RECENT  POSTS:  » Episcopalians approve ceremonies for all legally-qualified couples » NOM's wishful (and disrespectful) thinking: SCOTUS ruling is 'illegitimate' » Focus on the Family creates itemized price list for 'saving' marriage » Fox News pays this person for his opinions » Pat Buchanan doubles down on 1983 column claiming AIDS is nature's punishment » Is NOM really going to push for a constitutional convention on marriage? » Video: Great piece from 'CBS Sunday Morning' highlights sweet success » Yes, the American marriage equality fight is over—the rest is just bluster » Goodnight from the White House to your house » AL Chief Justice Roy Moore calls marriage equality worse than segregation decision  

« 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