We need to get off our back foot on this, and put those who are in *opposition* to fairness and equality in the position of having to qualify and defend *their* stances.
There are some statements we should embrace - make our mantra, if you will - in increasing levels of complexity. I'll include a description of why each works. In any of these, "I" can be replaced by "we" when one is speaking on behalf of an organization.
"I'M FOR MARRIAGE.": This is short, sweet, and puts anyone in the position of disagreeing with this having to qualify, explain, and defend.
("I disagree." "Why are you against marriage?" "I'm against your definition of marriage." "I define marriage as couples in love uniting to form a strong family. Which part of that are you against?")
"I'M FOR COUPLES IN LOVE BEING FREE TO GET MARRIED.": This restricts the definition to couples (so no one throws polygamy at us), and adds "being free" - something that it's hard to be against. ("So, you disagree. Do you disagree with 'couples being in love', 'freedom', or 'marriage'?" "You're redefining marriage." "Interracial couples can now get married, and you don't have to marry your rapist. It's been redefined over the years.")
"I'M FOR COUPLES IN LOVE BEING FREE TO ENJOY THE RIGHTS AND RESPONSIBILITIES OF MARRIAGE, CREATING STRONGER FAMILIES AND COMMUNITIES.": This adds the idea that we not only want the rights, but we also gladly accept the responsibilities that come along with those rights. We want to make our families and communities stronger. ("Which part of this are you against? Couples in love, stronger families or stronger communities?")
I support churches doing whatever churches want to do; I am free to (or not to) affiliate with them.
