To Those Ready to Jettison Gay Issues: What Precisely Would You Say?

[mondo joe]

When these issues come up what precisely do you suggest the dems say?

"Oopsy, we changed our minds and we don't think this is a civil rights issue after all."

or

"Gay? We never supported rights for gays. Whatchu talkin bout?"

Seriously. How do you suggest we change the position in a way that can be explained?

And how do you do so in such a way that doesn't CONFIRM democrats as a party of wishy washy flip floppers without conviction or principle?

[meow2u3]

1. Put it on the back burner

Emphasize the pressing, urgent economic and foreign policy issues.

[mondo joe]

2. Again, what specifically do you suggest be said?

When asked about gay issues what do you think our leaders should say?

"We're not thinking about that"?

When gay issues are on ballots what do you suggest our officials say?

"I have no position"?

[MsTryska]

5. "In reality.....

the affects on YOU Mr. Anti- Gay Agenda voter, gay marriage has very little affect on you. if anything, giving health benefits to gay individulas and their partners lowers the cost of health insurance for everyone. So do you, Mr. Anti-gay agenda voter, value your personal freedom more thna oyu value lower healthcare costs? Or do you prefer the government in your personal business, whilst charging you extra?"

[mondo joe]

6. But that's defending gays, not jettisoning them

What I'm asking is for those who say LET'S DROP GAY ISSUES what do they suggest we say?

[MsTryska]

8. Is there anyone actually sayuing let's drop gay issues?

or are they saying to put it on the back burner? Let's not make it our "flagship" issue let's focus on bread and butter.

which after a few years of republican rule, is what's gonna be most important for ALL of us anyway.

[mondo joe]

9. Maybe you weren't here last night, but YES

There were people suggesting dropping gays and gay issues.

No one was arguing it should be the flagship issue.

[MsTryska]

11. Yeah...I wasn't here last night.

when i left, basically a lot of people were upset because it seems people were blaming GLBT and pro-choice people for losing us the election.


I guess things progressed form that point.


Civil Rights issues are what Liberals are about. No Retreat, No Surrender, yet there's more than one way to skin a cat.


Notice the language i used in that last sentence of my original response. If you frame the issues as issues of Personal freedom, and anti Government Control of that freedom, it becomes much more palatable to the dimwits.


I mean these are the same people who would rather deny themselves healthcare than vote "a government controlled rationing of healthcare" all cuz dubya said that's what it was.

[IrateCitizen]

10. Yes, there are people saying just that.

This morning, I saw a thread by dolstein endorsing Clinton's advice to Kerry that he should endorse the gay marriage ban proposals on the state ballots. Kerry, to his credit, refused to do so.

[davepc]

13. we cant drop gay issues, I'm not going to write off all of those people

but we cant get our message out because we get CLOBBERED with being pro-gay abortionists.

We cant win with that albatross around our neck, and quite frankly I want to get out from under it.

We need to change the entire debate, not the terms of it.

[Sterling]

16. whats wrong with being a pro gay abortionist?

I am very pro gay. Not gay myself but I love living in a city where gay people are free to be who they are.

I also support people being able to get abortions, and birth control and AIDS education and research funding. Why the hell would I stop wanting these things and working to secure them?

[donco6]

4. There is no such thing.

When the majority of people believe "moral issues" are critical in their decision of leadership, it's not possible to put them on the back burner. We, sadly, don't get to make that choice. The people do. And they're not about to. So the question WILL come up, and there WILL need to be an answer. What will it be?

[geek tragedy]

3. "Move to Jesusland." eom

[Tyler Durden]

7. How about...no?

Civil Rights must continue to expand, or they will contract. Substitute "black" or "woman" or "jew" or "muslim" or "handicapped" or "mentally ill" or you name it. What's the next rights issue to jetison?

I've always been pragmatic about this, but giving up on a Civil Rights issue is just plain WRONG. How about getting the approximately 30 MILLION Gay/Lesbian people on our side solidly for a change (Log Cabinites are a good example). If the one in ten figure I've seen is accurate (and I've seen as high as 15%) then we have a ready-made voting bloc.

[Mike L]

12. Is there an "official" Party platform on the subject of

"gay rights"? I know that the Party does not include support for same-sex marriage in its platform.

Why not just make support for "civil unions" part of the party platform?

The next presidential candidate can "say" the same thing as Kerry did-- that he is for civil unions, but against gay marriage-- and possibly go further and support the constitutional amendment to ban gay marriage (for the purpose of diffusing the issue).

I personally support gay marriage.

[Mike L]

14. No replies?

[MrTriumph]

15. To state the obvious, we need hot button issues that cut our way

Kerry favored enforcing the laws against employers that hire illegal immigrants (debate #2). He did not make it big deal of it and I was surprised it was not picked up by the media.

There is a large number of conservatives that would side with us IF this issue is stronger than other hot button issues like gay marriage.