Hetero missteps = homo wedding rings, and other theories conducive to Maggie’s ambitions

Yes, in the following nugget, Maggie Gallagher is quite undeniably suggesting that same-sex marriages could only take root in a world where human beings experience a “growing disconnect between sex, love, babies, mothers, fathers and marriage”:

Of course marriage is under deep challenge today from many sources, most of them heterosexual. Gay marriage would not be plausible except for the growing disconnect between sex, love, babies, mothers, fathers and marriage. In America, 40% of births are outside wedlock and perhaps 40% of first marriages end in divorce. For me, far from being a reason for us to accept gay unions as marriages, this emergency is the reason the foundational questions about the meaning and purpose of marriage raised by same-sex marriage are so important.” -Maggie Gallagher

For this and many other reasons why she is losing the debate by a very wide margin, go see the ongoing Maggie Gallagher vs. Evan Wolfson debate taking place on The Economist‘s website:

Economist Debates: Single-sex marriage

And don’t forget to vote!

***

*Frankly, we wouldn’t mind hearing the moderator ask Maggie about some of her less forthcoming views:

-8/9/10 on Janet Parshall’s radio program: Said that she sees homosexuality as “unfortunate”, and said that gays can “always control [their] behavior”

-6/30/2008 on “Catholic Answers Live”: Said that according to the Catholic faith, both gays and their supporters are committing “several kinds of sins.”

-5/14/2001, Maggie uses Dr. Robert Spitzer’s study in a way that goes against his own wishes and findings, calls homosexuality a “sexual dysfunction”:I believe there is rather powerful evidence that human beings are a two-sex species, designed for sexual rather than asexual reproduction. If this is true, then the absence of desire for the opposite sex represents, at a minimum, a sexual dysfunction much as impotence or infertility. Human beings seeking help in overcoming sexual dysfunctions deserve our respect and support (and may I mention, President Bush, more research dollars?).” [Source]

-3/20/2000, Maggie defends Dr. Laura:In a simple biological framework abstracted from all religion and morality, homosexuality is like infertility. It is a sexual disability preventing certain individuals from participating in the normal reproductive patterns of the human species.” [Source]

-2/2/2010: Said she initially found gay marriage to be one of a set of issues “so dumb you don’t have to talk about them.” [speech at Franciscan Univ]

-She can often be heard using language that discredits gay love, like the way she dismissively talks about “two dudes” wanting to get hitched or the way she laughs when gays are compared to domesticated birds.




Good As You

—  admin

No, no — Maggie’s not battling gay orientations. She just calls homosexuality ‘unfortunate’, ‘controllable’, and ‘sinful’ because she’s bored.

In response to the Southern Poverty Law Center’s latest anti-gay group coverage, Maggie Gallagher chimes in with these thoughts:

I’m very proud of the message that NOM has carried consistently and with great love and courage: which is that marriage matters because children need a mom and dad; Our battle is not with an orientation but a political movement that seeks to use the law to embed a new moral idea: there is no difference between same-sex and opposite sex couples and you’re a hater, bigot and quasi-racist if you disagree. It’s very sad to see the deterioration of a once-great civil rights organization to this level

-Maggie Gallagher, chairperson of the National Organization’s Board [SOURCE]

Right. Maggie’s “battle is not with an orientation.” Except, you know — when it totally is:

Ex. 1:

8/9/2010: Maggie says gays ‘can always control [their] behavior’; admits she sees homosexuality as ‘an unfortunate thing’:



*AUDIO SOURCE: In The Market with Janet Parshall — 8/9/10 [Moody Radio]

***

Ex. 2:

5/14/2001, Maggie uses Dr. Robert Spitzer’s study in a way that goes against his own wishes and findings, calls homosexuality a “sexual dysfunction”:I believe there is rather powerful evidence that human beings are a two-sex species, designed for sexual rather than asexual reproduction. If this is true, then the absence of desire for the opposite sex represents, at a minimum, a sexual dysfunction much as impotence or infertility. Human beings seeking help in overcoming sexual dysfunctions deserve our respect and support (and may I mention, President Bush, more research dollars?).” [Source]

***

Ex. 3:

3/20/2000, Maggie defends Dr. Laura:In a simple biological framework abstracted from all religion and morality, homosexuality is like infertility. It is a sexual disability preventing certain individuals from participating in the normal reproductive patterns of the human species.” [Source]

***

Ex. 4:

6/30/2008: Maggie says both gays and marriage equality supporters in general are committing several kinds of sins:

(click to play audio clip)

*Source: Catholic Answers Live — 6/30/08

***

Ex. 5:

August, 2009: Maggie says the Iowa marriage ruling flies in the face of both Leviticus and Genesis:



*AUDIO SOURCE: Janet Parshall’s America

***

Maybe not an incoming freshman’s college orientation. But if we’re talk about a certain sexual orientation, Maggie’s like a “culture war” lieutenant (if not a full-fledged general)!




Good As You

—  admin

Maggie’s been stage-managing a marriage morality play for eons. Yet we’re the inauthentic ones?!

The Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA) was a contrivance that politicians had to put into the law if they wanted to prevent the federal rights that would obviously and fairly be granted to same-sex couples once marriage equality became a reality in America. And now, those of us who are seeking DOMA’s overdue demise are asking the courts to determine if this legislative contrivance can pass a constitutional smell test, as we believe the 1996 nam is as flawed as it is artificial.

MaggieBut leave it to the National Organization For Marriage‘s chairman to ignore that reality so as to instead act like it’s the pro-equality side that is “inventing” something here. This from The New York Times:

Maggie Gallagher, the chairwoman of the National Organization for Marriage, a group that opposes same-sex marriage, said court challenges to the Defense of Marriage Act showed that gay rights advocates “continue to push a primarily court-based strategy of, in our view, inventing rights that neither the founders nor the majority of Americans can recognize in our Constitution.” [NYT]

So wait, again: Politicians made a mid-90s choice wholly based on hostility for LGBT equality, and yet it’s those who are seeking to restore the constitution to its original intent (or at least to recognize its 142-year-old 14th Amendment) who are supposedly going against the founder’s intent?!? And the rights-thwarting mob rule of a “majority of Americans” is presented as a constitutional principle?! Yea, mmhmm, right, Mags.

Not to mention: Maggie didn’t even really like DOMA all that much back when it came into existence. She found it too timid:

Screen Shot 2010-11-09 At 10.14.36 Am

[SOURCE]

Because Maggie wanted and wants more. She wants a complete ban — an even more contrived amendment that would strike right at the heart of the constitution, turning it, for the first time in history, into a weapon against certain kinds of tax-paying citizens. Maggie wants an invention of the far-right think tanks that have given her a career.

So the NOM chair can go ahead and paint us as mad scientists in an anti-constitutional lab all she wants. The patently obvious fact is that its her own decades of work twisting and molding the political landscape so that it turns against the benign, easy, should-be-non-controversial concept of folding ALL Americans into the fabric that is the truly inorganic factor at play here. Peace would need to battle plan, if not for the far-right’s carefully orchestrated “culture war”!!




Good As You

—  admin

Maggie’s reliably myopic glimpse at faith-based bullying

For the second time in as many weeks, Maggie Gallagher has dedicated her syndicated column to the matter of bullying and suicide, with an underlying intent of absolving the climate cultivated by anti-LGBT groups like her National Organization For Marriage outfit of any role in gay teens’ troubles. Here’s a snip from the latest:

To break with central tenets of one’s family culture or with one’s religion is no doubt deeply troubling for parent and child alike. Parents who reject or abuse their gay children do appear to increase the risk of suicide.

But Americans, with the help of the media, seem to be painting the charge against religion with a pretty broad brush.

Given what I know about religion and suicide risk, it seemed to me at least an open question. Religion could be the source of distressing family conflict. But in general, religion appears to be remarkably good for mental health, and in particular for protecting against the risk of suicide.

Keep reading: DOES RELIGION KILL? [Maggie's Syndicated column via Yahoo!]

Maggie goes on to cite stats claiming that kids of regular churchgoers actually try suicide less often, paired with the idea that religion’s condemnations of self-inflicted death decreases its occurrences in faith-based homes. Maybe it does, maybe it doesn’t. But in limiting her frame in this way, Maggie once again overlooks the macro problem by micro-ing in on the wrong things.

The key idea that Maggie overlooks: That religious condemnation of LGBT people affects every single person on the globe, regardless of chosen faith. Because every last anti-LGBT teaching — every last one! — stems from biblical interpretation. So it doesn’t even matter what house of worship a certain statistical percentage did or did not attend — the issue is the sweeping usage of faith to deny rights, freedom, wedding rings, and an overall peace of mind!

One need not be Catholic to be wounded by the Pope’s labeling of homosexuality as an intrinsic evil. One need not be Mormon to feel the 201010271707effect that the LDS Church had in passing Prop 8. One need not be Christian to be mind-fucked by the idea that Christian conservatives nationwide run “reparative therapy” conferences telling gay people that they are spiritually and mentally wounded. That’s what’s so enraging about the far-right social conservatives’ bent sense of religious freedom on this issue: THAT NOBODY IS FREE FROM WHATEVER THEOLOGICAL BEHAVIOR THE “PRO-FAMILY” PLAYERS HAVE CHOSEN FOR THEMSELVES! We are all forced congregants of a far-too-church-infused state!



So Maggie — someone who’s on record saying that “the absence of desire for the opposite sex represents, at a minimum, a sexual dysfunction much as impotence or infertility,” calling homosexuality “a sexual disability,” instructing gays that they “can always control” their “unfortunate” behavior, and accusing gay marriage activists of “striking at the heart” of Genesis and committing “several kinds of sins” [*source for all quotes] — can try all she wants to disconnect butts in pews from depression in minds. But in trying to do so, she needs to be a little more honest about faith’s far-reaching effects. Because while she may not literally drag us in the confession booth with her, Maggie Gallagher is flat-out lying if she denies how fully she’d like our bedrooms to atone for what she sees as our sins. Or even if she personally doesn’t, her “protect marriage” cause certainly does. The same “protect marriage” cause that no credible study will ever show as helping even one gay kid’s mental peace.




Good As You

—  admin

Maggie’s self-appointed job: Stopping gay kin, stopping gay Ken

We respect Ken Mehlman’s right to his personal life. Supporting gay marriage, however, is a very different and very public matter. The fight over same-sex marriage Maggie-Gallagherreally isn’t about Mr. Mehlman’s personal life. Marriage, as a public legal status, is a man and a woman for a reason: It is the only civil institution that brings together the two halves of humanity to ensure the children they create have the best opportunity to be raised by their own mother and father. We will fight all attempts to redefine marriage to be something that it is not — a genderless, adult-centered sexual relationship centered on the alleged rights of adults and not the needs of children. The American people — including over 80% of Republicans and even 40% of Democrats — oppose same-sex marriage. NOM has already proven in races from New York to California that it is a particularly bad idea for Republicans to support gay marriage. The disconnect in Washington stems from politicans who refuse to pay attention to the values of the people they represent. If Mr. Mehlman wishes to help us elect pro-marriage GOP politicians, we welcome his support. If not, we welcome the victories that will come in the battle that must necessarily ensue.”

-NOMs Maggie Gallagher

Both were once on the Bushy payroll. Isn’t it interesting how it’s always increased honesty and transparency that ends up breaking these kinds of bonds?




Good As You

—  John Wright