Connect with us

Bigotry Watch: Maggie Gallagher Thinks She’s Better Than You Because She Can Get Married And You Can’t



“They [gay marriage proponents] hope to use the law to reshape the culture in exactly the same way that the law was used to reshape the culture of the old racist south.”

 (Editor’s Note: Maggie Gallagher’s National Organization for Marriage produced and paid for the $1.5 million anti-gay marriage hate ad currently speeding about the Internet.)

Extreme conservative, author, and commentator Maggie Gallagher thinks she’s better than you. She co-wrote the book, The Case for Marriage: Why Married People are Happier, Healthier, and Better Off Financially. That alone should make the hair on your neck stand on end in anger. I think the book should be sub-titled “Nah-nah-nah-na, nah nah” and the cover should have a photo of her with her tongue sticking out at you while she pops balloons with pictures of same-sex couples printed on them. 

Now, I’m all for marriage. Equal marriage. Everyone, regardless of orientation, should be able to marry the person they love. And I don’t begrudge anyone their marriage. Maggie believes in marriage so much, she is the President of the National Organization for Marriage (NOM), which describes itself as,

“A nonprofit organization with a mission to protect marriage and the faith communities that sustain it. Founded in response to the growing need for an organized opposition to same-sex marriage in state legislatures, NOM serves as a national resource for marriage-related initiatives at the state and local level. For decades, pro-family organizations have educated the public about the importance of marriage and the family, but have lacked the organized, national presence needed to impact state and local politics in a coordinated and sustained fashion.”


“Maggie Gallagher is also president of the Institute for Marriage and Public Policy (, a nonprofit organization whose unique mission is research and public education on ways that law and public policy can strengthen marriage as a social institution.”

But Maggie only believes in marriage for straight people. And Maggie wants married people to be happier, healthier, and better off financially. Which means she doesn’t want gays to be, and doesn’t believe we can be. Or should be.

Here’s why you need to know all this: First, because I promised last week the start of a new “aspect” to this blog, the “Bigotry Watch”. Welcome to the Bigotry Watch club, Maggie! Second, because Ms. Gallagher saw fit to write this nasty, uninformed, and yes, bigoted post in The National Review Online today. Responding to gay marriage and, specifically, the New York Times op-ed by David Blankenhorn and Jonathan Rauch, about which I’ve been writing a lot today. Here’s what she had to contribute to the discussion:

“From where I stand, it looks like the progressive/democrat position states: If you believe marriage means a husband and wife, you are not just wrong, you are downright wicked and deserve to have your home address put up on the internet so strangers can harass you.”

Really, Maggie? Really? The president of TWO national, pro-heterosexual-marriage non-profits (yes, tax-free!) groups, a conservative author for nineteen years, and that’s all you’ve learned? Wow. Is that the best you can offer, that glib, snarky, and factually inaccurate lie? It’s a lie because you and I both know you don’t even believe it. If you did, there would be no need for your decades-long career of being against same-sex marriage. Your career, I might add, which is primarily based on the ideology of keeping people who love each other apart. (Right now I’m wondering if that was one of the multiple-choice options the high school guidance counselor gave her?)

Now folks, remember our former president Bush? The one who spent hundreds of millions of dollars to “promote” and “protect” marriage? Hundreds of millions of your tax dollars to tell your friends and neighbors that you didn’t deserve your civil rights, well, guess who got some of that cash? Yup: Maggie Gallagher. Via Wikipedia:

“On January 26, 2005, Howard Kurtz of the Washington Post uncovered records of Gallagher receiving payments of tens of thousands of dollars from the Department of Health and Human Services from 2002-2003 for helping the George W. Bush administration promote the President’s “healthy marriage” initiative. During this time, Gallagher testified before Congress repeatedly in favor of “healthy marriage” programs, but never disclosed the payments.”

So, Maggie, to quote a phrase, “From where I stand” it looks like you subscribe to a theory I once heard: “The truth is very valuable. Don’t waste it by using it too often.”

Or, consider this inanity, the veritable “slippery slope” Maggie and her ilk so readily offer as to why gay marriage must be stopped. From her 2008 piece, “Redefinition Revolution: Gay marriage is about more than Adam and Steve“:

“What about polygamy? Is that the natural next step? When people ask me this, my stock answer has become, “I don’t know, go ask the guys in the Harvard Law School faculty lounge.” Because if the California decision stands, there simply is no longer any case to be made we have begun to win the war for judicial restraint. If a court can rule that same-sex marriage is a fundamental right (i.e., one deeply rooted in our nation’s traditions) then it can make up anything. Elite legal minds get to figure out what they think and break it to the rest of us once they’ve decided.”

Gallagher, at one point a single mother, seems to have been Ann Coulter’s coach for her latest book, “Guilty”, on which she (Coulter) blames all the ills of society on single mothers. In this video, Gallagher all but blames gays for the destruction of the family and (as does United Families International president Beverly Rice). the declining birth rate.

There’s one thing Maggie and I do agree. In her “Redefinition” piece, she writes,

“They [gay marriage proponents] hope to use the law to reshape the culture in exactly the same way that the law was used to reshape the culture of the old racist south.” 

You know what Maggie? You’re damn right we do.

Continue Reading
Click to comment

Enjoy this piece?

… then let us make a small request. The New Civil Rights Movement depends on readers like you to meet our ongoing expenses and continue producing quality progressive journalism. Three Silicon Valley giants consume 70 percent of all online advertising dollars, so we need your help to continue doing what we do.

NCRM is independent. You won’t find mainstream media bias here. From unflinching coverage of religious extremism, to spotlighting efforts to roll back our rights, NCRM continues to speak truth to power. America needs independent voices like NCRM to be sure no one is forgotten.

Every reader contribution, whatever the amount, makes a tremendous difference. Help ensure NCRM remains independent long into the future. Support progressive journalism with a one-time contribution to NCRM, or click here to become a subscriber. Thank you. Click here to donate by check.


Trump Appears to Think Jeb Bush Was President: ‘He Got Us Into the Middle East’



During a rally in South Carolina on Monday, Donald Trump appeared to confuse former Florida GOP Governor Jeb Bush with his brother, former President George W. Bush, while bragging to supporters how he beat him.

Jeb Bush, who was largely considered to be the default Republican Party nominee for the 2016 presidential election when he launched his campaign, dropped out in February of 2016 after the South Carolina primary.

“When I come here, everyone thought Bush was going to win,” Trump said, before claiming he was “up by about 50 points” over Bush. “They thought Bush because Bush was supposedly a military person.”

“You know what he was…He got us into the Middle East,” Trump claimed, wrongly. “How did that work out?”

READ MORE: ‘Isn’t Glock a Good Gun?’ Trump Asks Before Saying He Is Buying One – Campaign Forced to Deny He Did

“But they also thought that Bush might win. Jeb. Remember Jeb? He used the word ‘Jeb,’ he didn’t use the word ‘Bush,’ I said, ‘You mean he’s ashamed of the last name?’ and then they immediately started using the name Bush,” Trump claimed.

The ex-president went on to continue denigrating Jeb Bush, accusing him of bringing his mother to campaign with him.

“Remember,” Trump said, “he brought his mother, his wonderful mother who’s 94 years old and it was pouring and they’re wheeling her around and it’s raining and horrible. I said, ‘Who would do that your mother, 94 years old. How desperate are you to win?”

Media Matters’ Craig Harrington, commenting on Trump’s latest gaffe, observed: “In the past two weeks, Donald Trump has:

– Warned that Joe Biden might start ‘World War 2’
– Confused his 2016 election opponent (Hillary Clinton) with former President Barack Obama
– Confused his 2016 primary opponent (Jeb Bush) with former President George W. Bush.”

Watch the video below or at this link.

READ MORE: ‘Careening’ Toward ‘Risk of Political Violence’: Experts Sound Alarm After Trump Floats Executing His Former General

Continue Reading


Fulton County Judge in Trump Case Orders Jurors’ Identities and Images Must Be Protected



The Fulton County Superior Court judge presiding over Georgia’s RICO, conspiracy, and election interference case against Donald Trump on Monday afternoon ordered the identities and images of all jurors and prospective jurors to remain secret, ordering they may only be referred to by a number.

“No person shall videotape, photograph, draw in a realistic or otherwise identifiable manner, or otherwise record images, statements, or conversations of jurors/prospective jurors in any manner” that would violate a Superior Court rule, Judge Scott McAfee ordered, “except that the jury foreperson’s announcement of the verdict or questions to the judge may be audio recorded.”

“Jurors or prospective jurors shall be identified by number only in court filings or in open court,” he added.

READ MORE: ‘Careening’ Toward ‘Risk of Political Violence’: Experts Sound Alarm After Trump Floats Executing His Former General

Judge McAfee also ordered no juror’s or prospective juror’s identity, “including names, addresses, telephone numbers, or identifying employment information” may be revealed.

MSNBC’s Katie Phang posted the order, and added: “Another important part of the Order: no responses from juror questionnaires or notes about jury selection shall be disclosed, unless permitted by the Court.”

Judge McAfee’s order comes after Donald Trump’s weekend of attacks on his former Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, General Mark Milley. Trump strongly suggested he should be executed for treason. Trump also strongly suggested he would target Comcast, NBC News, and MSNBC if he wins the 2024 presidential election.

Responding to the news, MSNBC’s Medhi Hasan observed, “We have just normalized the fact that the former president, and GOP presidential frontrunner, is basically a mob boss.”


Continue Reading


‘Isn’t Glock a Good Gun?’ Trump Asks Before Saying He Is Buying One – Campaign Forced to Deny He Did



During a photo shoot at a South Carolina gun shop, Donald Trump posed with and then said he wanted to buy a Glock, asking if it is “a good gun.”

Some say it might be illegal to sell a gun to anyone under criminal indictment, and if he took the gun with him that too might be illegal. It was not clear if, despite saying he would, he actually bought the firearm. The Trump campaign initially said he had, although later backtracked on its claim, and deleted the social media post saying he had.

In the photo op (video below,) Trump posed with several people, including the Republican Attorney General of South Carolina, Alan Wilson, who has held that elected position since 2011.

“Trump’s spokesman announced that Trump bought a Glock today in South Carolina. He even posted video,” wrote former Chicago Tribune editor Mark Jacob. “If Trump took the gun with him, that’s a federal crime since he’s under indictment. There’s also a law against selling a gun to someone under federal indictment like Trump.”

READ MORE: ‘Poof’: White House Mocks Stunned Fox News Host as GOP’s Impeachment Case Evaporates on Live Air

Reuters’ crime and justice reporter Brad Heath posted the federal laws that might apply, as well as Trump’s campaign spokesperson’s clip of the ex-president’s remarks, and his spokesperson saying, “President Trump purchases a @GLOCKInc in South Carolina!”

CNN analyst Stephen Gutowski, who writes about gun policy, added, “It would be a crime for him to actually buy this gun because he’s under felony indictment. Did he actually go through with this purchase?”

“People under felony indictments can’t ‘receive’ new firearms. That also means you can’t buy them,” he also wrote.

MSNBC anchor and legal contributor Katie Phang wrote, “I don’t know if he actually bought the gun. At least it didn’t happen in this video. Also, the Attorney General of South Carolina is in this video. Is he watching Trump commit a crime?”

But some pointed to a federal judge in Texas’ ruling from last year. Reuters reported, a “federal law prohibiting people under felony indictment from buying firearms is unconstitutional.”

Watch the video below or at this link.



Continue Reading


Copyright © 2020 AlterNet Media.