Maggie Gallagher concedes: Marriage amendments 'merely symbolic...aren’t going to pass'

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

05/12/2015

by Jeremy Hooper

Maggie Gallagher was a major proponent of the so-called Federal Marriage Amendment back when it did have fighting chance. The National Organization For Marriage, which she co-founded, still floats the silly idea to its supporters.

But now Maggie is owning up to the reality that constitutional amendments on marriage "will prove merely symbolic, and they aren’t going to pass." She writes:

For me the most important thing now for those of us deeply committed to Christian teachings on sex and marriage (as well as similar teachings in other religious faith traditions, or for merely common sense moral reasons) is to look not at what is in the secret soul of a candidate, but what is he willing to publicly commit to do if we elect a GOP Congress and President.

I don’t care so much about constitutional amendments at this point in history. Those will prove merely symbolic, and they aren’t going to pass. Will Jeb Bush and other candidates support the Marriage and Religious Freedom Act? If not, why not? And what will he do as president to protect our freedom?
Against Dhimmitude: Bush Calls for Respect for Christian Conscience [Pulse 2016]

Pssst, Maggie—A federal MARFA (which would essentially allow just about anyone to discriminate against same-sex couples without penalty) isn't going to pass either. Must we wait another ten years for you to realize/concede that?

space