stats for wordpress
<% unless FeatureFlag.disable_quantcast? %> <% end %>
 







Are you on Facebook?

Would you please click "like" in the box to your right, or

Visit us on Facebook!


UPDATED: Maggie Gallagher Accuses Maryland Gays Of Racism Against Arora

by David Badash on March 3, 2011

in Bigotry Watch,Marriage,News

Post image for UPDATED: Maggie Gallagher Accuses Maryland Gays Of Racism Against Arora

Maggie Gallagher is accusing Maryland marriage equality advocates of racism against Sam Arora who just flip-flopped on his promise to vote for equality.

NOM’s Gallagher just shot off this post on the NOM Blog about Sam Arora and the marriage equality vote issue in Maryland:

“I have two reactions to reading this WaPo columnist’s comments.

“First, if Sam Arora is wavering under this media firestorm, he must be hearing from hundreds of constitutents who do not want him to vote for gay marriage.

“Secondly, as someone married to an Indian-American, I find it interesting that the gay marriage machine appears to be re-focusing its attacks from Black Democrats who oppose gay marriage to an easier target: Indian-Americans.”

Yup. Playing the race card. That’s the answer to this situation, Maggie?

Here’s some background.

Sam Arora, a freshman Maryland Delegate (same as a Representative,) ran on a platform that included his support of marriage equality. Now, after deleting a tweet that proved he did, he’s saying he never promised to support equality.

Maggie, Arora lied. If he had promised to vote against the marriage equality bill, instead of for it, and was getting heat from the right, instead of the left, would you accuse the right of racism? Hell no. Maggie, this time I’m especially disappointed in you.

Playing the race card is ugly. Playing the race card, falsely, and offering yourself as an example is even uglier.

Visit here, here, here, here, here, and especially here for more.

UPDATE: 10:00 PM I hadn’t noticed this at first, but it seems that Maggie published a PDF of Jonathan Capehart’s excellent Washington Post piece on which she based her comments (above.) Can anyone tell me if that’s a copyright violation? Just wondering, as I noticed Brian Brown did it too with Megan Mcardle’s piece in The Atlantic.

Related Posts Plugin for WordPress, Blogger...

Friends:

We invite you to sign up for our new mailing list, and subscribe to The New Civil Rights Movement via email or RSS.

Also, please like us on Facebook, and follow us on Twitter!

{ 25 comments }

Skulander March 3, 2011 at 8:20 pm

Arora is just a coward. Like all politicians, so it seems, when it comes to defend the rights of LGBT citizens. It's lame. And WHERE are the gays and lesbians in Maryland to speak against this discrimination???

joshua March 4, 2011 at 8:24 am

uh. we right hurr.
don't think we're not actively protesting this

alexjon March 3, 2011 at 8:29 pm

Oh so NOW she mentions her husband.

Craig Coelho March 3, 2011 at 8:35 pm

Tell that ignorant twat that civil rights aren't a popularity contest, and that she and her ass-banging nazi pope can just go off in a corner and play hide the shnitzel in the mutton wrinkles.

amiworking March 3, 2011 at 8:39 pm

Really? Since I read this post, I assumed he was an Italian guy with a good tan…

weshlovrcm March 3, 2011 at 8:59 pm

Shrill, professional anti-gay activist Gallagher will do and say whatever it takes to keep the $$$ flowing in, because she has chosen money over God. That is something she will have to explain on Judgment Day. For now, she does not have the right to use Big Government to impose her “religious beliefs” on the rest of us. She is free to live as she wants and believe what she wants. She cannot, however, redefine the Constitution for the rest of us.

The Professor March 3, 2011 at 9:39 pm

If he is hearing from "hundreds of constitutents" (sic) maybe it's because you and your religiously based group have been sending out flyers full of scare tactics and outright lies. You have no shame. And this politician has no spine.

Bill March 3, 2011 at 10:18 pm

A new low, even for that one.

Mostly, I feel bad for her kids. When the dust settles from all this, they will forever be attached to this most unfortunate woman's misdeeds.

She doesn't even have the common sense to see that, though.

maggie gallagher March 6, 2011 at 5:01 pm

Thanks for your concern for my children, Bill. This post is typical. I did not "charge" anything, much lest "racism." I understand why some folks would read it that way but its simply a political analysis: the fury directed at Arora was of a markedly different character than that of another co-sponsor say Melvin Stukes or Tiffany Alston.

It's not because gay marriage advocates dislike South Asian Americans, but it may be that its more convenient not to target African-Americans. I could well be wrong on that, it's speculation. But I'd feel more confident I was wrong if someone would address what I actually said, rather than making up things I didn't say.

I'm not a politician, headlines like this don't hurt me. Conversation might be enlightening though if we attempt it.

ashley March 3, 2011 at 10:19 pm

um, i'm married to an indian-american, too…or i should say, i fake gay-married an indian-american in 2007 on maryland's eastern shore, and would like for us to be legally married as well. it sickens me to see all the people that i know on sam arora's donor list, since i know they would never have given, if they knew he would bait and switch on this issue. many of them are gay indians. so, racism has NOTHING to do with this, at least where I stand.

maggie gallagher March 3, 2011 at 10:22 pm

Hey guys I never used the word "racism." Both of these delegates pledged to support marriage equality, and both are now having second thoughts after hearing from what must be an IMMMENSE outpouring of opposition to gay marriage in their district. Why is everyone suddenly going only after Sam Arora?

That's my question. I think, judging from the reaction Tiffany is now much safer than she was in changing her mind, before Sam Arora's second thoughts. Hey, I could be wrong, but don't make up what I said.

The Professor March 3, 2011 at 10:52 pm

“Secondly, as someone married to an Indian-American, I find it interesting that the gay marriage machine appears to be re-focusing its attacks from Black Democrats who oppose gay marriage to an easier target: Indian-Americans.”

Who do you think you're fooling? Don't back peddle – You don't have to explicitly use the word racism, your accusation of it is completely clear. I believe the IMMENSE outpouring of opposition came from your deliberate spreading of fear and misinformation from your specious postcard campaign. By the way, I see you appealed the Maine ruling. I guess we will just have to wait a bit longer to find out who paid for the postage.

Scott Wooledge March 4, 2011 at 12:17 am

And how do you feel about liars? As Senator Arora repeated assured people he'd support this. Doesn't the Bible have something to say about people who lie?

Of course, clearly the lies you tell give you no pains of Christian guilt. You lie for Jesus.

amiworking March 4, 2011 at 1:16 am

Because, out of all three of them, most evidence shows that Sam ran on a platform supporting marriage equality and actively sought donations from gay men and women when he was running.

It doesn't occur often that a politician will flip on a platform promise. Delay, maybe, but flip: no.

Additionally, Maggie (if you are, indeed, Maggie) you will find that the gay blogosphere and gay media made little to no mention of the race of the three. The first time I read about race regarding what is currently going on on Maryland was from NOMblog.

Anon March 4, 2011 at 8:04 am

So you're attacking those who are calling Sam on the carpet for flip-flopping because they feel he has betrayed them. Are you suggesting that they should not be calling him out on his promise?

If so, you're hypocrisy is showing: http://www.nationformarriage.org/site/apps/nlnet/

Scott March 3, 2011 at 10:41 pm

Why are you using your husband's race to score cheap political points, Maggie (Mrs. Srivastav).

Why aren't you parading him around at your anti-gay marriage rallies and telling your Catholic and Mormon donors how wonderful it is to be married in the Hindu tradition?

xbonzhd March 4, 2011 at 6:20 am

Maggie is a well paid for her anti-gay rhetoric and every time she says something outrageous, she and her hate group NOM make more $$$. I find it hilarious she actually commented here, but also kinda sad that she actually seems to believe her statement didn't imply racism. Of course it did and it's exactly what she intended. And if Maggie is so proud of her marriage to an Indian-American, why don't we ever see him with her? Whyt doesn't she take his last name? Because most of the NOMbots would outraged to find out the woman is married to a Hindu and that might mean less money for her and Brian to spread their lies.

She's certainly not stupid, but I wonder what it's like for someone like Maggie who dedicates her life and career to tearing other families apart and standing in the way for their happiness?

As for the posting of PDFs on NOM's blog: they do that instead of posting direct links because that way NOM is able to control "comments" from the stories, most of which are overwhelmingly supportive of SSM and LGBT causes. PDFs allow NOM to cherry pick things that seem to support their point of view.

a. mcewen March 4, 2011 at 7:23 am

Also, Maggie – while this may change – neither delegate said anything about IMMENSE outpouring of opposition, so I think that you are maybe creating a spin.

And while you are addressing things, why not address the fact that NOM is spreading a false story about gay marriage in Massachusetts and kindergartners in your mailers.

Anon March 4, 2011 at 10:32 am

"After several days of wavering, Del. Sam Arora (D-Montgomery) announced Friday morning that he intends to vote for legislation allowing same-sex marriages in Maryland."
http://voices.washingtonpost.com/annapolis/2011/0

Anon March 4, 2011 at 10:33 am

Apparently all that "IMMENSE outpouring of opposition" was as IMMENSE as Maggie would have us believe…

Anon March 4, 2011 at 10:36 am

wasn't* as IMMENSE

<needs … more… coffee…>

The Professor March 4, 2011 at 10:54 am

We shouldn't misquote her, as she does us. She actually typed "IMMMENSE." (sic)

Wade MacMorrighan March 4, 2011 at 8:52 pm

WTF?! And, this from the woman who, in a 1991 article, denounced multiculturalism not only as a threat to religion (ie. Christofascism0, but as a threat to impressionable children; but, it gets juicier, because she even let this racially-tinged comment fly, "Embarrassing as it is to admit, most African Americans are Christian"!

Rodgie March 5, 2011 at 10:32 pm

Is "Gallagher" a common Indian surname? So much for Maggie's deep belief in "traditional marriage".
Someone's desperate…

fxgeorges March 6, 2011 at 12:24 am

You and your anti gay organization have become hate mongers by intimidating and destroying people just because of their beliefs…. without a doubt, history has shown you will lose that battle. I suggest a more subtle approach if you want to enter the mainstrem. In the words of Ghandi, hate has never, ever won in the long term.

Comments on this entry are closed.

{ 3 trackbacks }

Previous post:

Next post:

<% unless FeatureFlag.disable_quantcast? %> <% end %>