Gay Marriage | News | West Virginia

Watch: These WV Bigots Want to Vote Away Your Marriage Rights


Or, I should say, the marriage rights you haven't even been given yet.

Between 125 and 150 people rallied at West Virginia's state capitol, demanding a constitutional referendum to define marriage as between a man and a woman:

Wv2  "The Family Policy Council of West Virginia, which organized the rally, says the Legislature is bottling up measures that would allow the vote. The crowd was addressed by speakers from national groups and by House Minority Leader Tim Armstead, R-Kanawha, who has tried to force a House vote on the referendum. The state chapter of the American Civil Liberties Union says no amendment is needed, since West Virginia law only recognizes heterosexual marriage."

NOM President Maggie Gallagher (above) made the trip.

Watch a clipreel from the rally, AFTER THE JUMP...

The rally followed a failed attempt earlier this week by the WV legislature to force a vote on a constitutional amendment banning same-sex marriage.

Feed This post's comment feed


  1. Funny - I watched the news locally, and I couldn't find anyone who covered it with a video crew. Or at least I didn't see it make it air.

    Posted by: Ed Kennedy | Feb 26, 2010 2:00:17 PM

  2. When do I get to vote on their forcible sterilization to prevent these mental midgets from reproducing?

    Posted by: charley | Feb 26, 2010 2:28:02 PM

  3. i think the gays should vote on their goddamn marriages

    Posted by: rick | Feb 26, 2010 2:32:32 PM

  4. The list of states that don't have a constitutional amendment barring same sex marriages is shorter than the list of those that do have one. I'm only surprised that red states like Ohio, Michigan, and Wisconsin have it on the books before West Virginia do.

    Posted by: Rodney | Feb 26, 2010 2:39:07 PM

  5. Heh, once again gays are assailed by individuals whose family trees no longer fork...

    Posted by: Darren | Feb 26, 2010 2:41:52 PM

  6. Well I think that's fine. But, defining marriage as that of a union between a man and a woman isn't enough for WV. It must further state, said husband/wife must not be related any closer than say 3rd cousins!

    If the gays cannot legally marry or unite whatever you wish to call it, then we should no longer condone inbreeding!

    Posted by: PropBob | Feb 26, 2010 2:42:02 PM

  7. Lets vote on Maggie's right to look like a beached whale.

    Posted by: KFLO | Feb 26, 2010 3:06:02 PM

  8. "does", not 'do'. Ugh.

    Posted by: Rodney | Feb 26, 2010 4:04:07 PM

  9. Wait, wasn't Maggie eating a Sea world employee that same day?

    Posted by: Christopher | Feb 26, 2010 4:32:21 PM

  10. How can Maggie Gallagher stand up and say that the arguments against allowing same sex couples marry are very different than the one's allowing interracial marriage? The ruling of that court read 'Marriage is one of the "basic civil rights of man," fundamental to our very existence and survival'.

    They pat themselves on the back for allowing different races to marry but then claim any court acting to protect the rights of all is run by 'activist judges' acting against the will of the people.

    I think they've miss the point of that ruling a little.

    Posted by: James | Feb 26, 2010 4:52:01 PM

  11. Oh Maggie, it looks like you are still eating the pain away. Her ugliness on the inside is starting to show on the outside.

    Posted by: RONTEX | Feb 26, 2010 5:35:19 PM

  12. These people need to feel special by keeping gays and lesbians that want legal protections for their relationships in a second class status.

    So you are strait and legally married, Voop De Do !!!

    Why will allowing gays to marry make your mariage any less special?

    Only ignorance and hatred will motovate people to be so up in arms about something that has nothing to do with them.

    Why do they not go try to help poor kids or something actaully useful.

    Tom in Long Beach
    redefining marriage for Maggie and all her scared chicken little, the sky is falling friends.

    Posted by: Tom in Long Beach | Feb 27, 2010 1:22:40 AM

  13. Don't care about the "term", but would like to see the rights.

    Posted by: Doug Berman | Feb 27, 2010 7:33:29 AM

  14. Since I'm queer myself, I think that rallies like this are definitely hurtful, ridiculous, and unnecessary.

    But I don't think that we gays get anywhere when we name call and stereotype these people. You'd think that people who are so tired of being judged themselves would be a bit less likely to jump in with the old "they're from the Appalachians so they must be inbred" shit. It's hurtful and it's so over-played it's not even funny.

    They're not dumb nor inbred, they're just not open-minded and they've ingested a bunch of bullshit from others who actually made an attempt to understand them. They've been indoctrinated into their beliefs via religion and some of them would change their minds about gay marriage if they had an opportunity to go to college, which I'm guessing that many of them didn't, because WV is in a chronic condition of state-sanctioned poverty. If you've been disenfranchised by our political and economic systems, as they have been, you are more likely to rely on religion for your solace and more likely to take out your pain on a scapegoat like gays.

    I'm sorry that some of the commentators so far have been so short-sighted and quick to judge. And I hope that instead of judging others in the future all gays will figure out how to use humor in a way that doesn't perpetuate other hurtful stereotypes.

    Posted by: Heather in North Carolina | Feb 27, 2010 11:48:08 AM

  15. hey heather - the time for being nice to these A-holes is OVER, doesn't wrk. When they show up with hurtful/hateful/bigotedf signs.....then we/others should show up with Hurtful Inbred signs etc.....too effĂ­ng bad, at 49yrs old,50 this July - I've had it with these supposed Hollier then Thou types..time to Fight Fire with Fire...because we have maybe 2-3yrs tops..before this is brought to the Supreme Prop 8

    Posted by: Disgusted American | Feb 27, 2010 11:58:30 AM

  16. It's not about being nice, it's about being appropriate. Feircely attacking the bigotry that propels people to fight against Gay rights is one thing and perfectly laudable - attacking the physical features of opponents (see the comments about Maggie Gallagher) is juvenile, pointless and advances the arguments for genuine gay equality not one bit.

    Posted by: Den | Feb 27, 2010 12:12:23 PM

  17. This bitch again, come on give me a break. There will be marriage equality for every state, whether the right or Maggie the fatso wants it or not. It is the same wedge issue that comes along every 4 years or so; and every election cycle praying on people's fears. Marriage equality gets closer and closer to becoming a realty and one day people of every stripe will be able to walk down the aisle with their heads held high and proud. Did you notice that they are all old and white, with their kids in tow; something to think about.

    Posted by: Jeff Dunivant | Feb 27, 2010 4:53:58 PM

  18. I would like to know how we are suppose to be political and agree with our country when all our Rights are slowly being taken away. I would also like to know who the hell tjese people are telling us we can not marry the person we love and want to be with, whether we are gay or not. I dont beleive that politicians should have the "Rigbt to tell us who we can marry,"

    Posted by: Kim | Mar 28, 2010 3:22:15 PM

  19. What needs to be said about Maggie Gallager and Brian Brown of the National Organization for Marriage is that NOM is being funded by an international pedophilia organization.. The Catholic Church!!!

    Posted by: mark | Apr 3, 2010 4:53:53 AM

Post a comment


« «James Franco Gets Back into His Wet T-Shirt for Gucci« «