I received a message from Geoff Kors, Executive Director of Equality California, with the subject of "How are we going to win in California?" Mr. Kors starts off with:

"I get asked all the time, 'How are we going to win marriage back in California?' and 'Why do we keep losing at the ballot box?' The answer to both questions is: We’ll win when enough people get to hear our stories."

With enormous respect for Mr. Kors and the job he and EqCa are doing, I completely disagree.

We've been telling our stories for a few years now, yet we've lost election after election regarding the marriage issue--the tally is around 30 now nationwide. They say that one definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over again and expecting a different result. I certainly don't intend to call anyone crazy, but it just has to be time to re-evaluate this solitary telling-our-stories strategy.

Don't they already know our stories anyway? They've seen Milk and Brokeback. And aren't our stories just the same as theirs? We meet; sometimes we fall in love; sometimes we live together; sometimes we raise kids; sometimes we stay together til death do us part; sometimes we break up. The only difference is that we lack the imprimatur of the state. They know all that.

What they're afraid of, and why they keep voting against allowing us to marry while at the same time voting for us as candidates, is the collateral damage they're warned about by the other side. They wouldn't mind us having marriage rights if they didn't think it would necessarily also mean that their children would receive gay indoctrination training in elementary schools. They'd be ok with us getting married if they hadn't been told that their own homophobic churches would be forced to perform the ceremonies.

Of course, these statements are entirely inaccurate. But the voters don't know that because we've been too busy trying to tell our stories to meet the other side's lies head on.

Sometimes in politics it's possible to fight fear with hope. That worked for Obama, but it hasn't worked for us. I say it's time for us to fight fear with fear.

Will the main backers of anti-gay propositions, the religious right, be satisfied when gay people have been relegated to under-class status? I doubt it. We have to make the voters understand that even if the right came for us first, we aren't the only ones they have in their long-range sights.

The Catholic Church is against all forms of contraception, not just the most radical form, abortion. So, expect a proposition seeking to outlaw condoms and the pill. Does anyone enjoy shopping or going to the movies on a Sunday? That violates one of the Ten Commandments (homosexuality didn't even make it into this top ten list), so expect Blue Laws to be re-enacted requiring us all to stay home and worship on Sundays. What about our freedom of religion? Well that probably just means freedom to decide which of the various Christian Protestant or Catholic churches you will attend regularly and believe in faithfully. And let's talk about the Bible's stance on women's rights! Then there's the right's record on civil rights and racial diversity. In case there's any question--they haven't generally been very supportive, to say the least.

I suggest that this is they kind of thing the voters need to be warned about if we're ever going to win marriage equality. Not more of our stories.

I'm in California, so I'll admit I didn't see all of the ads from both sides in Maine. But I did see a sample that I bet is representative. The pro-equality ad was sweet and soft and showed a nice gay couple and some kids. The other side's ad was mean and harsh and essentially said that if same-sex couples were allowed to marry, we would immediately set about the task of turning all their kids gay.

For Prop. 8 here in California, the first and most widely-shown equality ad showed a heterosexual bride running through a parking lot and some bushes and breaking a heel before arriving at her wedding. I like to think I'm pretty tuned in to the issue, and even I didn't understand the point of that one. Did we really think Joe Straight Voter was going to get the obscure metaphor and vote accordingly? The ads from the other side--not surprisingly--claimed that if marriage rights for same-sex couples were allowed to continue, we would immediately set about the task of turning all their kids gay.

We keep losing because we keep playing softball while they're playing hardball. Sure, their claim is a lie, but it's a damn compelling one: even gay parents would prefer--given a choice--that their kids not turn out gay. So we have to get out in front of them instead of playing catch-up. We have to tell the voters: here is what they're going to tell you, and it's a damn lie! Marriage rights are just about marriage rights, not about what your kids are taught in school.

We have our own ammunition, and it's not sweet gay families bathed in sepia sunlight. THEY have a hidden agenda that we need to expose. They want control. Once they get this taste of power, will they be satisfied with denying same-sex marriage rights? Hardly. Next to go will be domestic partnerships. But the other side is not just anti-gay. They're also anti-abortion, anti-anysexualpracticeotherthanmissionarypositionforprocreation, anti-anythingotherthanChristian, anti-progressive, and yes, you know it's true, many of them are also racist and sexist. So they may be coming for us first, but we need to let Joe Straight Voter know that he too is likely in their long-range crosshairs. Then maybe he'll vote our way.