Romney's Mormon Church fiercely attacked California's LGBT community with support of Prop 8.

[MineralMan]

40. What I was talking about in that other thread

was ridiculing things like the Mormon "underwear" as a way to attack Romney. That doesn't work. Romney has already said that he opposes marriage equality, and there's nothing wrong with linking that to the LDS church's support for anti-LGBT legislation. I wrote that thread because someone started a "magic underwear" thread. I think that's counter-productive in the extreme, since it has nothing to do with issues.

Both Romney and the LDS church oppose marriage equality. We can attack both of them on that score. We can even link Romney's Mormon beliefs to the church's funding of anti-LGBT legislation. That's a fair thing to do. The "magic underwear" thing isn't. In the OP for that thread, I mentioned using ridicule as the wrong way to do this. It's a weak kind of argument that pisses people off.

But, there's nothing at all wrong with pointing out that both Romney and his church oppose marriage equality and other serious issues. That's fair. That makes sense. Now, I'm not sure that it will change anyone's mind, really. Romney opposes marriage equality. Obama supports it. That's a clear difference between the two candidates, and everyone knows it. So, people will decide who to vote for based on that if that's a primary issue for them.

What doesn't work is focusing on things like the stupid "magic underwear" argument or the fact that Romney's great-grandfather was a polygamist. Those are non-issues for this election, and won't play any part in people's decisions. So, in my opinion, there's no point in such things, and they might even piss some people off enough to change their minds in the wrong way.

There are real issues separating Romney from Obama. Those are the issues that people will be deciding on. And there aren't many. Jobs, economy, military, and other broad issues, are the ones that will make the difference. Marriage equality is probably a wash. A poll today (I don't know which one...I just heard it on the radio news) demonstrated that the marriage equality issue wasn't likely to change most people's tendency to vote for either candidate. By election time, it will be one of the minor issues for most voters. Basically, most people already have an opinion on that right now, and it's not one of the things they're thinking about for the General Election. Right or wrong, that's the truth.

Obama did the right thing by stating his support for marriage equality. It will help bring people to his support, and he needs that badly. Besides, it's just the right thing to do. It won't change many people's votes, though. It may bring more voters to the polls, which will be wonderful, but it's not going to be a major factor in this election. I support marriage equality strongly, but I would have voted for Obama even if he hadn't stated his support directly. My efforts on the marriage equality issue will be to help defeat the amendment in Minnesota. Other issues will be primary when talking about Obama v. Romney for most people I talk to, though.

Anyhow, what I was talking about in that other OP was the use of ridicule of other elements of Mormonism as a way to attack Romney. It won't work, and it's a waste of time. There are plenty of issues that are important where the difference between the two candidates can be shown. Making fun of Romney's religion is useless in this campaign. But, there's nothing wrong with pointing out areas where the LDS Church and Romney both support things that are harmful. Polygamy isn't an issue in 2012, and neither is underwear. Focus is important.

In Minnesota, the biggest challenge is the diocese's support of the anti-marriage equality amendment. We have a very large Catholic population in Minnesota, and we have to reach out to them. It will make a difference. We have a much smaller Mormon population. Fundies are also in large supply here, but they're pretty much already committed to voting for the amendment. The Catholics are more likely to respond to campaigning to vote No than either the Mormons or the fundies. So, it makes sense to focus primarily on the voters who may be convinced to vote No than on voters who have already made up their minds and won't change. This is going to be a very, very close vote, and focus is going to be critical if we're going to defeat it and break the cycle.

You don't like me, much. I realize that. But, that has no effect on what I'm working on, and defeating the anti-marriage equality amendment is one of those things. I want to see it defeated, and I'm focused on changing votes of people who might change their vote.