I’m sorry. I’m not sure I’m understanding your question, but if it helps, a point I’m making is that, had there been a more objective and rational public debate on the subject, instead of simple verbal tug-of-war where each side uses its own rope, their media campaign would have had less impact, because it would fail to sway people who were better informed.
You are exactly right. The whole I don’t care about private behavior attitude has come around and bit everyone in the collective behind. One has to ask themselves why does natural law exist and what happens when one does not adhere to it?
I think the problem has been no one cared about the level of depravity of people who have become leaders in industry, government and cultural issues. What they think and do in private eventually seeps out into what they do in public. Compartmentalization is a myth. Homosexuality is disobedience to natural law. They say they are born that way. If that is true then why must they teach it to children in school and indoctrinate the courts with it. Right thinking people when they are given enough information will not support something that goes against natural law. Now watch the Apple stock tumble.
I understand that: I'm disagreeing.
Your presumption that people who are less offended are better informed is a conceit.
I maintain your theory breaks down because the "gay campaign" works because it is just that, a campaign, not because it resonates with people who do not share the same proclivities as homosexuals regardless of how "informed" they are.