Maggie Gallagher, nor Brian Brown, nor any of the myriad spokes faces of the anti marriage movement have themselves tried to adopt a child with special needs into THEIR homes.

Marriage is essentially about ENHANCING life, if not necessarily INDUCING it.
A quality of life issue, not whether or not you make a life.
These women are two of many, many thousands who give life AND a better life to children, marriage would make those lives even better.

So, the opponents are effectively doing without saying: damned do or don’t, they don’t care about a large segment of the population having self reliance, and MORE children having their needs met.

That about right?
That’s something that can’t be said enough to the public at large.

So is the question before the public, why WOULDN’T anyone agree with self reliance AND more people meeting their own needs and that of their children at no expense to anything?
I still haven’t heard an answer to that very rational question and expectation.

If your assessment is that the competition already has an estblished product, then there is no short-cut, no short-term groundswell.

To capture the market from such a product, one almost has to engage in a lengthy, costly campaign.

Companies like Coca Cola continue to spend enormous sums on advertising, even though everyone already knows the product. Continuously investing in this way keeps an established brand, and any rival to Coke would have to spend almost a prohibitive amount.

People who can successfully run what might be called a “strategic ad campaign” to upset an entrenched product or company are rare and worth every penny. Truly, the campaign is conceptualized from start-to-finish. The ones that people study in the casebooks are masterpieces, I think. Of course, there are plenty that fail…