Jasmine Beach-Ferrara encourages the marriage equality movement to use doubt to its advantage. Ed Kilgore embraces the strategy:

Beach-Ferrara concludes that ballot measures to stop gay marriage keep winning in no small part because equality advocates don’t talk much to conflicted voters, particularly those for whom religious dogma pulls them away from their own personal sense of fairness--i.e., non-bigots who are lumped in with bigots in most LGBT-rights strategies.

Based on her first-hand interviews with torn voters, Beach-Ferrara contends that marriage equality activists would do well to spend some time convincing such voters to reflect their true convictions by conscientiously passing up the opportunity to make a choice they aren’t prepared to make. In other words, rather than pushing people to come down on one side or the other, activists should have looked at doubt as a political asset.

If those in doubt abstained, would we win?

We want to hear what you think about this article. Submit a letter to the editor or write to letters@theatlantic.com.