What I mean is that neither of your responses before was worded as what will actually happen.
Yes. I understand that. Do you understand that I don't know what will happen
? Maybe you're unaware of this, but I provided you with more information (and more useful information) than you asked for. I suppose I could have just blindly stated a prediction, but that would have as much value as the pixels you're reading it on. Instead, I provided you with a pair of possibilities, with an explanation of what events might cause those possibilities to come to be.
If that's not satisfying for you, then I guess you'll just have to be unsatisfied.
It is not my intention to play a semantics game.
Yet... That's what you're doing. For no really useful reason.
But a literal interpretation of what you had said did not answer my question. You had said what you want to happen, you had said what hypothetically might happen, but you had not said what you think will happen. Do you understand my previous confusion and objection then?
What you asked for was a dumb thing to ask for. To follow your rain analogy. If someone asks if you think it will rain, which is more useful: Someone simply saying "Yes. I think it will rain". Or someone saying "Well. If the temperature and wind direction stay the same, it will rain. But if we're lucky, and that high pressure zone moves south, and we'll have clear skies".
One of those answers is useful. The other is worthless. Excuse me for automatically translating your question into one that served a purpose. I suppose I could be literal, but that would just be silly... ;)
This is fairly close to what I want. I don't want to frustrate you too much, but I am going to have to ask for some clarification.
Are you saying that the small percentage of people who you believe understand the difference between marriage and marriage benefits will fail to convince the majority or will they succeed (in the context of creating legislation)? It seems like you think they will fail, which will lead to some further legislative gains by the majority who believe marriage and marriage benefits must be tied, and that this will lead to other issues.
I don't know if they will or not. That's the point. I can only tell you the effects in operation, how they interact, and what may result depending on how those interactions go forward. I told you what I'd *like* to have happen. But I honestly have no clue whether that will happen or not. None at all. Couldn't place even vague odds on it.
Will then the issue of **** marriage be settled the way liberals want it (nationally, with full straight marriage benefits), and will this be permanent? Or do you think at some point this minority might convince or correct the alleged misunderstandings of the majority?
Perhaps. Again. I don't know. I can only keep on explaining my point of view on this issue in the hopes that if enough people are exposed to it, maybe the light will go on and they'll realize that the are charging off to fix a problem which isn't the one they really need to fix.
I kinda see it like a group of people working really hard to fix the oven in their home, but the problem is that the power lines are down. But when someone points out this fact, they get accused of not wanting to help fix the oven, followed with dire predictions of starvation if they can't cook their food, etc...
Yes. It's a silly analogy, but that's the way I see this. You've got a group of people who've become so wrapped up in the "cause" in front of them, that they just can't step back from it and see the larger picture.