Our opponents (and the media) love saying that our efforts to pass marriage protection amendments in states such as Minnesota amount to "banning" gay marriage.
Kalley Yanta of the Minnesota Marriage Minute responds: "No it doesn't. First of all, there's no such thing as gay marriage in Minnesota. The amendment doesn't change that."
11 Comments
EXCELLENT point!
It's to the opposition's advantage to use loaded rhetoric to further their cause. In fact, it's the only tool they have other than bribery of legislators.
This video series is truly inspired.
I would have liked her to say - It only Bans Judges and politicians from changing the definition.
Everyday folks in the trenches need quick, one sentence retorts to the SSM talking points that dominate the media.
I love these videos
This video says it all and why all of the states need these amendmants. As long as the people have decided then only the people can change them.
(1) No activist judge giving the finger to the people and changing marriage
(2) No politicians like Cuomo in NY taking bribes and changing marriage and then saying the people deserve to have a vote on this matter without actually letting them vote.
I am not familiar with the judges in Minnesota but I have already seen activist Democrats in that state who want to redefine it without the consent of the people. This is letting the citizens of MN decide.
These are great videos.
I like these vids too. The aura of common sense projected in them makes the SSM-ers' arguments sound bizarre:
"Should we change the definition of "dog" to include cats? No, because a cat is not a dog. While we understand that there is an emotional argument from cat owners who wish to enroll their cats in competitive dog shows, the mere fact that a cat has four legs and a tail does not make it the same creature as a dog....."
We may change the definition of "dog" to "cat," and vice versa, any time we want. All we need is agreement, though we need neither the dog, nor the cat's, agreement.
Ah -- so if we pass a law that only government agencies can transport people to the ISS or beyond near earth orbut, we're not banning commercial space travel -- we're just preserving the status quo!
*shakes head*
Circular logic is circular.
== Circular logic is circular.==
We know you're trying to make a great big statement there. We just can't tell what it is.