RECENT  POSTS:  » Brian Brown is the victim, y'all. How many times does he have to tell you? » Congrats, gay activists—Bryan Fischer has found new group for his weekly 'Nazi' branding » Maggie Gallagher: Sexual orientation is 'more akin to religion' than to race » NOM is totally popular (*in Ethiopia) » What constitutes 'absolute pure evil' in the eyes of Liberty University dean? » Why Colorado will soon have marriage equality courtesy of Colorado's head opponent of marriage equality » Audio: AFA owns its extremism » FRC prays for God's people to 'arise' against LGBT rights » Michael Brown will save his waning movement by grouping homosexuality with incest » GOP pollster Luntz to Heritage Foundation's Anderson: 'Gay marriage is harmless'  

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

08/02/2013

After so much marriage talk, Maggie Gallagher seeks 'change'

by Jeremy Hooper

I have heard that Maggie Gallagher is trying to figure out where to take her career now that she's no longer with NOM and no longer writing her column. But I can honestly say that I didn't expect her to choose "ex-gay" water-carrier. That is, however, the role she seems really eager to play these days:

Screen Shot 2013-08-02 At 9.56.18 Am
[National Review Online]

In Maggie's latest, she cites scientific outlier and recent NARTH (National Association for Research & Therapy of Homosexuality) keynoter Nicholas Cummings as "proof" that gay people can "change." One big reason why Maggie is in this game at all is because Maggie serves on the board of the Freedom of Conscience Defense Fund, the organization (headed by the quite anti-gay Charles Limandri) that's fighting in court to defend the anti-scientific practices of JONAH (Jews Offering New Alternatives for Healing). Maggie has always been quite dutiful; when she takes on a role with an org, she tends to be a company woman.

But it's crazy silly for Maggie to go down this road. She is already the inextricable face of the 21st century push to ban gay people from civil rights that a growing majority of people realize to be deserved freedoms. Does she really want to use her remaining capital to push a form of "change" that an even greater majority sees as too extreme to even be believed and that the vast majority of credible scientists see as downright misguided (/dangerous)?

Not that my longtime two-step partner wants career advice from the likes of me. But, well—wow.

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