RECENT  POSTS:  » AFA: Gay rights = 'grave threat to our survival as a nation and as a moral and civilized people' » Tony Perkins: Baltimore unrest might be godly punishment for declaring 'moral rights to that which is morally wrong' » The oddity that is the LGBT rights debate circa 2015 » Video: 'Vox' lays out eleven year journey toward a bettered America » Why's the far-right putting a long discarded fear card back in the deck? » 'The newly stigmatized' Maggie Gallagher » Tony Perkins is denying he calls for pro-equality judges to be impeached; he's lying and here's empirical proof » Reality stars Jim Bob and Michelle Duggar vow to defy pro-equality SCTOUS ruling » Video: At US Capitol event hosted by GOP lawmakers, God's wrath over gay marriage explored as if it's likely » NOM: We're broke and need money before you see no reason to ever give to us again  

« Go back a post || Return to G-A-Y homepage || Haul tail to next post »

02/09/2011

NOM's been chopping at CPAC tree; Maggie will still eat its fruits

by Jeremy Hooper

The National Organization For Marriage may be on the official boycott list, prominently signing on to the coalition letter (assembled by NOM co-founder Robert George) that kicked off the boycott. But that minor point isn't stopping Maggie Gallagher from crossing the CPAC picket line:

"I will be at the Conservative Action Political Conference this week as an opinion journalist, covering the speeches of major potential presidential candidates with an eye toward answering this question: What do they think of life and marriage? And how do they explain, in a principled way, why these are core conservative issues?" [Maggie's syndicated column]

Isn't that just a tad hypocritical? I mean, Maggie's not only NOM's chairperson, but also its most prominent face (and other co-founder, along with George). People don't really even separate the two these days -- Maggie essentially is NOM. So since NOM has been front and center in announcing "withdrawal from participation," isn't a bit bullcrappy for Maggie to reap benefits from CPAC's offerings? We're going with yes.

***

*SEE ALSO: Chris Geidner's cover story on the CPAC brouhaha.

space gay-comment gay-G-A-Y-post gay-email gay-writer-jeremy-hooper


Your thoughts

comments powered by Disqus

G-A-Y Comments Policy


 
Related Posts with Thumbnails