Thought Theater

Framing The Marriage Amendment Debate genre: Gaylingual & Polispeak & Six Degrees of Speculation

I ran across an interesting piece on how to combat the rhetoric behind the push to pass a constitutional amendment to prohibit gay marriage here. The author, Jeffrey Feldman, makes some strong arguments that focus on three recommendations. The overriding objective is to determine how the topic is discussed rather than to participate in the discussion as it has been framed by proponents of the amendment.

Progressives cannot take control of this debate if they repeat the GOP frame of "gay marriage." But we also cannot ignore the topic once it is already out there.

The solution is to steal the ball by focusing on The Constitution. In my informal surveys, readings and conversations, I have found that even Americans who are most uncomfortable with the idea of same-sex marriage -- these same people are even more uncomfortable with the idea of turning The U.S. Constitution into a document that enforces inequality.

The big frame change to take control of this issue and to stop it for good is the "time" frame.

The "time" frame is broad frame that defines the current issue relative to a fixed amount of time and is embodied in this deceptively powerful question:

Do we have time for this now?

Notice how this question is based on the metaphor of [time] as a [fixed and tangible resource]. Time is not unlimited, it does not grow on trees. We only "have" "so much" time to "go around," so we better "use" the time "we have" wisely.

After we switch the debate from the "defense of marriage" to protecting the ideals of our Bill of Rights we immediately take control of the time frame by saying "We do not have time for this."

The last step is to extend the time frame by linking it to the problems we face right now.

After we frame the debate in terms of the Constitution and limited time, we must ask a series of bold and direction questions about the dangers that result from not solving the real problems that face us:

How many people have died in Iraq because of a marriage?

How much has the price of gas gone up because of a marriage?

How many elected officials in Washington have been indicted for corruption becauseof a marriage?

The list could go on for days. But the point is clear. By asking these questions, we are taking control of the debate. We are saying that America does not have time to waste on foolishness that serves only to insult the honor of our Constitution. We are demanding that the debate stay focused on the real issues we face as a nation.

And is it any wonder President Bush and the GOP do not want to talk about these issues? They are all problems created or made worse by GOP policies.

To beat the marriage amendment debate, follow these three easy steps. The only way to lose is to get drawn into President Bush's frame.

While Feldman is speaking about one particular issue, the importance of determining how any other issue is discussed is an important strategy reminder. Republicans have done a far better job in understanding the benefits of topic framing. Hopefully Democrats are not only prepared to debate the issues, but prepared to craft the debate to their advantage.