George Lakoff on Gay Marriage

[maylily]

The conservatives are using two powerful ideas: definition and sanctity. We must take them back. We have to fight definition with definition and sanctity with sanctity. For both sides, "marriage," as an ideal, is defined as, "the realization of love through a lifelong public commitment." Love is sacred. The sanctity in marriage is the sanctity of love and commitment.

snip

But "gay marriage" is a double-edged sword. President Bush chose not to use the words "gay marriage" in his State of the Union Address. I suspect that the omission occurred for a good reason. His position is that "marriage" is defined as between a man and a woman, and so the term "gay marriage" should be an oxymoron, as meaningless as "gay apple" or "gay telephone." The more "gay marriage" is used, the more normal the idea of same-sex marriage becomes, and the clearer it becomes that "marriage" is not defined to exclude the very possibility. This is exactly why some gay activists want to use "same-sex marriage" or even "gay marriage."

snip

For example, when there is a discussion in your office, church, or other group, there is a simple response to someone who says, "I don't think gays should be able to marry, do you?" The response is, "I believe in equal rights, period. I don't think the state should be in the business of telling people who they can or can't marry. Marriage is about love and commitment, and denying lovers the right to marry is a violation of human dignity." The media does not have to accept the right wing's frames. What can a reporter ask besides "Do you support gay marriage?" Try this: "In San Francisco, there has been a lot of discussion of the freedom to marry, as a matter of equal rights under the law. How do you feel about this?" Or try this: "Do you believe that love is sacred? Since marriage is the realization of love through commitment, do you think marriage is sacred?"

[whatever]

Good point, to separate the two. It's about impossible though. Just the fact that folks argue about this religious ceremony not being a matter of church and state tells me how far gone understanding is.

People think their religion is what defines marriage...but not someone elses religion. I have a terrible time even approaching this issue, because it seems like it's been so beaten down and misunderstood, turned into insurance money as if that's all that matters...in the name of religion...that if someone doesnt have an informed opinion by now, they just aren't trying. Either they've realized that it is, in fact, a religious belief because religion is their only objection...or they don't realize and never will.

I've faced religious arguments for as long as I can remember. Been told I'm going to hell often and with authority. On this issue, folks seem to allow that view of "sin" to be universal, even though it is not a universally accepted concept, as the concept of "God" is a universal concept. That there is a difference of opinion should be enough, to me, to mean that belief should not be a consideration in law. When gay CHRISTIANS can stand up and say they believe they should be able to get married, and other Christians say no, because that isn't...christian enough...what does that mean?

And yet, they hold that belief over everyone elses view, no matter what anyone else says about their honest feelings about how God made them and why. No matter the faith. No matter the truth, because surely we don't know that. No matter if there IS no faith. Atheists get married too. But no matter. We're still a mostly Christian nation, and for them, it's enough. And other religions prohibit homosexulaity too...and...I give up at that point. That original concept of freedom from religious persecution has been completely lost.

I just lose my ability to reason after a while, when faced with that. Explaining color to a blind person. When people love each other, enough to live and die for each other, and other people blow that off.. I can't get there from here. We're back in the dark ages. I'll try to be more constructive next time on your topic though. All I did was opine, instead of discussing technique of opining

[maylily]

whatever, that's the whole point. To reframe the debate. To restate it in different terms.

As the article said, Bush didn't use the words "gay marriage" in his speech. Because the more people hear it, the more acceptable it will become.

Words do have power. And people who don't agree with how the current issues are being discussed have to use words to fight it. For example, many of the neo-cons have begun using the term "government schools" to talk about public education. What feeling do you get when you hear "government school" as opposed to "public education" or "public school". It's dishonest. But that doesn't mean that the opposition can't use the same tactics honestly.

Can't remember if I sent this to you or not. How to counteract the framing of the Republican debate And it includes the text of Luntz's Republican Playbook which teaches Republican politicians how to discuss issues.

[outgirl]

I agree may, words do have power. Like the whole "pro family" thing. Who is anti family? It's just another way to say antigay. We have a lot to learn from the right.

[whatever]

outgirl said:

I agree may, words do have power. Like the whole "pro family" thing. Who is anti family? It's just another way to say antigay. We have a lot to learn from the right.

I respectfully disagree outgirl. unweaving their lies is something we want everyone to UNlearn. And their self-serving arguments, slanted and full of partial truths mixed with blatant lies...is not a technique we want to learn.

We could never sound like them, even if we wanted to outgirl. They lie. In either case, it's bad to be beaten by word games, and so far the rhetoric has ruled, that's for sure. Know thy enemy.

Not to argue with you for arguments sake. Maybe you just meant learn in order to decipher. To turn the lies against them. Figuring out their game. OH yeah.

[whatever]

Good morning May I wanted to get back to you about today. I'm not going to make it today, but please don't write me off for more of those meetings. Today there's just no way.

It's funny how much I have to force myself to get started, to get into the nuts and bolts of what he's talking about. I think I must be a bit mentally lazy.

But it's part of my charm, isn't it? Visions of bubble-headed bleach blondes No, but lately I seem to be nothing but negative. Whoever calls me Wednesday. So anyway, I'm sorry for all the negative input. It's not like we can't all get plenty of that elsewhere.

[outgirl]

whatever said:

I respectfully disagree outgirl. unweaving their lies is something we want everyone to UNlearn. And their self-serving arguments, slanted and full of partial truths mixed with blatant lies...is not a technique we want to learn.

We could never sound like them, even if we wanted to outgirl. They lie. In either case, it's bad to be beaten by word games, and so far the rhetoric has ruled, that's for sure. Know thy enemy.

Not to argue with you for arguments sake. Maybe you just meant learn in order to decipher. To turn the lies against them. Figuring out their game. OH yeah.

No I mean learn to play the word game to our advantage. Like em or not, those guys are pretty smart. They managed to make a pretty good thing like profamily become fighting words for the right to base their hatred on. We do need to use their own techniques to fight them. Turn the phrase marriage equality into being profamily.

[whatever]

outgirl said:

No I mean learn to play the word game to our advantage. Like em or not, those guys are pretty smart. They managed to make a pretty good thing like profamily become fighting words for the right to base their hatred on. We do need to use their own techniques to fight them. Turn the phrase marriage equality into being profamily.

I understand, and I think you're absolutely right.

And it's true, the monsters don't have to be stupid. Just the opposite. That's how I feel about the poster barabus. Sometimes when he blithely blew me off for being very upset about all the torture...I realize he was uncaring about how bad it could be, even though he easily knew how bad it could be. That's just wrong, but he managed to make it sound as if I were being unreasonable.

Me, who was in the military and had to learn about the GC and why we abide by it. Made ME look like I was being silly about a nonissue. Right. THAT's what ticked me off about him. Some of those prisoners were beaten to death, by US. OMG Surely that's the height of barbarity. And the child rapes? But he abides by his login; the barbarity is okay with him, in war. And war is okay, if it's preemptive. Sure.

But for all that, he's quite intelligent, and the word play is nothing to him. Gee, I just realized this is posted publicly. OH well. Whatever. He was always free to confront me. But I think I should forget any knowledge I have of him from now on. Block those painful memories I'm good at that

Hey, I saw a judge in California woke up, did you hear that on the news? LOVE it when people stand up for what they believe in.

[outgirl]

If it's any consolation, I really think you got to him as much as he got to you. Things just turn so damned ugly on that forum. You missed my thread the other day. It was titled "I'm tired of being nice" I just went on a rant about how rude some people there are and I'm just not going to be nice to them anymore. It was pretty fun really. I got about 8 pm's on that one, lol. Even Kurt pm'd me. Ha.

[whatever]

outgirl said:

If it's any consolation, I really think you got to him as much as he got to you. Things just turn so damned ugly on that forum. You missed my thread the other day. It was titled "I'm tired of being nice" I just went on a rant about how rude some people there are and I'm just not going to be nice to them anymore. It was pretty fun really. I got about 8 pm's on that one, lol. Even Kurt pm'd me. Ha.

LOL YOu go get 'em!! Oh, enjoy, please, rejoice, roll in the carnage. Someone has to. Oh, that's rich, I enjoy that too much, 8 pm's? hahaha

Guess I'm not surprised it's turned ugly. Don't get too worked up now!

Hey...you know what you got to hear?? I got the Arlo Guthrie cd out most recently, with an updated version of Alisons Resterant. It's awesome if you know the original, and has a great message at the end. I listened to it the other day, wanted something mellow : )

[outgirl]

whatever said:

LOL YOu go get 'em!! Oh, enjoy, please, rejoice, roll in the carnage. Someone has to. Oh, that's rich, I enjoy that too much, 8 pm's? hahaha

Guess I'm not surprised it's turned ugly. Don't get too worked up now!

Hey...you know what you got to hear?? I got the Arlo Guthrie cd out most recently, with an updated version of Alisons Resterant. It's awesome if you know the original, and has a great message at the end. I listened to it the other day, wanted something mellow : )

I absolutely love Alices Restaurant...Arlo Guthrie Rocks.

I love the Motorcycle song best

I don't want a pickle
I just wanna ride on my motor sickle
I don't wanna die
I just wanna ride on my motorcy...cle

[whatever]

Hey, I'll have to remember to lend you this cd! It's just great to hear him sing this song again, 30 years later. It's good, I laughed a lot

[whatever]

I thought May might like this too : )

Entries for a Devil's Dictionary of the Bush Era
By Tom Engelhardt
Tom Dispatch

Monday 28 March 2005

For the last few years we have been ruled by lexicographers. Never has an administration spent so much time creating, defining, or redefining terms, perhaps because no one (since George Orwell) has grasped the power and possibility that lay hidden in plain sight in the naming and renaming of words. In a sense, our post-9/11 moment began with two definitions: The Bush administration named our global enemy "terrorism" and called the acts that followed a "war," which was soon given the moniker "the global war on terror" (later reduced to the acronym GWOT, also known as World War IV), which was then given an instant future - being defined as a "generational struggle" that was still to come. All this, along with "war" itself, was simply announced rather than officially "declared." more...

[RS Davis]

"When words lose their meaning, peoples lose their liberties." - Confucious

[whatever]

admin said:

"When words lose their meaning, peoples lose their liberties." - Confucious

Oh yes

Life, liberty, the pursuit of happieness? Sure, if you're a good Christian beer-drinking straight white man, you can be happy Happy as a pig in a blanket nowadays.

I think I should go out on a mission, shake up each and every person in our country, just shake 'em till the fizz. Then, move on to the next one. Grass roots with bubbles.