your organization right now." That doesn't mean the criteria were right, it just means that you're not attacking the person for being an impulsive lunatic.
Here's how I think this could apply to gay marriage advocates....although I want to make it clear that this is solely my take on applying this concept, not Mr. Godin's.
Since Election Day the response of gay marriage advocates so far has largely been to attack Prop. 8 advocates as impulsive lunatics who were full of hate and stupid, But is that really the criteria that people who voted Yes on 8 voted on? I don't think so.
People who voted against marriage equality didn't think "What's the stupidest most hateful thing I can vote for today?" Some of their criteria is wrong in my opinion but that's not useful to point out. It's better to look for agreement.
So is there any common ground? My last piece on Rick Warren here at The Huffington Post asked people to consider what they had in common with Pastor Rick Warren. Some who commented were adamant there was essentially nothing they had in common. I think that's a limiting belief that blocks understanding, dialog and the road to a real solution.
One sign of extremism is the shrill denial that ANY common ground exists between us and them. We are good and right and THEY are just evil and stupid. We've seen this from the Bush administration a lot in the past eight years and unfortunately, a lot of gay marriage advocates seem to adopted the same basic tactic.
But if we try and adopt the mindset that Godin suggests for dealing with rejection in business, I think there's a major area of common ground between the pro and anti Prop. 8 forces. I think the politics of division make it impossible to see just how close the camps really are on a key issue but by trying to say "based on the criteria you set out, it's clear that you made exactly the right choice" to the people who voted Yes on 8, the commonality emerges..
Here's my attempt at a congratulation letter to the Yes On 8 forces...
Dear Yes On 8 voters,
The members of the gay and lesbian community and their friends and family would like to congratulate on your victory. It may seem an odd gesture but we think the amount of money and time you put into the campaign shows that you actually agree with us on what is really the central issue.We agree with you that marriage in important.
You made this case to the voters. You said that marriage is something important that must be protected. You're right.
If you've seen angry protests in the past few weeks, please understand that they happened because we believe marriage needs to protected. Imagine the pain and anguish you might feel if your right to marry the person you loved were suddenly taken away. That's what a lot of us felt happened on election day.
We want to preserve marriage - your marriages and our marriages, too. We don't want to change your religious beliefs or make your church perform a ceremony that's against its traditions. Many gay people belong to churches that embrace us and those churches should be free to perform services...just as other churches should be free to follow their own views and not perform services if that's what they want.
Marriage has so many contractions. On one hand, it's a very conservative institution that helps maintain order with things like property inheritance. On the other, it's one of the craziest leaps of faith that anyone can make personally. Knowing the divorce statistics, knowing that people change over time and knowing that the incredible and powerful feeling of being in love can change radically with time - we still choose to stand up and say that we are ready to risk pain and heartache by stepping into the important and life changing event called marriage. We want the freedom to take that risk.
Because...we love.
It may not be something that makes sense to you but why someone loves another person often doesn't make sense. We often don't even understand it ourselves. But, just like you, we do love.
If you know the value and importance of marriage and family in your own life then you can understand the value we place on those things, too. And that's why we feel so strongly that we have to continue this fight for marriage - because it matters to us just as much as you've shown that it matters to you.
So congratulations for standing up for marriage. We understand that change can be fast sometimes and that his new idea of love and marriage may be new to you - but so is the idea of an African-American President who reaches out to those with whom he disagrees.
We invite you to join us in the future as we try struggle for the rights and risks of marriage. This vote showed that marriage matters. Now it's the time to make it matter for everyone.
Follow Lee Stranahan on Twitter: www.twitter.com/Stranahan
Loading comments…
Want to reply to a comment? Hint: Click "Reply" at the bottom of the comment; after being approved your comment will appear directly underneath the comment you replied to
As a Christian who doesn't go to church because their sermons are always about passing judgement on others and never about living in tolerance, I can't in good conscience be a part of a group that practices we are better than them. Thankfully I went to sunday school where I learned about Jesus and how he lived his life, and since childhood I have lived do unto others as you would have them do unto you. This mantra for living has ensured I've lived a life of tolerance, of loving my fellow citizen, as helping others rather than hurting them. And as a member of a family of churchgoers who espouse gays are bad and are pedophiles, I have been ostracized from them because I refuse to go to church every sunday because of the hateful rhetoric, and I challenged their hateful beliefs, but I couldn't sit quietly and condone their bigotry. Yes its lonely to have to spend Christmases with only my dog because of my stand, but having God in my life is the price you pay. This is what a good Christian looks like!
Why is it that folks who are gay want to define themselves as "gay" rather than using some other term?
People who are not gay do not really define themselves as "straight" 100% of the time...rea
I am a pro-prop 8 person and would agree the tone of such a letter is better than the "you are a bigot" rhetoric (especially when I have spent the majority of my life trying to make changes to help the most defenseless amoung us). The bottomline is no mater what you say, there are many of us who see gay marriage as legitimizing a institution and further creating a class of people based on a chosen sexual behavior practice that we consider is wrong. We have the right to respectfully, legally, and orderly protest our view, just as the "gay mariage" community does. It means we disagree, not that I am bigot or that "gay" people are condemd. I will never be for gay marriage, but I will always be for your right to respectfully fight for the right (in a legal way). Protesting folks on their way to church, however, is not a good tactic.
Well said, firstfreeze, well said:)
Then....ou
If you doubt why marriage is needed, find a DVD or go to a screening of the film "Freeheld.
As if the people mainly behind Prop 8 (m0rm0n and cath0lic churches) would give a rip if we sent them such a letter.
I think this is a great post.
"We know through painful experience that freedom is never voluntarily given by the oppressor; it must be demanded by the oppressed.
--MLK
Any law that uplifts human personality is just. Any law that degrades human personality is unjust. All segregation statutes are unjust because segregation distort the soul and damages the personality. It gives the segregator a false sense of superiority and the segregated a false sense of inferiority. Segregation, to use the terminology of the Jewish philosopher Martin Buber, substitutes an "I-it" relationship for an "I-thou" relationship and ends up relegating persons to the status of things. Hence segregation is not only politically, economically and sociologically unsound, it is morally wrong and awful. Paul Tillich said that sin is separation. Is not segregation an existential expression 'of man's tragic separation, his awful estrangement, his terrible sinfulness? Thus it is that I can urge men to obey the 1954 decision of the Supreme Court, for it is morally right; and I can urge them to disobey segregation ordinances, for they are morally wrong.
--MLK
Segregation of the right to marry (civil unions versus marriage) is morally wrong, period.
Why are some folks so against the love and commitment of other folks?
Shame on CA. Kudos to CT and MA.
Cheers, Joe Mustich, Justice of the Peace,
Washington CT 06793 USA
http://www
Why is it that virtually NO ONE in the MSM and barely anyone in blog-land speaks about the SUFFERING that occurs when those 1,138 rights & protections are NOT in place? It's as if years and years and years of harm and suffering are not important, so we can crawl to the finish line over the next 30 years.
My congratulation letter would hit them more in the pocketbook (something which tends to trump morality and common decency):
Congratulations on your "win". Since you have bought our government, I think you should fund it. You may have "protected" marriage, but it will cost you (and America). Gays have officially seceded from the union (and IRS) until the union recognized ous families. So pay our taxes. We stopped.
[equality tax protest]
It's time for a California Tea (Chai, preferably) Party!
Probably because there aren't 1,138 rights that married couples -- or any other pairings or individual citizens -- get in ANY context.
And if "years and years of harm and suffering" are so important, why doesn't the No on 8 campaign come under conviction for not talking about the necessity of these so-called 1100> rights, instead of spending so much time attacking Mormons and calling everybody bigots and homophobes.
Is that question rhetorical, carsntrucks?
I can't imagine you really need it answered..
Will you stop using publically funded services? Can you set up seperate HIV/AIDS hospices so that everyone else do not have to pay for them? Can I have a list of businesses to avoid because you do not want my money? I promise to pass it along so that only people who agree with you will patronize your businesses.
Here's another clear example of someone constructing their "gay rights" argument in opposition to the MSM media narrative of extremist, fundamentalist views. Can someone say Strawman?
Lovely. But wrong. And phony. And unctuous. Pro Prop 8 voters are not stupid and would see right through it. What you propose is precisely why Prop 8 passed. It does not address the lies of the Pro ads. Also, it ignores the fact that Pro voters have religious beliefs in opposition to gay marriage. You cannot schmooze people into changing their deeply and sincerely-held convictions. But they will change their views over time through education (the true job of the Anti-8 campaign, which went virtually unaddressed) and exposure to real-life situations, etc.
If you want to persuade Pro Prop 8 voters to change their minds, stick to the FACTS. Stop whining and appealing on an emotional level as the Anti-Prop 8 ads and testimonials did. Rebut the lies of the pro Prop 8 campaign .. in a civil and respectful manner, of course, but not with the sarcastic and oily slather you suggest.
I couldn't agree with you more. Especially with the "phony" and "unctuous" part. Spot-on.
There's nothing phony about what I wrote, at all. It may be wrong in your opinion, but it's 100% sincere.
He's taking the lesson BO taught the country about looking at what you have in common with your opposition in the wrong context. You look for areas of commonality at the tail END of the process--after the fight has been fought. The end of the process gives you the luxury of time to talk civilly and calmly and look for common ground. BO has that luxury as the post civil rights president on the issues of civil rights movement.
The problem is that gays were really not part of the 60s civil rights movement --they are at a new beginning of their fight. That is why you will see more direct fighting, more political theater, more shock --all the methods typically used at the beginning of a movement. There will be time at the final arc in the movement to use BOs recommended methods of looking for commonality to conclude the final phase of the movement.
Lee,
I saw Warren on television explaining the reason he came to care about AIDS was because his wife pointed out to him that children were dying of it. It did not matter to him that millions of adults were dying of it, he could have cared less. In his own words "it wasn't even a blip on my radar". That's abominable coming from someone who professes to be 'pro-life' and calls himself a Christian.
I just got back from seeing the movie "Milk" and realized after 30 years, nothing has changed for gay people in this country. Rick Warren is just Anita Bryant in reverse drag.
Milk did not become the first openly elected gay man in this country or beat back Prop 6 a law that meant to outlaw gay teachers, because he wrote ass-kissing 'please don't be mean to me' letters to Anita Bryant and her followers. He organized gay people, got them to come out of the closet and organized their families and friends to fight bigotry.
Gay people and those that love them should not back down or craft sweet letters begging for acceptance, they should take to the streets, boycott any company that supports religious right organizations, join up with women's rights groups, run for office and fight for their rights just as black people did in the 60's.
If what you took my letter was 'please don't be mean to me', I'm not sure what to say. It wasn't begging, either. And if you say nothing has changed in 30 years - nothing? - I just can't agree. Anyone can name a hundred things different, from widespread acceptance of gay people in nearly every walk of life, to gay marriage in two states, to sodomy laws being overturned.
I think your feelings are blinding you to those facts. Civility isn't weakness. Anger isn't strength.
I couldn't agree more with what you wrote. It's been sad watching and listening lately to the GLBT community lash out at those who support their equal rights on ALL matters, and while I understand their pain, they aren't helping their cause.
Instead of focusing on Pastor Warren's 2 minutes, things like this letter you propose are a great way to open a dialogue. To discredit some of the myths and stereotypes surround the GLBT community.
With the hate being tossed out from both sides right now, it's hard to distinguish between the two. If a person claims that anyone who stands near Pastor Warren is a bigot, they are guilty of the same kind of thinking Bush has given us for 8 years.
True progress comes slowly, it comes painfully, it takes great courage and dignity. And yes, the victims always have to be the bigger people. It's been that way with all civil rights movements. It isn't fair, but it is reality.
I am tired of being called a bigot and worse when I work to overturn Prop 8, just because I think dialoguing with people like Pastor Warren is a sign of progress. The attitude that no one else other than GLTBs are impacted by things the fundies do is quite wrong. Women are impacted, as they are target number one. We all have a stake in this.
We all need to work together to keep religion out of the law.
Anger is strength and can be constructive. Just depends on how you use it. This Warren fiasco has certain angered this particualr 46 yo gay man. That doesn't mean I'm going to burn down a building or anything. But it does mean I'm not going to shut up again, I'm not going to back down anymore, and I'm not going to be punked by bigots. Finally, Obama has shown once again that gay folks cannot depend on politicians. We must fight for ourselves. Politician
What about self-respect? How can so many gays and lesbians submit to and fund a government that systematically works overtime to deny us basic, fundamental family rights? Don't we realize we deserve these rights? Not in 20 years but now?
In what other world would 2 people go into a supermarket and purchase citizenship, yet one leaves with MUCH LESS than the other? Who plays that noise?
The stories of suffering are horrific and heart-breaking, and this is needless suffering.
Perhaps only those TRULY affected by Marriage Equality should speak, and others politely Shut The Face Up.
Please stop using black people as a point of comparison
Nope won't stop doing it.
It has nothing to do with hiding who you are. Please stop being so ignorant. It's not about saying "blacks got their rights and so should gays naa nana na na". How ridiculous!
It's saying EVERYONE should have equal protection under the 14th amendement of the law. Separate but equal not being equal is the point of law is that is going to be used to dight this battle. It doesn't matter if it were blacks or purple people or women or anyone else that used this point of law to win their rights in the past--it just so happenes that blacks have the most famous case about this point of law -- "Brown vs Board of Rducation". Since most law is determined on PRECENDENT, that case is going to be the central point of argument in gays being treated equal as well. Get use to it and get over it.
WOW----you just unveiled how much you really think gays don't deserve rights.
you said, "it's like you are saying blacks don't deserve rights and since they have them then everybody should get more because blacks are not deserving.
Oh really? So let me get your logic straight here.
A. Gays don't deserve rights
B. Gays rights are being compared to blacks rights (which they are not--its the point of law that's being compared--the point of law of separate but equal not being equal but I don't expect you to be able to handle more than one variable in brain at one time)
C. Therefore, blacks rights are being said to be not deserving.
You really are quite ignorant.
"Please stop using black people as a point of comparison
Not completely true. It doesn't happen anymore but when I was a kid black people tried various tricks to change their skin color and hair and to "pass" as white.
"it's like you are saying blacks don't deserve rights and since they have them then everybody should get more because blacks are not deserving.
Wow, what an illogical stretch. The analogy with black rights makes perfect sense to me. Its not a swipe at black people at all, but support of them. Saying "black people used to be discriminated against including who they could marry and all but the most backward of us now realize how stupid that was, gays are at the same stage now that blacks were 60 years ago" The fact that you view equating gay rights with black rights as meaning blacks are not deserving just reflects your homophobia.
No, Charmed, what's being said is that black people DO deserve rights, despite the fact that this country denied AAs those rights for centuries. And black people deserve rights because, in the eyes of the law and constitution, they are no different from anyone else. Gay people are simply saying that we are human beings too, and as such we deserve the same rights as citizens as anyone else.
It's true that being gay is not the same as being black (or hispanic, or whatever). You are also true in that gays can "hide" if they wish to but what a mean, cynical approach to take. Also, no black kid had to ever worry about being disowned by their parents for being black, so if you are insistent on winning the battle of who has it rougher, I suppose I don't mind if you win because I don't really wish to win that battle...I JUST WANT MY EQUAL RIGHTS
The outrage that gays feel over Prop 8 and the non-stop whining on the part of those who voted for it proceed from the same source, religion. When one group of people believe so strongly that a certain course of behavior is frowned upon by God, they will react accordingly and either explain their actions by religious arguments or disguise them as some sort of sociological tract (the "5000-year old tradition"). Since neither of these arguments are rational or logical, their opponents, who are trying to be, become frustrated and descend into invective and insult. The truth is, you simply cannot come up with a sensible and rational defense of Prop 8 without dragging religion into it.
Oh, and by the way, 5000 years ago, men had multiple wives and were allowed to consort with concubines and slaves, though women were not. Women, in fact, in most Western cultures at the time, were kept locked away in purdah and not afforded many rights at all.
I can certainly understand the anger. I am a parent of a gay man and very involved in this issue. But I have know other people who don't realize they know gay people and just have not made the jump to look at the issue from the view of civil rights.
My father-in-law is 80 and a Catholic convert and just never thought of the issue beyond religion even though he is very intelligent. When I made that argument, he changed his mind completely.
Many people who voted for Prop 8 are not so involved with religion, but have never given the issue a lot of thought. Mr. Stanahan relates the issue to everyone and makes it understandable to most everyone, unless they are fanatics.
I understand this attitude is very hard for gay's and lesbians to have because they are directly involved and feel the rejection, but ultimately these arguments will will win the day. It is too bad that the movie "Milk" didn't come out before the election. It would have made the difference.
They are probably less susceptible to emotional arguments when the people fighting for them have all the legal benefits they're asking for with marriage.
And using Biblical heterosexual relationships -- even polygamous ones -- doesn't make the case of gay marriage.
The only thing in life that I know for sure is Religion is a choice you can make...The day you turn 18.
Lee, just like a lot of other people in this country you don't get it either. The fight here is not just about gay marriage, it's about equality. This countries experiment with separate but equal was a complete failure which resulted in dramatic demonstrations and in some cases many deaths at the hands of the government. Can you explain exactly how you can compromise when equality is at stake. Warren and people like him have said some of the most hateful things about gay people (remember we caused 9/11) and now you ask us to compromise with them and be magnanimous. Rosa Parks got tired of waiting and compromising said no to her oppressors and sat in the front of the bus and it is our time to say no to our oppressors which now seem to include our first black president. Remember DADT was a compromise and we all know how that has worked out for gay people. No matter how many ways you say we should compromise it will never convince us. Unlike Bush we remember history and how we have been treated by people like Warren.
I don't think either the separate but equal or Rosa Parks analogies apply here. Refusing to have a margarita at El Coyote isn't the Birmingham Bus Boycott. Those analogies don't work because they diminish the struggles of the Civil Rights Movement.
And I never asked anyone to compromise. There's nothing in my presentation that says compromise. Suggesting that there's a smarter way to win equality isn't suggesting compromise.
Lee--you're way off here and it's terribly disappointing. "Separate but equal is not equal" IS the issue. It is the legal point of law that is going to be debated across the country in the next few years and I can't believe that someone who appears to be as tied into the pulse of the political culture could miss that.
On the upcoming anniversary of Brown vs Board of Education, you will see gay leaders banging the drum on this and they are going to be dead on point.
White-water fountain = marriage (only btwn man and woman)
black-only water fountain = civil union
And for you to say the analogy diminishes the civil rights movement is horrible. It show that you don't understand that gays are being denied civil rights themselves.
Love I got and that has been the success for those not embedded in their fear. Great post..
You're right, "separate but equal" does not apply to gay people since we haven't achieved even that yet. As for the way we protest, our money and where we use or don't use it can go a long way in achieving our goals. The only diminishing of the struggles of the Civil Rights Movement going on here is from people like you willing to wait for equal rights. I believe we have waited long enough and giving legitimacy to people who would rather see us dead is not a path to those rights.
One person who disagrees with you..
Coretta Scott King:
"Homophobia is like racism and anti-Semitism and other forms of bigotry in that it seeks to dehumanize a large group of people, to deny their humanity, their dignity and personhood," King stated. "This sets the stage for further repression and violence that spread all too easily to victimize the next minority group." - Chicago Defender, April 1, 1998, front page.
"For many years now, I have been an outspoken supporter of civil and human rights for gay and lesbian people," King said at the 25th Lambda Legal Defense and Education Fund.... "Gays and lesbians stood up for civil rights in Montgomery, Selma, in Albany, Ga. and St. Augustine, Fla., and many other campaigns of the Civil Rights Movement," she said. "Many of these courageous men and women were fighting for my freedom at a time when they could find few voices for their own, and I salute their contributi
"For too long, our nation has tolerated the insidious form of discrimination against this group of Americans, who have worked as hard as any other group, paid their taxes like everyone else, and yet have been denied EQUAL PROTECTION UNDER THE LAW... I believe that freedom and justice cannot be parceled out in pieces to suit political convenience. My husband said, "Injustice anywhere is a threat to justice everywhere
You must be logged in to comment. Log in or connect with
