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


Polls and referenda and strategizing now for naught, Maggie Gallagher looks to God

by Jeremy Hooper

Maggie Gallagher, the person who is most likely to serve as the face of the 21st Century's marriage inequality movement, has long balked at the idea that anything, including marriage equality, is inevitable. But now that it marriage equality, in fact, inevitable, Maggie's getting a little more theological with her reasoning:

Those opposing same-sex marriage are on their heels, and increasingly unwilling or unable to make a stand against it. Asked whether the public acceptance of gay marriage was inevitable, one of the foremost opponents of gay marriage, Maggie Gallagher, gave this vague, philosophical answer:

“Nothing is inevitable. ‘Inevitability’ is the progressive substitute for the idea of Divine Providence,” Gallagher, the former president of the anti-gay National Organization for Marriage, told The Daily Beast. “Either God is in charge, or the future hasn't yet happened and is freely determined. Or God leaves us free.”
FULL: ‘Only God’ Can Stop Gay Marriage [Daily Beast]
(*I also contributed a quip to this article)

But wait, if God is in charge, hasn't he (or she) also been in charge for the past couple of years? And if so, might the current trajectory suggest that God is also sick of this discriminatory fight and that the all-knowing one wishes we mere mortals would move on to actual solutions to the actual problems that have been put here to test us? Wouldn't this be more likely (or at least just as likely) as the weird notion of God giving us marriage equality only so people like Maggie can spend more time trying to snatch it away?

I mean Maggie is technically true in saying that nothing is inevitable, since anything that exists could theoretically go away. But the more compelling and applicable truth is that Maggie Gallagher and her team had every right to make their case before a public that was very much on their side, and had every reason to believe that this battle, which was insurmountably uphill just a decade ago, would stay in their favor for years to come. But they failed to do so, and they failed really hard. We on the pro-equality side have won out because we made winning arguments. That might not make our civil marriage equality lock-solid for all the rest of recorded history, since again, just about any concept could theoretically disappear. But if looking to destiny, you have to admit that the safer bet is with the side that pushed for more peace and won more hearts with every passing day, and not the team that demanded more discrimination but lost its public support in (and because of) the process.

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