So, say you know someone who opposes gay marriage

[CreekDog]

but supports Civil Unions. whether you consider them bigots or not, the question is, what do you do next?

to make it more interesting, let's add the stipulation that they are your friend and you care about them. (let us also assume that you have just found out their position on gay marriage)

now what?

[dem629]

1. Now what....what? What are you trying to accomplish?

[CreekDog]

3. i'm asking what folks will say to each other

if anything.

i have a few friends that voted for Prop. 8 and I have talked to them about it. a couple said they perhaps should have voted the other way. i'm going to still work on them.

i guess what i'm trying to accomplish is the overturning of Prop. 8.

[dem629]

7. Are they "working on" you too?

If not, I would value the friendship over a political crusade, but that's just me. And you asked. ;)

[CreekDog]

11. about the same

as i recall, they brought up the subject but weren't trying to change my mind, just asking how i voted. we talked about why we voted the way we did.

[patrice]

2. If they're churchy types, they should belong to a church that does not marry LGBTs

But they should NOT be active against churches who DO marry LGBTs, because, when it's activity outside of their own church, it's politics.

[patrice]

6. P.S. If they're not church types, what's the point of them having an opinion on this at all? nt

[HelenWheels]

4. I think all "marriages" should start out a gov't civil unions

and then if it is the couples choice to have a church bless them and make it a marriage that's okay by me. (The UU's would be more than happy to marry gay and lesbian couples.)

It would require changes in the statutes wording but they could do that fairly easily with a blanket law of some type.

[xchrom]

5. nothing -- if you are my friend -- you are my friend.

i don't proselytize to friends --

what i can tell you is that there are probably many reasons why this person and me are friends -- and there are NO conservatives in my life.

[CreekDog]

9. i have lots of conservative friends

i talk politics with them sometimes, but not often. sometimes we argue, usually we don't.

i can't change anybody's mind. the most i can do is tell them something that might spur them to think of something in a different way.

that said, politics is something i mainly talk with liberal friends that are interested in politics.

[xchrom]

16. talking politics with liberals is always more interesting.

even in disagreement.

conservatives not so much.

[cali]

8. I've had many friends who supported CUs and not marriage.

Most have come around. I consider none of them bigots. I certainly wouldn't jettison a long time friendship over it. I'll continue doing what I've been doing: working to change their minds.

[Mari333]

10. I educate them

http://lesbianlife.about.com/cs/wedding/a/unionvmarriage.htm

unfortunately a lot of people are not aware that civil unions are not the same as legal marriage. when i show them over 1400 rights that are denied to gay people because they cannot be legally married, that cuts to the quick of peoples arguments.
people are often horribly misinformed.

[Gormy Cuss]

12. Ask them why it's so important to create a new class of unions.

In my experience, the people who say they are in favor of civil unions but not marriage are either 1)confused about the word 'marriage,' thinking that if the civil definition is expanding that will somehow have an impact on the religious use of the term, or 2) really not in favor of recognizing that two people of the same gender can have the same depth of feelings and commitment as a heterosexual couple. I first try to figure out which is the underlying reason for drawing a line in the sand and talk them through it.

I managed to move a conservative friend away from the "let them have civil unions" position to an acknowledgment that there is no reason for the separate category in civil law. With other friends, it came down to an acknowledgment that in their faith it was against God's law no matter what it was called -- in other words, although they had initially said that civil unions were okay, they didn't mean it.

[LeftHander]

13. SImple....tell them...civil unions are already banned.....moot.

It is not simply marriage that marriage protection/focus on the family types are after...

They have succeed in banning civil unions in addition to marriage for same sex couples in numerous states with language that marriage is between one man and one woman and the state will not recognize any same sex union similar to marriage.

Marriage is just a mask for these social conservatives who vehemently believe that homosexuality is a sickness, choice, abomination, sin....whatever....they simply want us to go away. They couldn't attack us on many other fronts so they eliminated rights and created a second class out of a minority group.

So joining in with these people and supporting the radical bigoted views of "Marriage and Family Defenders" thinking that civil unions is the answer, is simply ignorant and playing into the greater purpose of these groups. Which, again, is to make us go away.

So that argument for equality is a non-argument....

(and people wonder why we jump on people for bringing up civil unions)

[TWiley]

14. I argue for "Human Rights" or "Civil Rights" n/t

[unpossibles]

15. I know a couple, and how I react depends on them in some ways

I always speak up about it, and try to present it as I rightly see it: as a 14th and 1st amendment rights issue, beyond sexual orientation, gender, or anything else. To deny the equal protections from the state to some of the citizens is against the Constitution, and to do so because of religious reasons is also against the Constitution. Period.

However, as I have one friend who I think I can win over, I tend to be a lot more understanding toward some of the things he says. This guy is a piece of work - I'm not sure he knows it, but a lot of the people he hangs out with and goes riding with are lesbians, as well as a few gay men, as well as several bi, and quite a lot of pro-equal rights straight people. The way I see it, he's a good guy who is the victim of too much right wing radio in the shop where he works. You can tell by the way he frames his arguments, but beneath that I think he is not aware of his bigotry, so I try to be a little more gentle with him when I point it out to him that not only is he being a bigot but that his views are anti-Constitutional. He is "ok with civil unions, but disagrees with attempts to change definitions", etc., blah blah.

It's hard, trying to get him (or anyone) to understand that no one is changing the definition of anything, and that even if they were, it is for the better and more inclusive. Suffragettes changed the definition of voters, and abolitionists changed the definition of what it was to be a citizen and in some ways a human to many - definitions set by the majority and which were NOT created with equality in mind.

I know some other guys - not friends - who are a lot more up front about being bigoted assholes, and I give them no such courtesy because I don't see the point. I don't really like them, nor do I see them ever changing their minds, so.... I'm basically a bit harsher with them, although I still make it a point to use the same very strong arguments.

Honestly, in some ways I try to take sexuality out of the discussion so that they can see it is a humanity issue, an equal rights issue, and just one more step of many which our nation has taken in order to live up to the language which we were founded with.

[Tuesday Afternoon]

17. Don't all matrimonial ceremonies have to be a civil union in order

to be legally recognized?

[pnwmom]

18. The real question is why they support Civil unions.

If they see Civil Unions as a major step toward marriage equality, that is very different than if they are against marriage equality EVER.