If you’re going to persuade people to support the idea of relationship recognition for same-sex couples, you’ll need to deliver consistent messages and avoid reinforcing those of our opponents. Talking points are important tools to keep your campaign focused.  They should be short (no more than a few sentences) and straightforward.  You can distribute general talking points to anyone involved in your campaign who may be called upon to speak to media or at events. They can be affirmative messages you have decided are the most important messages to get across to the public, or reactive messages to respond to tough questions or criticism from your opponents.  Every set of talking points is different, varying by messengers and audiences, but here are some basic recommended guidelines.

Emphasize Common Ground

• "Marriage is about committed couples who want to make a lifelong promise to take care of and be responsible for each other." Marriage isn't about "rights." It's about love, commitment, and responsibility. It's about the things we give, not the things we get. It's about our responsibility to the ones we love and the promise and commitment we make to take care of each other. Straight and gay couples want to marry for the same reasons. Both straight and gay couples want to build a life with someone. Both want to make a commitment and a lifelong promise. Both straight and gay couples want to take care of and protect the one they love. Both need the security and legal protections of marriage that help make this possible. Too often, marriage is discussed as if it's some sort of public policy dispute or a set of "rights" or "benefits" that are being "demanded." Americans don't think about marriage this way-and they don't want to. Talk about marriage as people understand and experience it. Help people connect their desire to make a lifelong commitment to someone they love with gay couples who want the same thing.

Illustrate Concrete Harms

• Denying committed couples the security and legal protections of marriage hurts them; it's wrong to make it harder for committed couples to take care of and be responsible for each other. Marriage confers a set of social and legal protections that help couples fulfill their lifelong promise to take care of and be responsible for each other-emotionally, financially, in sickness and in health, and even in death. Denying committed couples the ability to marry is wrong because it makes it harder for these couples to take care of each other. We're asking people to stop actively denying or standing in the way of the security and legal protections gay couples need to take care of each other. To do this, we must show exactly how denying marriage (and the important security and protections it provides) puts committed couples in harm's way. Note that Americans who are undecided or against marriage for gay couples aren't just maintaining the status quo-they're taking an active role in hurting gay couples. Focus on telling detailed, emotionally moving stories that connect straight Americans to gay couples. Medical and end-of-life issues are especially resonant, including hospital visitation, emergency medical decision making, and leave to take care of an ill partner.

Affirm People's Desire to do Right

• Acknowledge people's inner conflict around marriage but remind them it shouldn't be grounds for hurting committed couples. When we acknowledge the conflicted feelings of our audience, it helps give them the permission they need to support marriage for gay couples. Why? Because it gives people a chance to support marriage without first having to resolve conflicted feelings or be comfortable with gay couples. For example, say, "We may not all agree on this issue, but that doesn't mean we should make it hard for committed gay couples to take care of each other," or "I understand you may not be comfortable with this, but that doesn't mean it should be illegal."


• Talk about the importance of being the type of person who cares about others and opposes putting committed couples in harm's way. Many Americans believe we should strive to treat others as we'd like to be treated. Reinforce that people who care about others should support a committed couple's right to visit each other in the hospital and make emergency medical decisions. Caring people should support couples' commitment to be responsible for and take care of each other, in sickness and in health. On the flipside, only an uncaring person would try to bar a loved one from a hospital room or try to prevent a committed couple from making emergency medical decisions for each other.

Things to Avoid

• DON'T use "gay marriage" or "same-sex marriage" (instead, say "marriage," "marriage for committed couples," or "marriage for gay couples").


• DON'T talk about marriage as a "right," a "civil right" or a package of "benefits" (instead, talk about the security and legal protections of marriage that committed couples need to take care of each other).


• DON'T talk about marriage using abstract numbers (instead of talking about the 1,138 federal benefits of marriage, focus on language that reflects how people think about their own marriages).


• DON'T use opponents' language (e.g., instead of debating the myth that "marriage is under attack," stick to the key messages about committed couples taking care of each other).


• DON'T talk about "deserving" or "demanding" marriage (instead, remind Americans that committed couples need to be able to protect themselves when bad things happen, such as death, disability, or losing a job).

Rejecting the Terminology of Anti-Gay Activists

• Using the terms of anti-gay activists legitimizes their language. One creative way to avoid parroting opponents' terms is to preface them with "so-called" (for example, "so-called threats to marriage" or the "so-called Defense of Marriage Act"). Using this qualifier challenges opponents' terminology and can make a real difference. Another way to avoid repeating opponents' frames is to subtly play with their wording. For example, advocates in Ohio began referring to their DOMA as "the Denial of Marriage Act." This description copied the DOMA acronym, but accurately described the true purpose of the bill (without falling into the trap of name-calling). Similarly, a Marriage Protection Act could be accurately labeled a Marriage Prevention Act.