I Want to Hear Maggie's Answer.

Investigative reporter Steve Silberman wrote a blog post called “NOM, A Late-Stage Cancer in the American Body Politic.”

What’s astonishing is that Maggie Gallagher responded to it in the comments section.  That’s great, because Steve’s reply is the best part of the whole post.  I love this excerpt, in which he imagines what Maggie will say if a child of hers turns out to be gay:

I’ve spent many years ensuring that you and the love of your life can never have the kind of happiness and stability that your father and I took for granted. Should your beloved get sick, I have worked tirelessly so that you will be unable to visit him in the hospital — adding panic, confusion, and layers of bureaucracy to the most frightening moments you will have to endure together. I have also spent millions of dollars tithed by goodhearted Mormons and other people of faith promoting ballot initiatives to deprive you of the benefits that I spent the first half of my life chronicling in my books. Read my books and know that I became a national celebrity by making sure that you, anyone you will ever want to share your life with, and people like you will never have access to the precious, meaningful, and profoundly fulfilling life I describe in those pages. Life is brief. Spend your life as I did, making certain that other people can’t have the security and fulfillment we all ache and yearn for when we’re young. At least your father and I will not have to endure the shame of ever seeing you get married.

Reprinted here in the hopes you’ll go check out the whole thing.  It’s worth it.

Share:
  • Digg
  • Facebook
  • email
  • Reddit

23 comments to I Want to Hear Maggie’s Answer.

  • 1
    Zach says:

    I love how she completely ignores his entire response and just says “Oh, I bet this dead founding father would have been on our side!”  She’s nothing more than a complete fool in the feeble guise of an intellectual.

  • 2

    Actually, that John Adams post was her first.  She just replied.  I’ll let you judge her response for yourself.

  • 3

    Gracious, the gall of that woman! I just responded to her, but my comment is awaiting moderation, so I’ll add it here for fun.

    Maggie,
    You say that your work has no scientifically proven effect on LGBT teens and suicide.
    Fine.
    It’s telling, however, that you did not respond to any of Steve’s other points. This leads to the inevitable conclusion that you want the mental and physical benefits of marriage explicitly denied same-sex couples.
    Based on your article Why Marriage Is Good For You, you want same-sex couples to:
    10. BE LESS SAFE “Marriage lowers the risk that both men and women will become victims of violence, including domestic violence.”
    9. DIE EARLIER “Married people live longer and healthier lives.”
    8. HAVE UNHEALTHY CHILDREN “Children lead healthier, longer lives if parents get and stay married.”
    7. EARN LESS MONEY “Married men make, by some estimates, as much as 40 percent more money than comparable single guys, even after controlling for education and job history.”
    6. ACQUIRE LESS WEALTH “Married people not only make more money, they manage money better and build more wealth together than either would alone.”
    5. BE UNFAITHFUL AND NOT HAVE LIFELONG RELATIONSHIPS “Marriage increases sexual fidelity. Marriage is also the only realistic promise of permanence in a romantic relationship.”
    4. BE MENTALLY UNSTABLE “Marriage is good for your mental health. Married men and women are less depressed, less anxious, and less psychologically distressed”
    3. BE UNHAPPY “Overall, 40 percent of married people, compared with about a quarter of singles or cohabitors, say they are “very happy” with life in general. Married people are also only about half as likely as singles or cohabitors to say they are unhappy with their lives.” [you and NOM fight to make sure same-sex couples can be nothing more than cohabitors]
    1. HAVE LESS SEX, LESS OFTEN “both husbands and wives are more likely to report that they have an extremely satisfying sex life than are singles or cohabitors.”
    I’ve left out your #2 as it deals only with children of divorce, unlike the other points you made.
    Please, explain how you are not a bigot, when your own writings attest to the ills you wish upon gays and lesbians.

  • 4

    That would be true, Lightning Baltimore, if the research cited involved actual study of same-sex couples.
     
    But it did not. Indeed, it involved opposite-sex couples — which means that the gender differences and cultural influences therein, which involve valuing monogamy and fidelity, thinking of marriage as being superior to single parenting, plural relationships, cohabitation, and other such things, and generally putting much more emphasis and value on marriage, have an effect.
     
    The gay and lesbian community, in contrast, <a href=”http://beyondmarriage.org/full_statement.html”> does not value marriage or see it as anything special</a>.

    To have our government define as “legitimate families” only those households with couples in conjugal relationships does a tremendous disservice to the many other ways in which people actually construct their families, kinship networks, households, and relationships. For example, who among us seriously will argue that the following kinds of households are less socially, economically, and spiritually worthy?

    And here are just a few examples of the relationships that they consider identical in value.

    Committed, loving households in which there is more than one conjugal partner
    Single parent households
    Queer couples who decide to jointly create and raise a child with another queer person or couple, in two households

     
    So it’s no surprise that marriage has positive effects for opposite-sex couples; they’ve been taught to value and cherish it as something special. In contrast, it’s kind of silly to whine about the benefits of marriage for same-sex couples when you have gays and lesbians like Dan Savage claiming that monogamy is “hurtful”, that marriage is “patriarchal” and to be avoided, that it’s no different than being single or having multiple sex partners, and that people who oppose things like no-fault divorce are wrong.

  • 5
  • 6
    Allen says:

    ND30, if you had an ounce of intellectual honesty you’d know that Dan Savage and other unspecified individuals who claim “that monogamy is ‘hurtful’, that marriage is “patriarchal” and to be avoided” don’t speak for all gays and lesbians. Of course this has been pointed out to you repeatedly, but I can see why you cling to this belief. It’s the only way you can continue to pretend that your arguments are valid.
    By the way, if you’re going to use Dan Savage as an example, you might take note of the fact that he is, essentially, married, even if he and his partner can’t have their marriage legally recognized where they live. He is, by his own accounts at least, in a happy, healthy, stable relationship.
    You, on the other hand, have no idea what a healthy, stable relationship is, since you’ve never been in one.
     

  • 7

    Sorry, Allen, what individuals believe, say or want is trumped by whatever negative things have been said or done by other members of whatever group said individuals are a part.
     
    Humans are not individuals; they are hive members.

  • 8
    Greg says:

    Hey, leave ND30 alone!  You don’t know what he goes through!  First, he has to pretend to be gay even though he’s not, which is icky!  Icky!  Then he has to wade through all the groups that are trying to secure same-sex couples equality so that he can ignore them and get to the extreme few that are against it!  And all this, just to come out from under his bridge to provide some entertainment that you don’t value and don’t deserve!
    Leave ND30 alone!

  • 9
    TikiHead says:

    ND30 has been doing this schtick for years. It’s pitiful – though it does show some real Troll stamina.

  • 10
    TikiHead says:

    ND30 is also lying about Dan Savage’s feelings about marriage. No, not surprising.
    http://www.nytimes.com/2006/07/30/opinion/30savage.html

  • 11

    ND30 is also lying about Dan Savage’s feelings about marriage.

    The values of the gay and lesbian community, as stated by Dan Savage: “only fools would build marriages with monogamy as their foundation (and only a foolish society would demand such behavior).”
     
    The values of the gay and lesbian community, as stated by Dan Savage: “Gay male couples generally don’t view monogamy as the defining characteristic of a loving, committed relationship.”
     
    And of course, the gay and lesbian community is openly bragging about how it needs to redefine marriage because gays and lesbians think promiscuity is normal and sexual responsibility and monogamy are “weird”.
     
    Particularly amusing is the argument — also pushed by Dan Savage and other leaders of the gay and lesbian community — that heterosexuals should be more promiscuous like gays and lesbians are.

  • 12

    You don’t get to just assign the beliefs of one person to others, ND30. I’ve said I believe strongly in monogamy, am in a 100% monogamous relationship approaching twenty years, and promote monogamy when I work with LGBT teens . . . and, you respond by questioning my honesty.
     
    My goodness, you are a loathesome person.

  • 13
    Greg says:

    Lightning, in ND30-World you get to assign beliefs to people who are different from you IF AND ONLY IF they are liberals.
    Let’s play the reverse game.  Everything any random fool with an (R) after his or her name will now get ascribed to ND30.  Clearly, ND30 believes that all homosexuals (including him, if you take him at his word that he’s gay (I don’t–I think he’s faking it to make gay people look stupid)) are immoral pedophiles.
    Why, oh why does ND30 molest children?  Why, oh why does ND30 cause hurricanes to strike?  Doesn’t he know he can just choose to not be evil incarnate?
    Man, this game is going to be fun.

  • 14
    Neil says:

    Mr ND30 writes:

    The gay and lesbian community, in contrast, does not value marriage or see it as anything special.

    It’s true because Dan Savage has some critical things to say about the institution of marriage. If it were left up to the gay and lesbian community there’d be no push for marriage equality. I’m inordinately heartened that all these people outside the gay and lesbian community are advocating on our behalf.

    What I don’t understand is that as a member of the gay and lesbian community, I’m not supposed to see marriage as anything special. So why do I care? My connection to the mind controlling, group thinking hive-mind of the gay and lesbian community must be broken or something.

  • 15

    Resistance is futile. You will be assimilated promiscuous.

  • 16

    You don’t get to just assign the beliefs of one person to others, ND30.

    Sure you do. Look at Dan Savage saying these things about monogamous couples (“fools”) and gay men.
     
    And as for questioning your honesty, I merely point out that your commitment to monogamy seems amazingly nonexistent when it would require you to criticize your fellow gays and lesbians like Savage. But to put it more bluntly, it is difficult to believe that you hold monogamy in any regard when you are such an obedient and silent toady for those like Savage and the rest of the gay and lesbian community who denigrate it.
     
    Perhaps that’s the lesson the teens you mentor need to learn, though; you can have principles, but not if they in any way would require you to stand up for them or hold another member of the gay and lesbian community responsible.

    Why, oh why does ND30 molest children? Why, oh why does ND30 cause hurricanes to strike? Doesn’t he know he can just choose to not be evil incarnate?

    Sorry, those only apply to gay people, and as you’ve made repeatedly clear to everyone, in your mind, I’m not gay.
     
    Or easily categorized.
     

    What I don’t understand is that as a member of the gay and lesbian community, I’m not supposed to see marriage as anything special. So why do I care?

    For the same reason that a toddler will suddenly throw a tantrum when he sees another child playing with a toy that he discarded. Especially when he already hates and is jealous of the other child.
     
    The gay and lesbian community has the world of promiscuity, irresponsibility, and non-commitment that it created and demanded as its birthright in the late 1960s and 1970s. You wanted to be free; have at it. You wanted to promote pedophilia and libertinism, knock yourself out. And you wanted to bash marriage, go ahead.
     
    You threw out the toy. Why should anyone seriously believe you have any interest in it?

  • 17

    Loathesome was obviously far too complimentary a word for you.
     
    I think even pathetic might be too nice.

    Anyhow, please, don’t kill yourself.

  • 18

    Just curious, ND30, what do you hope to accomplish by constantly lying about what others think and want?

    Is it a greater sense of self worth?

    A hightened feeling of self-righteousness?

    Or do you just want people to say ugly things to you so you can play the victim?

    My guess is the last of the above. Loser.

  • 19
    Jason D says:

    ND30 is still lying about dan savage
    As recently as July of this year, in his sex advice column, he wrote this.  BOLD is mine, the rest is taken as is from here http://www.avclub.com/articles/july-14-2010,43079/

    “And to all the outraged folks writing in to ask if I’m seriously suggesting that no one should ever be monogamous: That’s not what I’m saying—and it’s not what the authors of Sex At Dawn are arguing, either. The point of Sex At Dawn—and my point in drawing my readers’ and listeners’ attention to it—isn’t that no one should attempt to be monogamous, or that people who’ve made monogamous commitments have a license to cheat on their partners. For the record: I’m happy to acknowledge that there are lots of good reasons to be monogamous and/or very nearly monogamous, e.g., children and other sexually transmitted infections.
    What the authors of Sex At Dawn believe—and what I think they prove—is that we are a naturally non-monogamous species, despite what we’ve been told for millennia by preachers and for centuries by scientists, and that is why so many people have such a hard time remaining monogamous over the long haul. I’m not saying that everyone everywhere has to be non-monogamous; the authors of Sex At Dawn don’t make that argument either. (Lots of monogamists, however, do run around insisting that everyone everywhere should be monogamous—and proscriptive monogamists get a pass, because hey, they mean so well, and wouldn’t it be nice if everyone were?)
    The point is this: People—particularly those who value monogamy—need to understand why being monogamous is so much harder than they’ve been led to believe it will be. In some cases, this understanding may help people find the courage to seek out non-monogamous relationships and/or arrangements and/or allowances that make them—gasp!—happier and make their relationships more stable, not less, as a routine infidelity won’t doom their marriage/civil union/commitment/slave contract/whatever. But understanding that monogamy is a struggle for most people—and being able to be honest with our partners about experiencing it as a struggle—may actually help some people remain monogamous.”

  • 20
    Neil says:
    What I don’t understand is that as a member of the gay and lesbian community, I’m not supposed to see marriage as anything special. So why do I care?

    For the same reason that a toddler will suddenly throw a tantrum when he sees another child playing with a toy that he discarded. Especially when he already hates and is jealous of the other child.

    The gay and lesbian community has the world of promiscuity, irresponsibility, and non-commitment that it created and demanded as its birthright in the late 1960s and 1970s. You wanted to be free; have at it. You wanted to promote pedophilia and libertinism, knock yourself out. And you wanted to bash marriage, go ahead.

    You threw out the toy. Why should anyone seriously believe you have any interest in it?

     
    So you’ve seen material about the committed same gender couples who wish to marry and see pedophilial libertines in the throes of a tantrum? I don’t think the word jaundice does justice to how extensively your world view is clogged up with toxic bile.

  • 21

    For the same reason that a toddler will suddenly throw a tantrum when he sees another child playing with a toy that he discarded. Especially when he already hates and is jealous of the other child.

    Your analogy is beyond faulty.

    The toddler is angry because the other child is “playing with a toy” that was dangled in front of his face, out of reach, and then handed to the other child, right in front of him. When the toddler objected, he was told, “shut up and be happy with what you have.” What he had, of course, was nothing.

  • 22
    Bobby in Seattle says:

    Apparently ND30 thinks a handful of gays/lesbians (such as Dan Savage) speak for the whole LGBT community, as he continues to remind us and generalize on about.
     
     
    So, when was this vote for representation taken and why wasn’t I notified?

  • 23
    Ben in Oakland says:

    I cannot understand why so many people think it is worth arguing with a homo-hatin’-homo, even for the sake of the intellectual (????) exercise.
    As my not so sainted mother used to say: never mud wrestle with a pig. you only get dirty, and the pig lovesi t.
     

Leave a Reply

 

 

 

You can use these HTML tags

<a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>