« Go back a post || Return to G-A-Y homepage || Haul tail to next post »
07/26/2010
Maggie Gallagher wants to take back territory; by 'territory' she means the shelf where my wedding album lives
I am a legally married gay man. It's no overstatement to say that Maggie Gallagher wants to legally divorce me from my husband:
"The battle for marriage is often unique to each state. On the East coast, for example, we need to block same-sex marriage. In other places, we need to take back territory by overturning same-sex marriage laws.
...
"After this election cycle, we hope to take back territory and have a much more friendly leadership for exploring how same-sex marriage is interfering with the core civil rights of Americans."
...
"Marriage is the tip of the spear.
We’re now seeing a colorful movement attempting to ground the law into a lie about human nature.
Two men in a union do not equal a marriage.
If the government embraces and uses the power of the law to enforce this lie, the result will not only be the disintegration of our public culture of marriage and the suffering of children, but it will also result in a permanent second-class status for Christians and people of other traditional faiths.
People of faith will increasingly be treated like racists or bigots in the public square; not only by public opinion, but by the law.
We need to stand up for marriage and communicate that ‘We’re here. We’re not going away. We’re going to stand up for what’s right. Same-sex marriage is not a civil right.’"
-Maggie Gallagher, National Organization For Marriage [Source: Focus on the Family]
It's a truly sick threat to put into someone's head. Here we live in a world where divorce sometimes seems to be the default position, where partners leave their families for a number of reasons (as the father of Maggie's son did her), and where things like fame and material wealth have taken the premium that we should instead place on notions like peace and love. And here is this person, in her self-appointed role, deciding that she's going to deny, devalue, and yes, divorce, any kind of loving couple that falls outside of her purview of acceptability? To deny tangible CIVIL rights based on her personal faith views? To hurt thy neighbor for political sport?
Drop the rhetoric and contrived "culture war" politicking for a second and just think about this on a human level. If you can do so and still see Maggie's work and comments here as anything less than dehumanizing, then your childhood golden rule had a much different ring to it than mine did. And that should be true even if your adulthood golden ring has a much more opposite-sexed spouse attached to it than mine does.
***
**SEE ALSO: The pre-Xmas exchange where Maggie essentially told me the same thing to my e-face: A Maggie Little Christmas [G-A-Y]
Your thoughts
comments powered by Disqus
