Connect with us

Monogamy: Dan Savage Calls Me Out

Published

on

Dan Savage thinks his public comments on marriage, monogamy, and fidelity don’t hurt our efforts to win hearts and minds in our battle for equality — and admonishes me for pointing out that they do.

Dear Dan,

In, “Confidential to David Badash,” a rant on your blog even most of your readers who commented seemed to think little of, you call me out for my article, “Chuck Colson: ‘Gay marriage will inevitably undermine all marriages’,” in which I call your comments in a New York Times interview last month, (in passing, I might add, as the piece is about Chuck Colson, remember, Dan?,) “misplaced rambling,” and your statement on monogamy, “circumspect.”

You didn’t piss me off, but thanks for saying “I’m sorry,” as you write, for, “sharing my opinions and shit like that.”

Time and time again, Dan, as I have mentioned before, you do shoot your mouth off without thinking about the bigger picture or the consequences of your actions. For an advice columnist, surely that’s not wise, is it?

I have no desire to judge the covenants of your relationship or of anyone else’s. Lord knows, the only people who can create and guide and judge their relationship are those whose relationship it is.

And for the record, while I personally believe in monogamy and fidelity — the “forsaking all others” thing — I don’t think I have the right to force that on anyone else.

But I take umbrage with the timing of your comments — even one of your readers made the same observation, and with feeding into the religious right’s pernicious meme that gays are sex fiends. AFA’s Bryan Fischer recently stated, “fidelity in same-​sex relationships is virtually unheard of,” and so, as you can imagine, your comments feed right into that bunk.

Fischer’s was a false statement — as is almost everything that comes out of his mouth about us — but it makes our jobs all the more difficult, especially as he is heard in forty states via the AFA’s 180+ radio stations.

“The view that we need a little less fidelity in marriages is dangerous for a gay-marriage advocate to hold,” the Times piece that started this brouhaha warned. “It feeds into the stereotype of gay men as compulsively promiscuous, and it gives ammunition to all the forces, religious and otherwise, who say that gay families will never be real families and that we had better stop them before they ruin what is left of marriage.”

And that’s my point.

The millions of Americans who are on the fence about us only need to hear that someone billed as one of the most central figures in the LGBT fight for equality thinks that fidelity and monogamy are going to be tossed out by same-sex couples, and there goes another state, say, Minnesota, adding a constitutional ban on same-sex marriages.

Voters, sadly, don’t need to be handed a reason to vote against us — or for the Michele Bachmanns, Rick Santorums, or Rick Perrys of the world. Giving them a reason merely justifies their own ignorance.


 

If you read my entire Chuck Colson piece, which offended you so much you needed to send me a public admonishment, you’d have read the part in which Colson writes, “So the next time you hear friends question what harm gay marriage will do, why not talk about the Times article…”

That’s what we don’t need, Dan. You know so well, from the success of your It Gets Better Project, that words matter, and that we’re fighting a war for hearts and minds. Giving fodder to the enemy only hurts our community — and all those kids you are working so hard to help. Did you ever stop to consider that a great many people read The New York Times, and having your words as ammunition could be used by those who oppose us?

And no, as you write, we’re not going to change Maggie Gallagher’s mind. But the millions of other Americans who are on the fence about us only need to hear that someone billed as one of the most central figures in the LGBT fight for equality thinks that fidelity and monogamy are going to be tossed out by same-sex couples, and there goes another state, say, Minnesota, adding a constitutional ban on same-sex marriages.

Voters, sadly, don’t need to be handed a reason to vote against us — or for the Michele Bachmanns, Rick Santorums, or Rick Perrys of the world. Giving them a reason merely justifies their own ignorance.

You see your job as calling things as you see them, and delivering advice based on your perceptions. I see my job as helping to inform and educate people, and present our issues to the general public honestly and positively — but that doesn’t exclude the importance of calling out those whose missteps harm us.

“We’re fighting for equal rights, sistergirlfriend, not a very special right to a bullshit double standard,” you write. “Gay people don’t have to be on our best behaviors, as defined by you or Maggie or the Pope, to be entitled to our civil rights. They’re called rights, David, and not treats or trophies, for a reason: we don’t have to earn or win them. They’re already ours, technically, even if they’re not yet recognized.”

I agree, seeing that I spend every day, almost every waking moment, writing about our civil rights — and about those who are hard at work trying to prevent legal recognition of them. I certainly don’t need to be reminded that the rights of LGBT people are inalienable, as I’ve written often, like here.

I don’t think we have to earn our rights — they’re ours, they’re inalienable, they exist because we do —  but I do think, for the good of our community, people in the spotlight, people with a platform, have a responsibility to make sure we’re helping, not harming, the movement. That’s why I wrote this. And this.

All that said, Dan, I really do want you to know that I have great respect for so much of what you’ve accomplished. The It Gets Better Project should go down in history as possibly one of the greatest life-saving creations of the decade. You, and Terry, deserve all the accolades you’ve received for that.

As with so many battles within our movement, I fear you may not feel you and I are fighting for exactly the same thing. I hope you realize we’re on the same side.

There's a reason 10,000 people subscribe to NCRM. You can get the news before it breaks just by subscribing, plus you can learn something new every day.
Related Topics:
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.

News

Trump’s Coalition Is ‘Kaput’ — Midterms Threaten to Be ‘Brutal’: Columnists

Published

14 hours ago

on

April 16, 2026

By

The coalition that united to put Donald Trump back in the White House in 2024 is “kaput,” and with a president polling even worse than at this point in his first term, the November midterms are threatening to be “brutal” for Republicans, argue Yvonne Wingett Sanchez and Elaine Godfrey at The Atlantic.

“A shocking number of the president’s supporters have turned against him,” the columnists write.

“When Trump opens his mouth, three-quarters of what he says is stories, lies,” Tomas Montoya, a Trump voter, told The Atlantic outside a popular Hispanic grocery store in Casa Grande, Arizona.

“Montoya voted for President Trump in 2024, but now, well, frustrated doesn’t begin to cover how he’s feeling. The president is bragging about the economy, even though everyone Montoya knows is hurting; he promised to stop wars, but started one in Iran,” The Atlantic notes. “He’s planning to vote in the midterm elections this fall. But he may not choose a Republican.”

Some Trump voters, like Montoya, the columnists explain, sound “anxious, and a little regretful about how they voted two Novembers ago.”

They describe some of Trump’s “fanboys in the libertarian-leaning manosphere” as “baffled by his actions on the Epstein files, immigration, and now Iran.”

Religious conservatives “have been criticizing their once-unassailable leader after he posted a photo on social media of himself as Jesus and attacked the pope, calling the first American pontiff ‘WEAK on Crime.'”

Some battleground Republican operatives would prefer the president not campaign “too hard” for their candidates.

READ MORE: Conservative Christian Broadcaster Slams Franklin Graham’s ‘Embarrassing’ Defense of Trump

How bad are the midterms expected to be for the GOP?

“Almost every new poll is a red flag for Republicans,” they write. “Independents, young voters, and Latinos—groups that were crucial to Trump’s win in 2024—aren’t in the bag anymore. Even non-college-educated white Americans, once the president’s strongest group, have turned on him, according to a CNN polling average.”

One 61-year-old Democrat who opted to vote for Trump in 2024 hoping he would bring down high prices says she is poorer today than she was two years ago.

“High gas prices mean that she is staying home more often—skipping Bible studies at her church, volunteering less, and even missing exercise classes. Trump’s decision to go to war with Iran was her breaking point with the president. ‘I think that he just wants war,’ she said. ‘He’s made it plain that he’s adversarial with everybody.'”

Trump’s highly controversial AI post of himself “dressed in flowing robes, surrounded by a heavenly glow while healing a sick man … alienated the one group of Americans that has rarely left his side: Christian conservatives. The picture, declared the Daily Wire reporter Megan Basham, was ‘OUTRAGEOUS blasphemy.'”

Far-right pastor Joel Webbon, who, The Atlantic noted, opposes women being allowed to vote, said that Trump is “currently demon possessed.”

Anti-trans activist Riley Gaines, whom the president has called a “tremendous athlete,” wrote that “God shall not be mocked.”

Some fundraising “plummeted” in early March after Trump launched his Iran war.

“If this is a two-week stretch, not a huge deal,” a GOP consultant told The Atlantic. “If we’re still bombing Iran in November? I mean …”

READ MORE: ‘I’m All About the Gospel’ Trump Says After Refusing to Meet With Pope Leo

 

Image via Reuters 

Continue Reading

News

‘I’m All About the Gospel’ Trump Says After Refusing to Meet With Pope Leo

Published

16 hours ago

on

April 16, 2026

By

Amid an escalating feud with President Donald Trump lashing out at the first American pope, Pope Leo XIV, and the pope promoting a pro-peace, anti-war message the president opposes, Trump is refusing to meet with the Vicar of Christ.

“I don’t think it’s necessary,” Trump declared on Thursday afternoon, despite new poll numbers that show his support among Catholics slipping after his attacks on the pontiff.

Earlier on Thursday, Pope Leo had posted to social media a message some thought was meant for the president.

“Woe to those who manipulate religion and the very name of God for their own military, economic, and political gain, dragging that which is sacred into darkness and filth,” he wrote.

Asked specifically about it, Trump did not answer directly, instead telling reporters that it’s “very important that the Pope understands, very, very important…Iran cannot have a nuclear weapon.”

Trump also told reporters, “I’m all about the Gospel. I’m all about it as much as anybody can be!”

READ MORE: Conservative Christian Broadcaster Slams Franklin Graham’s ‘Embarrassing’ Defense of Trump

 

Image via Reuters

Continue Reading

News

Conservative Christian Broadcaster Slams Franklin Graham’s ‘Embarrassing’ Defense of Trump

Published

17 hours ago

on

April 16, 2026

By

Conservative Christian evangelist Franklin Graham is rushing to President Donald Trump’s aid, defending an image the president posted that appeared to depict him as Jesus Christ, “bathed in divine light and clad in religious robes,” as The New York Times described, and one of the president with Jesus Christ. One conservative Christian broadcaster isn’t buying Graham’s defense.

“I do not believe President Trump would knowingly depict himself as Jesus Christ—that would certainly be inappropriate,” Graham wrote on social media on Thursday. “I’m thankful the President has made it very clear that this was not at all what he thought the AI-generated image was representing—he thought it was a doctor helping someone, and when he learned of the concerns, he immediately removed the post.”

“I think this is a lot to do about nothing,” Graham continued, noting that there were no halos, crosses, or angels in the illustration. “There is so much ill-intended speculation. I think his enemies are always foaming at the mouth at any possible opportunity to make him look bad.”

He went on to defend an image Trump also posted that appeared to show him being embraced by Christ.

READ MORE: Trump Axes Catholic Charities Funding for Migrant Kids Amid Pope Feud: Report

“I like the fact that this is a picture of Jesus whispering in his ear, or at least His hand on his shoulder, guiding him,” Graham declared. “We all need that—we all need to be listening to Jesus…Remember, President Trump didn’t draw this, he didn’t create it, he reposted it on his social media because he thought it was nice—I would have to agree.”

Graham called Trump the “most pro-Christian, pro-life president in my lifetime,” and suggested the Pope should “thank the President for his efforts to protect religious liberty for Catholics and people of all faiths.”

Erick Erickson, a conservative evangelical talk radio host and political commentator once described as the “most powerful conservative in America,” blasted Graham’s remarks.

“This is embarrassing,” he wrote in response to Graham’s post.

He was not alone in his condemnation.

“So laughable it’s sad. Sycophancy comes to the Graham name. Deeply unserious,” declared Professor Matthew Boedy, who focuses on the rhetoric of religion.

Republican former U.S. Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene, a former Trump ally, also blasted Graham.

“Franklin Graham making excuses for Trump posting himself as Jesus is one of the worst things I’ve seen,” she wrote. “Trump posted his blasphemous picture with Satan added above him, the original picture had a soldier. If you search ‘pictures of Jesus’ most of them show Jesus in white with a red robe over his shoulders. Franklin Graham of all people, who is frequently at the WH and with Trump, should be leading Trump to be a Christian, NOT telling other Christians that Trump did nothing wrong when he committed blasphemy.”

READ MORE: Why Trump Might Want to Try to ‘Usher’ Alito Into Retirement: CNN Analysis

 

Image via Reuters 

 

 

 

Continue Reading

Trending

Copyright © 2020 AlterNet Media.