DOMA | Gay Marriage | Massachusetts | News | Rachel Maddow

Rachel Maddow: Gay Marriage Saving Marriage in Massachusetts


Rachel Maddow points out that since gay people started getting married in Massachusetts five years ago, divorce rates have descended to pre-1940 levels.

Says Maddow: "Turns out gay marriage is a 'defense of marriage' act."


Feed This post's comment feed


  1. Ryan,
    Your comments are very thoughtful. I disagree with you though. Her show is nothing like the News Hour with Jim Lehrer, for example, because it is completely biased. She mocks Republicans or people with a conservative perspective and she delivers her news in a sarcastic manner. If you watch the News Hour on PBS, you will see thoughtful and intelligent debate - not a judgment made by the moderators. Her show is entertainment, not news.

    Posted by: Dave | Sep 4, 2009 5:59:47 PM

  2. "She is a completely biased, smug left wing lunatic who could use a strong dose of humility."

    And Rachel is a lunatic how? And how is the "far left . . . just as bad as the far right" for gay people? (Assuming you're one of us "ladies," DAVE.)

    "A straight man may very well look at a gay married couple and have a less positive view of marriage. However bigoted he may be, that would be bad for us all."

    And, RICK, how exactly would that be bad for us all? If some straight guy--or bigot, by your description--can't handle seeing a happily married gay couple then he's probably not really suited to marriage. He'd be better off on the down low or covering his eyes and hiding under his bed. It's true we don't know what effect gay couples marrying will ultimately have on the institution of marriage, but it is clear who is responsible for the current high divorce rate, and it ain't us gay folks.

    Posted by: Ernie | Sep 4, 2009 6:44:23 PM

  3. I don't think anyone watching PBS has any illusions about the politics of Bill Moyers, Charile Rose, or Ken Burns. Humans are biased. And all reporters are human. Even the ones who work for PBS. The difference between them and the cable talking heads is that they're not considered "insufferable" to the other side.

    Cable networks hire anchors and hosts based on their ability to enrage the opposition. It creates a lot of false conflict. In the same way putting the "racist hick" and "black nationalist" together obviously does on reality television. There's nothing spontaneous about the feud between O'Reilly and Olbermann. That goes for most the feuds between CNN, FOX, NBC, HBO, Comedy Central, and so forth. They are as scripted as anything else on television. And that's why they're entertainment and not journalism.

    Posted by: John | Sep 4, 2009 7:28:10 PM

  4. @ Rick

    Yes gay marriage will have consequences for society. It will tell society that gay or straight, pair bonding is important and valid. It will possibly lower promiscuity in the gay community, lower STD transmission rates, increase self-esteem. We have a generation of young gay people who will increasingly see themselves as equal...not less than.

    So far as the straight community goes, you cannot seriously believe that because gay couples can marry it would in any way diminish marriage for straight people! If it did, then they were clearly getting married for the wrong reason. If they can't be happy for the gay couple down the street and want the same happiness and security for them, then that's their problem. Again, gay people marrying will not CAUSE people to be gay, will not STOP straight couples coming together to make babies, and will not stop straight couples marrying. To try to say it will is just nonsense.

    Posted by: Gregus | Sep 4, 2009 8:13:24 PM

  5. "Her show is nothing like the News Hour with Jim Lehrer, for example, because it is completely biased."

    I don't think Rachel herself would claim to be anything like Jim Lehrer or the News Hour. She is paid to have an opinion and to express that opinion as articulately as possible. There's not pretense of being unbiased. (As there is with Bill O'Reilly, for instance--who claims to be fair and balanced when obviously he is neither.) Her style and viewpoints may not be to some people's taste, but that hardly makes her a "lunatic." I can't think of many people--left or right--who are better at doing their homework and clearly expressing their viewpoint.

    Posted by: Ernie | Sep 4, 2009 8:34:24 PM

  6. "almost everywhere in the culture you see men rejecting anything gayish and putting up slobby, homophobic, ne'er-do-well as the male archetype."

    Just like in real life? Seriously, white heterosexual teenage boys have held this culture hostage for 50 years. It's time for adults to take it back.

    Posted by: Attmay | Sep 7, 2009 2:47:05 AM

  7. « 1 2

Post a comment


« «Harvey Milk Day Passes Assembly, Faces Potential Veto Again« «