Tweet
crossposted on Holy Bullies and Headless Monsters
This is just pitiful. A few thoughts:
1. Where is Carrie Prejean? Apparently her moment in the spotlight is over.
2. Maggie Gallagher got wrecked twice. First was a full speed dressing down by former Miss USA Shanna Moakler. Moakler takes Gallagher to task for exploiting Prejean. I found myself saying “get it girlfriend!” while snapping my fingers in a “Z formation.”
The second wrecking was a bit more subtle by substitute host Joy Behar. Behar asked her a simple question about why focusing on gays wanting to get married rather than divorce. Gallagher hems and haws big time. Of course she pushes her tried and true diversionary argument of “they think we are bigots for defending traditional marriage.”
3. Stephen Baldwin was much more useful when he was freely showing his buttcheeks in movies. “God wrote the Bible?” Come on now. And then he talks about being persecuted. Pullleaze!
4. Former Miss California, the Rev. Nicole Lamarche, defends marriage equality with intelligence, poise, and the utmost grace. Awesome lady!
But the main thing I took out of the segment is this – NOM is swiftly leaving Heaven's Gate territory and careening towards Plan 9 From Outer Space land.
***
BEHAR: The gay marriage debate has been front and center this week.Joining us for a debate of our own are Shanna Moakler, director of Miss California USA. She's a former Miss USA who's in a new ad slamming Proposition 8. It bans gay marriage in California.
Reverend Nicole la March. Nicole was Miss California in 2003. She supports gay marriage.
In Los Angeles, actor Stephen Baldwin, starring in “I'm A Celebrity, Get Me Out of Here,” joins us. He is opposed to gay marriage.
And Maggie Gallagher, president of the National Organization for Marriage, is here.
A new anti-gay marriage ad featuring Miss California, Carrie Prejean, I believe is the way you say it, was launched this week.
Listen to Carrie's remarks that reignited the issue.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP, COURTESY NBC)
PEREZ HILTON: Vermont recently became the fourth state to legalize same-sex marriage.
Do you think every state should follow suit?
Why or why not?
CARRIE PREJEAN: Well, I think it's great that Americans are able to choose one or the other. We live in a land that you can choose same-sex marriage or opposite marriage. And you know what, in my country and in — in my family, I think that I believe that a marriage should be between a man and a woman — no offense to anybody out there.
CARRIE PREJEAN, MISS CALIFORNIA: Well, I think it's great that Americans are able to choose one or the other. We live in a land that you can choose same-sex marriage or opposite marriage. And, you know what, in my country, and in my family, I think that I believe that a marriage should be between a man and a woman. No offense to anybody out there. But that's how I was raised, and that's how I think that it should be, between a man and a woman. Thank you.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
BEHAR: Shanna, what's your reaction to Carrie Prejean. How do you say her name?
MOAKLER: Carrie Prejean. Prejean, Prejean. I say Prejean.
BEHAR: What's your reaction to those remarks?
MOAKLER: I'm very proud of Carrie that she stood up for what she believes in and she followed her heart. And I told her that that night. I'm not going to lie and say that it hurt my feelings a little bit. Everyone is right. Everyone has the freedom to their speech, the freedom of speech. I applaud her for that.
BEHAR: Right, OK. Maggie, you had a press conference for the National Organization of Marriage, where you released that new ad called “No Offense With Carrie Prejean.” Let's take a look at that.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: She's asked her opinion about marriage.
PREJEAN: I believe that a marriage should be between a man and a woman, no offense to anybody out there.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Then is attacked.
PEREZ HILTON, CELEBRITY GOSSIP: She's a dumb (EXPLETIVE DELETED), OK?
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: A pro-marriage group talks about how gay marriage will impact religious groups.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: It's no longer palatable in this country or OK to be an outright bigot. UNIDENTIFIED MALE: They attack if you oppose gay marriage because they don't want to debate the consequences.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
BEHAR: OK. That was — that's a harsh ad.
GALLAGHER: Is it a harsh ad? I think it's an honest ad. I think the reason Carrie's story is resonating with so many people, besides how young and nice that she is and beautiful, is that a lot of Americans who think marriage means a man and a woman are feeling like it doesn't matter how nicely you say it, how civilly you say it, you get slammed. You get treated as if you are — you get name-called. After Prop 8, people's names were put up on the Internet, and we had people saying, go after these people.
We had a waitress who gave 100 dollars to support marriage and people were calling for her job. They wanted her to lose her job, because she supported marriage as a man and a woman. So the reality is I don't blame gay people for this. I know many gay people. No way this is the way they want this movement to be acting.
But we do have a gay marriage movement right now that if you disagree with them, they tend to treat you like you were the Ku Klux Klan or something. And that's what happened to Carrie. I think most of us think that's wrong.
BEHAR: Nicole, you've been in Carrie's position. You were a beautiful Miss California.
LAMARCHE: Thank you, thank you.
BEHAR: Then you became a reverend. I'm fascinated by that. Was she correct to speak her mind like that, do you think?
LAMARCHE: Oh, absolutely.
BEHAR: Free speech?
LAMARCHE: Absolutely. I think the place where I enter the conversation is when she went on “The Today Show” and then said that the Bible condones what she said. And that's a little tricky. The Bible — any reading of the Bible is a selective reading. And so I always want to make sure to offer an alternative position, which is that god is the god of love, and that marriage should be something that's available for each and every loving adult committed couple.
BEHAR: Do you agree with that, Steven?
BALDWIN: Absolutely not. The Bible clearly indicates that when two of the same sex lie down together, that is sin. Now, God wrote t
he Bible. So, therefore, that is what God has to say and God is the judge.The thing that's very interesting to me, Joy, is just because I believe in the Bible means that I'm now being persecuted if I believe in traditional marriage. So I'm here to –
BEHAR: How are you being persecuted?
BALDWIN: Joy, let me finish. I'm here to represent all of those people who are being persecuted for believing in traditional marriage.
BEHAR: Tell me how you're being persecuted exactly, Stephen. What's happening to you?
BALDWIN: Exactly like Miss California. Just simply because who she is and what she believes is that traditional marriage is what is right, according to who she is and what she believes. Look what's happening. She's being persecuted.
MOAKLER: I need to interject in here.
BALDWIN: She's being persecuted.
BEHAR: Go ahead, Shanna.
MOAKLER: First and foremost, Carrie didn't lose the pageant because her answer. She was behind in numbers, behind in scores. Carrie is being persecuted because she has a title, and that title is Miss California USA. She has responsibilities as Miss California USA that she has now basically kind of forgone, and has aligned herself with an organization that has — it's already a heated and polarizing issue. So to align yourself with this right after all the heat, you can't complain of getting all this heat and then go do something so drastic.
BEHAR: OK, Maggie.
GALLAGHER: It's not drastic to say marriage means a man and a woman, nor to stand with other people who are doing that. I was going to compliment you, Shanna, on the change in your tone in respecting Carrie's rights here. But I have to say you're now sounding exactly like you did when she appeared on “The Today Show,” accusing her of pursuing an opportunistic agenda. Then you released private medical information about her to the press to try to smear her.
MOAKLER: I think you're pursuing an opportunist agenda when you hire a 21-year-old that has –
(CROSS TALK)
MOAKLER: — who has never even had a long-term relationship, and you put her in a press junket that she's unprepared for. You were not only damaging her. This is a bright, young, talented young woman that has — is going to be left with a legacy of being an Anita Bryant. She should be back home in California, and she should be doing her responsibilities.
BEHAR: I'm going to let you talk as soon as we come back, OK?
What do you think of gay marriage. That's tonight's quick vote question. Go to CNN.com/LarryKing and tell us what you think. We'll be back after this with more.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
BEHAR: OK. We're back. Maggie, what did you want to say to Shanna?
GALLAGHER: I wanted to say, first of all, that Carrie does not work for the National Organization for Marriage. She's a spokesman for her own views, as anyone watching her is perfectly clear. It's the Miss USA California officials who, instead of backing her up and dealing with this judge, who went on the Internet and videotaped himself cursing her out, saying he wanted to rip the tiara off — for you to go around Shanna and say that her legacy is divisive and polarizing, you will not meet a better human being than Carrie.
I'm honored that she chose to stand with us at the National Organization for Marriage, as we released this ad calling for people to account.
BEHAR: I want to ask you about the National Organization for Marriage. It's set up to protect marriage, right?
GALLAGHER: Our mission is protecting marriage and the faith communities that sustain it.
BEHAR: Then why don't you focus on Mel Gibson's divorce, Bristol Palin's single parenthood, and she should be married — maybe she should be getting married? Why are you focusing on gay marriage?
GALLAGHER: I spent 20 years on the problem of family fragmentation, divorce and married child — there really isn't anyone who has gone around the country more.
(CROSS TALK)
GALLAGHER: The reason I cared about that is I used to go around the country and say marriage really matters because children need a mom and dad. After after Massachusetts, I think I'm not going to be able to say that anymore. The law — you change the definition of marriage, you change it for everyone. And this ancient and honorable idea, marriage is about bringing together the two halves of humanity, male and female, so that children have a mother and father. That's going to be treated as bigotry.
MOAKLER: What's wrong with a mother and a mother and what is wrong with a father and a father? I don't think anyone can define marriage, except two people who are in a union together who love each other. — as an organization that can do that.
BEHAR: Nicole, get in here.
LAMARCHE: Those of us who are celebrating marriage equality believe in marriage. I mean, marriage is an institution that creates healthy children, healthy families, which is why I would say that it should be an option for any adult, loving, committed couple. And it is because we're all — we're all celebrating marriage and we believe it is so important that it should be an option for each and every couple.
(CROSS TALK)
BEHAR: I understand that, but you're sort of saying the words mother and father as a nouns. It's also a verb, to mother, to father, so you could have two women mothering a child or fathering a child. It's a role really.
GALLAGHER: No, I don't think so. I think that, in fact, there's something special about unions of husbands and wives. There's a reason marriage has been this way. Not only our own, but in almost every known human society. And that this vision of marriage — it's your point. It's a fine point.
46 Comments
Was Maggie off her game,or are they trying another new approach? Where is the gays are trying to destroy civilization as we know it? Where was the argument about adoption in Massachusetts? Ocean Grove in New Jersey? Is NOM going to give up on those as everyone now knows that NOM wasn’t telling the truth?
Nicole does a great job saying we believe in marriage and have no desire to destroy it.
Stephen was just the same shit head he has always been. ”God wrote the bible” my ass.
The religious right are losing because what they are trying to do is wrong. The more exposure the debate of Marriage Equality gets, the better it is for those of us who support it. The ICK factor of two men engaged in romance is dying quickly as the religious right don’t even mention it during live televised debate.
Hopefully the Senate will get finished with Hate Crimes laws quickly and President Obama signs it. This will only add to the fact that the religious right are a bunch of fear mongering lying bigots as there will not be any of them losing their religious freedom.
It is only looking better for our side.
When I read this……I think of this:
Hell, I never saw Stephen in action before. He’s like a mole for the left.He looks, not only as though he found God downa toilet in a drunken, drug-addled state (which he did) but that he’s still drunk. He couln’t make a worse case or in a manner more repulsive if he tried. I think Alec must have him on a retainer to make the religious right look like alcoholic losers.
Oy!“God wrote the bible”, Stevie? OMFG!
Can we say “historical context”? If they want “traditional marriage”, let’s ask Maggie what her dowry was! I wonder how much it’ll cost to buy Carrie from her daddy?
It always amazes me that these clowns collectively haven’t enough brains and intelligence to put in a thimble.
A wonderful eventI think it’s wonderful for the cause of marriage equality that this idiot with a tiara decided to cast herself on the Anita Bryant fire. She is surely going to come off looking like she’s channeling Anita, and is going to provide a new face for bigotry as the mindless stupidity that it is. She’s really not very bright, as evidenced by her inability to form coherent and complete sentences or to actually get her facts straight. She’s going to ruin her career in the process. The whole world of beauty pageants, and fashion and any other venue that would need the services of some inane blond boob job like her is so filled with gay men, both on and off stage and in the audience, that the industry isn’t going to touch her with a ten foot pole now. The professional homohaters like Maggie the Shill are going to gain reputations as jaded egotists who will happily sacrifice anyone else’s career in their desperate bids for attention.
I added the transcriptIn case folks want to read the ridiculous blather of Baldwin and Gallagher.
I grew up with “God wrote the BIble”and also “In Romans, Jesus says” because the Epistles are all written my Jesus (through other people).
It seemed a little weird when I was 7-13 years old. Now it seems like my Sunday School, youth group, vacation bible school, and Christian camp leaders were saying the authors were possessed – which seems even more creepy.
Yes, these people believe every word in their preferred translation of the Bible is written by God and is without error. They believe every answer you need for any problem in modern life can be found in the oft-copied and oft-translated words written 1800-6000 years ago.
If that’s working for them, great. It doesn’t, however, work for me and I would like them to quit trying to press their solutions on me, thankyouverymuch.
How are you being persecuted?Simple enough question, but there was no answer. If I have one complaint, I might have asked Joy to make one or two additional attempts to get Stephen to answer this question.
And I think we definitely need to hear more from Nicole LaMarche. She’s a wonderful spokesperson for marriage equality; where has she been all this time?
You have to remember one thing, The religious right believe that being rejected is the same as persecuted. But then again, we are winning the ‘WAR’ and this means they will be losing the amount of money that flows into the Hate Teh Gay industry, Maybe that is what they call being persecuted?
StephenIsn’t it amazing how quickly some celebrities find Jesus when their careers start tanking? They get to parade their dubious talents before a whole new pre-sold audience.
My favorite example was Mickey Rooney’s appearance on The 700 Club a couple years ago. Rooney, who has been married seven or eight times, explained to Pat Robertson with a perfectly straight face, “The biggest problem in America is that it’s too easy to get a divorce.” Well…if he doesn’t know, who does? But does the Bible really hold the answer for spoiled celebrities who get themselves new spouses the way you and I buy fresh rolls of paper towels?
Trying a new approachthey are shifting their message more and more to they are the victims and they are being demonized and discriminated against. I wish somebody would call them on that whey they start spewing that garbage and hold up Pams “we’re being oppressed chart”.
Not only that.Think about those who give money in offerings every week thinking it will be put to good use. You know, feed the poor, give shelter to those who don’t have any.
On the other hand, their money goes to things like that. The public is deceived into thinking their money is going for good things to help people. YOU know, the things Jesus would have preached about?
How are you being persecuted?They never answer that one, except to try to equate criticism with persecution or by shifting to the “you’re redefining marriage for everyone” line. But didn’t they criticize Miley Cyrus over her pro-equality stance? And isn’t what they are doing about redefining marriage, in a legal sense, by narrowing the definition or marriage?
A couple of pointsI think every time somebody brings up Leviticus’ injunctions, they should be asked if they have ever had a bacon sandwhich on Sunday as Leviticus also recommended death for those who touch the flesh of a pig on Sunday, (which also mean mass slaughter of NFL teams).
One other thing: No offense but your definition of “destroyed” must be different from mine. I thought that the marriage equality folks got a lot of good points in of course and the NOM people made themselves look ridiculous as usual, (as they are wont to do), but “destroyed”? I only wish.
Nope, they never doStephen Baldwin may have been “destroyed” but he did it to himself by failing to answer the question of how he was being persecuted but that’s a winger for you: Always playing the part of the victim. They should have gotten a better actor though. There is a reason that he is going to be on “Help! I’m a Celebrity, Get me Outta Here”. Sort of brings you down to Earth, knowing that they look at you in the same light as they see Rod Blagojevich.
she’s so ‘special’I seriously just want to run up to Maggie and say “fine, yes you are very very special- you’re a special little married heterosexual and no one is trying to take away how special you feel you are”
She’s so obsessed with the thought of losing this status she’s claimed for herself and all the other married heterosexuals out there- I really think that’s at the heart of the matter, she is afraid of not feeling special anymore once marriage is no longer denied to gay couples.
Even dumber than we thought?Am I the only one who thinks that Carrie Prejean was actually trying to express a pro-choice viewpoint with her answer, and it wasn’t until Hilton’s response and the subsequent spotlight that she received that she realized anti-choice was the more profitable way to go? Basically, her answer stated she believes people should be able to choose same-sex or opposite-sex marriage, and that she would choose opposite-sex. Errors in fact aside, I think she was thrown by the question and tried to substitute a prepared answer she may have had for another controversial subject.
“GALLAGHER: Our mission is protecting marriage and the faith communities that sustain it.”Obviously, Maggie believes that the government exists to enforce right wing faux “christian” beliefs and to endorse a singular interpretation as the Bible. This pretense to religious purity is the last refuge of these scoundrels – and Maggie’s failure to get divorce laws revoked, coupled with the Right’s dismal failure to attract people to their “covenant marriage” programs (which redefine marriage and codify a particular “religious” viewpoint into law)underscores how these people represent nothing more than a fear-and-smear industry attempting to profit from persecuting fellow Americans.
Gallegher likes to demand there be a “civil” debate about equal rights under the law, unless, of course, that debate extends to HER equal rights. And someone should have called her sorry butt on the phrase “and the faith communities that sustain it.” WTF is that all about? The “faith communities” – which Gallegher obviously means as those right wing political action committees masquerading as “non-denominational” churches aren’t supposed to have anything to do with civil marriage. It is insulting enough that so many states have to include passages in gay rights laws massaging the feelings of wingnut “churches” by reassuring them of their private rights to discriminate, but when we have to be told to negotiate OUR rights through a “debate” with these nutcases, it makes our constitutions seem like nothing more than Bush’s “just a piece of paper.”
Of course, the media still misses the major point – if “marriage” didn’t include a plethora of special rights for heterosexual pretenders ONLY, there wouldn’t be such an aggressive campaign for equality. But since these special rights whores, who expect the government to reward them with constantly increasing benefits based on nothing more than the image of a sexual/relationship orientation, believe they are entitled by their existence to thousands of special protections, we shouldn’t be surprised at how desperately they cling to any law which elevates them above others. If there is one thing a wingnut hates, it’s being rewarded on the basis of performance rather than image.
It behooves me how these clowns even get on television, particularly since they have lied over and over again – and the media usually does little to research or even tell the public who funds these organizations. Now they haul out this unmarried, uncommitted single Barbie doll who has a right to express publicly her “opinion” about the marriages of other Americans she doesn’t know or care about – and yet we don’t see any gay people on television publicly stating opinions about the marriages of our straight next-door neighbors. Frankly, a straight person would be horrified if someone talked about their marriages the way these faux religious charlatans publicly talk about ours — which is why this continues to be more of a media circus than an actual “debate” about marriage.
If you want to debate marriage, Maggie, then you best be prepared to discuss everyone’s right to marry – including yours. After all, we should be allowed to talk about how marriage is harmed by people with a propensity to lie for personal and professional gain.
I think she’s a closet caseHonestly
CASH COWi like that she admits that she’s given up on fighting “divorce” (ie. NO ONE WOULD FUND IT)
& set her sights on “gay marriage” (CASH COW)
W00t!You go girls!
Every time Leviticus is brought upthey need to be asked if they support executing us for private consensual encounters.
The only reason I think church and state should be one is….To try them as criminals. They are far from what they say they are. The public is deceived by the devil “they” say they fight against.
Maybe not so far as executing us but…consider the Oklahoma Republican Party sounds like it was inspired by Leviticus. The party platform in the home state of Sally Kern:
http://www.tulsagop.org/wp-con…
God wrote the Bible?Where does this idiotic statement come from? The Bible never claims to be written by God. Such a statement wouldn’t mean anything if it did. The Bible is a collection of writings bound together as a book. It was never written as a book and the writings are totally misused from their original intent. No one even knows who wrote most of it.
I don’tAnd I sure wouldn’t want her on our team.
I think she’s just a sanctimonious prig who learned she could make hundreds of thousands of dollars a year being one at our expense. She should kiss the ground we walk on.
I thoughtthat maybe a gay man, who was trying to hide his homosexuality, got her pregnant first (she was trying to change him and ended up preg.) Then he wouldn’t marry her so she became an unwed mother.
I also wonder about the guy who did end up marrying her and what’s HIS story. Do you think she may have dipped into the Ex-gay pool for a second time?
Tiresome…I’m getting really tired of this debate for one simple reason: Where are the experts? Why is it that whenever they have a debate about same-sex marriage on TV, they bring in the pro- and anti- people and, in this case, even a celebrity (where are the South Park guys when you need them?), but they don’t bring on anyone from the American Psychological Association, the American Academy of Pediatrics, the National Association of Social Workers or any of the other organizations that are on our side.
Thanks Pam ;pI’m adding the transcript to the blog post on my site ;p
Dont’ know what she is REV of….
But I hope she is one of the 300 at the HRC FAITH Thingy tomorrow.
More importantly…… why are so many of us obsessing about what a beauty queen and a gossip queen are saying about gay marriage? Let alone Steven Baldwin (and just what kind of queen is he, anyway?)!
Here’s what’s interesting about Maggie Gallagher, especially considering her history. When you really peel away the layers of her anti-gay marriage stance, it comes down to this: marriage needs to be “special” (i.e., exclusive) so that straight men will be willing to take part in it. Absent marriage, straight men will simply procreate and leave, which is, you know, bad for children and stuff. (I’m not making this up — she spells it out quite clearly here.)
But you never really hear about Maggie’s underlying theory of why straight marriage is so damn important when she speaks on the national news, presumably because it’s just not that palatable for an audience of straight men to be told what kind of scum they are by yet another abandoned single mom.
So let’s forget about the celebs and call Miss Maggie’s bluff on her own theories. In public, in the light of day (as opposed to an obscure Christian law journal that most folks will never have read). The link is there on her own website.
Sunday?As in, the day after the sabbath?
the BibleI’m disappointed that Baldwin went unchallenged when he brought up Leviticus and how two men laying together was sinful. He’s pretty much correct, but that’s not the point. A lot of people don’t even pick up a Bible until their pastor tells them what page and verse to turn to. If his God really did “write the Bible” as he claims, then his God is a bit of a psychopath.
People like him are clearly ready to throw these verses in your face as their excuse for opposing homosexuality. They say, “well this is what the Bible says and there’s no misinterpreting it.” Yes, and the Bible supports slavery, quite clearly in that very same book he just referenced. Explain that one to me. Or explain executing children for disobedience, or executing people for adultery, or perjury, or…well there are plenty of things you could be put to death for. But all I need to see is Stephen Baldwin trying to explain why his God would permit and even encourage such a crime against humanity. Then tell me how that book has any credibility at all.
GoateeIs Maggie trying to grow a goatee now??
I’ve been enjoyinggoing onto the NOM website and seeing all their “news releases” It’s all very lame. One was to clarify that Miss California WAS NOT a spokesperson for NOM (Maggies wants to make sure that she is that person) and then they go after Perez Hilton for issuing a cease and desist letter about them using his image in which they try and demean Hilton by claiming he’s an opportunist so why would he care if they stole his image.
Yesterday I was stepping back and looking at the whole thing and thought that for the first time in many years, people don’t care. The only people that ARE caring are the anti-bigots like Gallagher and the millions of GLBT family and friends. Gone are the days when people like Gallagher could influence the masses.
They’re gone like the funding that Gallagher received from the past Administration. Now the only people who follow her are the ones she’s attacking and we’re mad as hell and aren’t going to take it anymore.
I also read that link tha was provided to the St. Thomas Law School article that Maggie wrote. I laughed when I saw a lot of reference to her own material (nothing like writing a paper and crediting yourself) and to her fake research “gay marriage peaked in 2003, young people just aren’t for it anymore…” LOL
This is why …Nicole LaMarche’s comeback was so brilliant. We love her. Where has she been all our lives?
They’re really, really, really bad at this.You can’t successfully pretend that you’re the victim if you’re the only one doing the attacking. That lie falls apart very quickly. It’s even worse when your “attackers” keep “attacking” by saying they want you to have complete freedom, independence and autonomy — in this case, within your own religion.
Joy picks a great way to counter people like this by changing the subject to why they’re not seeking to outlaw divorce and fight out-of-wedlock pregnancies. If they want to “defend” marriage, why aren’t they really doing that already with people who are married or “should” be? It exposes their true agenda instantly.
And it’s never wrong to bring up the fact that Maggie’s well-paid lifestyle depends on income brought in by running her hate group. That’s her real motivation, after all.
Talking over each other…I think the networks should come up with a talk show where all the guests are in little sound-proof-booths, and when it’s your turn to talk, your microphone is turned on. If you want to comment on something someone else is saying, you push a “I want to comment” button and the host will let you speak when the current speaker is done.
The way it is now, every time someone starts to rebut an idiotic statement, the idiot just talks over their response.
dead set righthahaha good comment. your exactly right
Still, let’s not take it lightlyThis is true, BB. But the pendulum of time does swing and that’s what I’m afraid of. Who is to say that they may not gain influence unless we beat them down and expose their illogical nonsense every chance we get.
Keep hitting your opponent until the final bell rings.
Moakler takes on GallagherFinally, someone who challenges her head on. Moakler didn’t take the bait and didn’t back down when Gallagher used her tried and true method of debate by talking over her. Moakler wouldn’t let Gallagher interupt her point. You go girl!!!
Gallagher always gets the most air time. That is frustrating.
Aw shucks, Fool, quit trying so hard. You’ve already met the requirements.
Here you go:
Of courseWe will always have to keep watch over them.
You know, maybe Gallagher has beenencouraged to get out there and be the “barking dog” on gay marriage so everyone will forget about the huge Morman agenda and influence on this issue.
Just had that thought…art of war, ya know. We all go after Gallagher, meanwhile the real Antis and Anitas fortify themselves and trench in.
Baldwinlooks like a MASSIVE douche bag and waste of space. Why is he still around? He had NO business being in this debate.
Having been around forever, gays are “Traditional” too
Does anyone – anyone – remember a super-funded ad campaign on family fragmentation, sometime in the past 20 years?
I’ll bet that a thorough-going history of the issues shows that “children need a mom and dad” was not what was being said ’20 years ago’. The “mom and dad” thing was a formula that came up in the wake of the prospects for recognized relationships for gay couples, I’m almost certain.
Last, the idea that “marriage is redefined”, let alone in a way that is detrimental isn’t true. If you put another shelf in a bookcase, it’s still a bookcase. 95% of the books are still non-gay books.
So, Maggie’s huge DRAMA that she cannot go around talking to non-gay people about their marriages effectively is rubbish. She can still tell non-gay people that they ought to get married and say whatever she wants to them about having kids, civil wedlocked or not.