Queerty is better as a member

Log in | Register
  Public Offender

Maggie Gallagher’s New Job: Playing Mother Theresa To Poor Oppressed Homophobes

Marriage ADA’s goal is an America where people on all sides of the gay marriage debate feel free to participate peacefully in the democratic process without fear of threats, harassment, or retaliation. I know that Frank is not the only one, because I’m getting e-mails from others who’ve faced similar threats. The goal of too many gay marriage advocates is to isolate, intimidate, and silence Americans who believe that marriage is the union of husband and wife, because children need their mom and dad. Marriage ADA is a response to these tactics of branding civil, thoughtful participation in democracy as hatred and bigotry.

Former National Organization of Marriage chair and out-of-wedlock mother Maggie Gallagher discussing her new role as the head of Marriage Anti-Defamation Association, in the National Review.

Source: Joe.My.God

By:           Dan Avery
On:           Sep 27, 2011
Tagged: , , , ,

  • 24 Comments
    • Cam
      Cam

      The typical phony lament of the bigot.

      You are oppressing us for not letting us attack you.

      Sorry Maggie. But if a woman fights off a rapist, she is not being hateful or taking away that rapists civil rights by not letting him rape her.

      Sep 27, 2011 at 3:01 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Little Kiwi
      Little Kiwi

      You have to remember why Maggie does what she does. She makes her living by being anti-gay.

      She has a son who is involved in NYC’s “music theatre community” (cough cough cough cough) whom she raised as a single mother. Yes. She got knocked up by a man she was not involved with, and gave birth to a son whom she raised as a single mother. She’s continually “atoning” for her perceived “sin” by choosing to be anti-gay, and pretty much a hardline right-wing Christian, all to make up for her earlier “loose ways.”

      Her last name, as well, is Srivastev. She doesn’t use it publicly, though, because it sounds too “Foreign”

      not very “traditional” to NOT take the last name of your husband, eh?

      she also has a history of racism. a published essay of hers on the “myth of secularism” includes a lovely line along the lines of “as much i hate to admit it, most black people are Christians”

      Look, she and her fellow bigots made fools of themselves during the Prop 8 trials. They have no argument beyond “but your honor, they’re GAYYYYY!” to fall back on.

      she’s a very sad woman who is herself guilty of two biblical sins which she continues to wallow in every day – Pride and Gluttony.

      Sep 27, 2011 at 3:06 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Michael
      Michael

      Whatever Maggie the bigots harass discriminate threaten and mock the gay community constantly.

      Don’t expect people to feel sorry for people who are responsible for innocent blood being shed due to comments like : ” gay is unnatural ” ” gay is not normal ” being gay is an abomination” etc….

      Nice try with the Martyr act Maggie not working though you idiots never gave a damn about these teens who took their lives .So why the fuck should we care about anything concerning any of you vile creatures? Hypocrites.

      Sep 27, 2011 at 3:10 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Little Kiwi
      Little Kiwi

      Maggie Srivastev (her married name) has a child out of wedlock that she gave birth to after getting knocked-up by man she wasn’t involved with in the 1980s.

      she’s spent her life trying to “atone” for her perceived sin by being as right-wing Christian as possible. all the while ignoring the sins of pride and gluttony. (Ezekiel 16, folks. “Sodomites” are explicitly stated as being people with wealth and resources and provisions who do not give to those without)

      it’s the same reason Tyree became one of their spokespeople – his own father didn’t care enough to stick around to raise him, and the idea that LGBT people out there DO want kids and DO want to have families upsets him. he’s angry that gay people are fighting for the right to do something that his heterosexual didn’t want – to raise a child properly.

      Sep 27, 2011 at 3:12 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • ToptoBottomNYC
      ToptoBottomNYC

      @Little Kiwi

      Every time I read one of your comments I get a little happy in the pants.

      Sep 27, 2011 at 3:58 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • ewe
      ewe

      She was one of those straight fag hags kicked out of the gay bars by the bartender. Bitter. Table of ONE.

      Sep 27, 2011 at 4:03 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Little Kiwi
      Little Kiwi

      *nuzzles TopToBottom :D

      Sep 27, 2011 at 4:04 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • the crustybastard
      the crustybastard

      “Marriage ADA is a response to these tactics of branding civil, thoughtful participation in democracy as hatred and bigotry.” – Maggie Gallagher

      Your hostility toward my rights shouldn’t be presumed as hostility toward me? Nonsense.

      When you attack an individual’s rights, you attack that individual, just as when you attack a minority’s rights, you attack that minority.

      It is equal parts preposterous and disingenuous to insist that an argument claiming gays do not possess fundamental/civil/Constitutional rights, or that gays ought to be alienated from their inalienable rights can come from anywhere other than hatred and bigotry.

      Such hatred and bigotry may be made in an exquisitely polite fashion, analyzed in innocuous-sounding terms, and spoke by likable telegenic personalities, but that doesn’t alter the underlying argument that gays are something less than people — which is an empirically bigoted and hateful message.

      …marriage is the union of husband and wife, because children need their mom and dad.

      More weapons-grade bullshit.

      Civil marriage is most certainly NOT a breeding commitment. (Moreover, I’ve never even seen sacramental marriage vows that extract the parties’ promise to reproduce — but even if such religious vows exist, they would still have no more relevance to the validity of a civil marriage than baptism has to the validity of a person’s citizenship.)

      Regardless, this argument is PRECISELY the same as banning Jews from marriage because marriage is the union of two Aryans because the state is best served by children with two racially pure parents.

      Sep 27, 2011 at 4:05 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Little Kiwi
      Little Kiwi

      Is Maggie saying that we’re allowed to marry as long as we don’t have kids or that she just wants to punish the children of LGBT couples who are being prevented from rights by stopping their parents from being allowed to legally marry?

      this isn’t an issue of “gays havign children” – we can have our own biological children whether she likes it or not. not letting LGBT parents marry, however, deprives the CHILDREN of rights and protections.

      oh Maggie, stopping Deb & Sue from marrying wont’ make “God” forget that you got knocked up after a few too many bacon-rimmed appletinis at Rosie O’Poverty’s Bar & Grill.

      Sep 27, 2011 at 4:09 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Kevin
      Kevin

      I have also posted this in various blogs in their comments section and would like to know if anyone else sees this new “group” as I do….

      From all the different blogs that I have read about Maggie’s new 501c group I notice that most of them seem to miss the obvious.

      As you recall while defending their right to privacy for their donor lists in many of the court cases (including the appeal to release the tapes of the Prob 8 trial), one point that the various courts have brought out that other than occasional incidences here and there they have been unable to prove any real “harm or discrimination” for those who are on the anti-marriage equality side. It was even one of the facts brought up in Judge Ware’s recent ruling to release the tapes.

      To me this is a way to for them to have their tales of discrimination and “attacks” in one central location that the courts can view.

      The danger comes in when anyone can post their experiences to the website, without being vetted as being a true and honest case of discrimination and they take it as gospel truth because after all, Christians never lie… NOT!!!!!!!

      In all of this though they never seem to count all the instances of anti-gay discrimination and attacks, which are for the most part fueled by their actions and words.

      They never mention things like how many gays are fired just for being gay (which is LEGAL in the majority of states) or how many gays have been bashed, spit on, and condemned for being gay or sometimes even those who are perceived to be gay for “acting on their gay impulses”.

      Although she is a vicious and vile woman with her own personal “agenda”, she is also smart and cunning like a fox. And with that in mind it’s only natural (for me at least) to wonder what her true intentions are for setting up this group. Maggie never does anything without thinking through what is in the best interest for her and her ilk and how she can capitalize on it for her best interests…

      Sep 27, 2011 at 4:10 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • One of the CA 36,000
      One of the CA 36,000

      @the crustybastard: To add to your last point about breeding not being a required part of civil cis-marriage: Despite all of the fundies whining about “sex between people of the same sex is UNNATURAL and icky!!”, sex itself is NOT a required part of civil marriage either.

      How about the a$$holes on Death Row who manage to convince women with rock-bottom self-esteem to marry them, despite near-universal denial of conjugal visits to prisoners on Death Row?!

      How about elderly men who can marry women indiscriminately and on a whim even if they’re impotent? The marriage license issuing clerk doesn’t tell them to “Whip it out and get it hard, otherwise you’re wasting your time and mine as well?!”

      Civil marriage does not depend on sexual relations or children. It’s about the mutual care of the two consenting adults (TWO; polygamy is a historically coercive and unbalanced family structure, and would the State force equal liquidation and division of community property when one party wanted to divorce the others in community-property states?!). No more, no less. It’s two people uniting as a social and legal unit. Usually out of deep love for each other.

      Like me and my husband.

      Sep 27, 2011 at 4:19 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • the crustybastard
      the crustybastard

      @One of the CA 36,000:

      Well-said and true.

      Sep 27, 2011 at 4:50 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Jim Hlavac
      Jim Hlavac

      Well, from a different perspective (for the Maggie=creep angle is well covered, I can add nothing much more,) the Census just released these numbers: “131,729 same-sex married couple households and 514,735 same-sex unmarried partner households” — and so these 600,000 gay couples are the “existential threat” to 65,000,000 hetero couples? Are they really that insecure, these heteros? Is their sexuality that tenuous? Apparently so. It’s mind boggling. (not that I agree with the study’s numbers; but, well, that’s the “official” “this is all we’ll admit to for now” numbers.)

      Well, as my family told the Catholics 600 years ago at Tabor, Czech Republic: “pfft, a zatra ceni kram a kral.” –> Goddamned church and king. But as my grandfather also said, “Ah, Jime, muj sladce divni vnukicku!” –> Ah, Jim, my sweet little gay grandson! A little more for family values that these creeps, for sure.

      Sep 27, 2011 at 5:12 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • milhouse
      milhouse

      It makes sense now why she attended the Proposition 8 play in New York. She wanted to provoke a reaction and hopefully publicity of her being “attacked” and thrown out of the theatre. This would have dovetailed perfectly with the start of her organization of oppressed homophobes. Too bad for her it failed. Also, you must remember that these sham organizations are set up to make money. The front men are paid a salary from all of the donations. Anti-gay is an industry now.

      Sep 27, 2011 at 5:23 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • the crustybastard
      the crustybastard

      @Kevin: From all the different blogs that I have read about Maggie’s new 501c group I notice that most of them seem to miss the obvious…this is a way to for [anti-equality bigots] to have their tales of discrimination and “attacks” in one central location that the courts can view.”

      I doubt a court would accept Maggie’s aggregation of anecdotes such as “The Lavender Mafia conspired to fire me for loving Jesus” or “I was beaten and peed on by elements of the homosexual activist lobby” as anything approaching testimonial evidence.

      Maggie cannily noted how the media grants Bill “The Catholic League” Donohue all sorts of facetime to spin any news that might depict Catholics in an unflattering light.

      She wants the media to indulge her persecution complex as well. Naturally, they will.

      Sep 27, 2011 at 5:35 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • D Campbell
      D Campbell

      @Little Kiwi: Do you know where/if this essay is online?

      Sep 27, 2011 at 9:15 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Miss Understood
      Miss Understood

      I wanna fart on her.

      Sep 27, 2011 at 10:38 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Kurt
      Kurt

      Okay, she makes one particular stupid comment that I think our community is at some fault for not pointing out. Maggie says “marriage is the union of husband and wife, because children need their mom and dad.” Well, plumbing of heterosexual couples makes babies; homosexual plumbing doesn’t. We all know that. Legalizing gay marriage doesn’t change biology so that gays can make babies. We are not denying any children their mom and dad.

      What some gay couple do is very generously take in and raise children on their own that heterosexual couples abandon or otherwise would send to the abortion clinic.

      In other words Maggie, we are stepping in where straights have fucked up.

      Sep 28, 2011 at 9:43 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Little Kiwi
      Little Kiwi

      @ D Campbell, it should be. “The Myth of MultiCulturalism” I believe it’s called. or The Myth of Secularism.

      Something stupid like that.

      Sep 28, 2011 at 11:34 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Nice Sean
      Nice Sean

      The worrying thing is though that people will believe this line that christians are being forced into silence by the evil homos! Remember what they tried to do with evolution, branding it as a scientific controversy where none existed, this is exactly the same – they are trying to brand themselves as victims while unjust laws damage gay people’s lives daily.

      Sep 28, 2011 at 5:31 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Queer Supremacist
      Queer Supremacist

      @Nice Sean: They have victim envy; a veritable fetish for victimhood. It’s sickening, and it goes back thousands of years.

      If I were in ancient Rome I would have rooted for the Lions. I’d settle for them getting pummeled by the Detroit Lions. Heck, I’d settle for them getting beaten up by a stage hand for The Lion King.

      Sep 29, 2011 at 2:48 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Steve
      Steve

      NOM is about to lose several court cases, and be required to disclose its donors. Before that happens, I expect, the records of those donations will conveniently be destroyed in a fire or flood. That will trigger a lot of legal action, and will likely result in NOM ceasing operations and declaring bankruptcy.

      In preparation for that, the assets are being transferred to a new organization. It will take several years for the lawyers to catch up, since they will have to build their case all over again against the new organization. Of course, the new organization will not have the donation records from the old organization. It will have a lot of the same supporters, just no records of prior amounts and dates.

      Somewhere in Maggie’s files, I am sure there is a list of supporters, without the specific dates and amounts of past contributions.

      Sep 30, 2011 at 3:15 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • sideliner
      sideliner

      @D Campbell: I believe the title of Maggot’s essay is “The Myth of Multiculture”, which can be found here:

      http://www.city-journal.org/article02.php?aid=1610

      Oct 21, 2011 at 10:03 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • urlaubsorte
      urlaubsorte

      Candidate Safe,cos chief youth edge reduction servant welcome tea especially afternoon unfortunately society consider theory channel student middle offence me creation from worth television into seat marry experiment nature emerge information construction pull enemy duty charge area introduce star towards list scale gas foreign no-one grant argument exactly especially agreement hence aim progress live smile similar basic fashion percent handle face decide final by brain corner factory whether really male that special tear important stop reflect odd military keep need solution before wood challenge membership culture where

      Dec 31, 2011 at 4:53 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·

    Add your Comment

    Queerty now requires you to log in to comment

    Please log in to add your comment.

    Need an account? Register It's free and easy.

  • POPULAR ON QUEERTY

    FOLLOW US
     



    GET QUEERTY'S DAILY NEWSLETTER


    FROM AROUND THE WEB

    Copyright 2014 Queerty, Inc.
    Follow Queerty at Queerty.com, twitter.com/queerty and facebook.com/queerty.