Gay Marriage | Maggie Gallagher | News | Thanksgiving

Maggie Gallagher Offers Tips on Defending Your Anti-Gay Views at Thanksgiving Dinner: VIDEO


NOM's Maggie Gallagher (speaking for the 'Culture War Victory Fund') tells anti-gays to stand their ground at Thanksgiving and try to cover up their bigotry with a call for tolerance, and some pie.


(via good as you)

Feed This post's comment feed


  1. And THIS is why you don't piss off your hair dresser.

    Posted by: sparks | Nov 23, 2011 4:01:28 PM

  2. yeah, in Gallagher's case, 5 or 6 pies...

    Posted by: ACe | Nov 23, 2011 4:04:51 PM

  3. Hates makes her even look more hedious

    Posted by: jaragon | Nov 23, 2011 4:54:25 PM

  4. according to the above, repeating that you are not a bigot is the only way to defend an anti same-sex marriage position.
    Wouldn't some rational debating points be more helpful? That's right, there aren't any.
    Once you concede that children are born and raised without the benefit of marriage, and legally married persons are sometimes terrible parents, and marriages occur without being accessorized by children, the only position left is to be illogical.
    Now i understand: it's not bigotry, it's idiocy.

    Posted by: eric | Nov 23, 2011 5:02:17 PM

  5. To me she comes off as someone resigned to the notion that her time has passed, that we've evolved and that NOM is doomed.

    Posted by: RobH | Nov 23, 2011 5:07:21 PM

  6. Maggie pretends to be polite and not a bigot, as she stomps all over your relationship. So you're supposed to be polite in return? Don't pretend that it is a simple disagreement, you are telling people that you want them to be second class citizens.
    Don't forget the National Organization for Marriage (Maggie's real group) created a pledge that most of the Republican candidates signed. That pledge not only advocates a constitutional amendment but also prosecution of anyone who objects to NOM's bigotry.
    Just like at the Thanksgiving table, Maggie doesn't want to share a piece of pie with anyone else. LGBT Americans deserve a piece of the American Pie.

    Posted by: Rich | Nov 23, 2011 5:40:16 PM

  7. Maggie sticking up for tolerance! LMAO! That's rich!

    Posted by: Danny | Nov 23, 2011 5:54:44 PM

  8. i hope that some fag gave her that hateful haircut as a joke (on her).

    Posted by: oliver | Nov 23, 2011 6:19:44 PM

  9. Who did this woman's hair? I hope it was a gay hair dresser and was getting a little revenge.

    1. Man created marriage. It's a cival law that can be changed when the old law found to be outdated. Marriage did not come from any deity.

    Posted by: Dale | Nov 23, 2011 6:21:49 PM

  10. I would love to have this COW at the same table with us... & give her some info...

    Posted by: Mike Deegan | Nov 23, 2011 6:48:16 PM

  11. Step 1) make bigoted claim
    Step 2) lie that you aren't a bigot
    Step 3) wait for a distraction to hide your bigoted statement
    Step 4) ...
    Step 5) Profit

    Posted by: colin | Nov 23, 2011 7:11:34 PM

  12. One more giant slab o' pie and that little sweet potato's gonna explode.

    Just sayin'...

    Posted by: TPOWW | Nov 23, 2011 7:17:04 PM

  13. Not surpised at all the Maggie weight jokes here. But what IS surprising is what's going on at the comments section regarding Pat Robertson's mac and cheese statement. Not one person posted something like the following - "Now if Robertson really wants to learn about mac and cheese all he has to do is ask Maggie Gallagher, I mean......." I won't finish the sentence since it pretty much finishes itself.

    I am on Maggie's side politically, but glad that at least some people here are concerned about her health. It's concerned me also, but I can't do anything about it since I don't know her personally. I'm sure the jabs she gets about it must hurt. But what must have hurt even more was the the humble "pie" she was forced to eat when marriage equality pased in New York State this year. I believe everyone at NOM was stunned. Reports were that Brian sobbed like a baby.

    A question: Do the posters here really think Maggie is a closet lesbian or are you just saying this to be provocative?

    Posted by: Mary | Nov 23, 2011 8:45:31 PM

  14. @Mary: I don't know whether Maggie is gay, bi or heterosexual and I wouldn't claim to know.
    But I do know that in every single case of anyone I've ever known who was overly focused on attacking gay people (sometimes verbally, sometimes physically and sometimes legislatively), the individual always seemed to have personal sexual desires and/or to be involved in sexual activities that were contradictory to their own supposed moral code, hypocritical and guilt-inducing. (And in several cases, the anti-gay individual even eventually made sexual passes at me.)
    Anti-gay tirades seem to be a projection of guilt about one's own sexual moral failures. Otherwise, why in the world would they care so much about a relationship that makes two other adults happy in life?
    I don't know if Maggie is gay or whether she is trying to project her own self-loathing onto others in a false attempt to redeem herself for an unplanned pregnancy from casual sex (an indication that her real sex life is likely not consistent with all the noise she makes about how others should live).
    But I do know that people who are secure and comfortable in their own relationships (and whose morals are consistent with their own sex lives) have no logical and pschologically-healthy reason to be focused on trying to convince society that some other couple should be treated as second-class citizens.

    Posted by: GregV | Nov 23, 2011 9:54:29 PM

  15. Greg, thank you for answering my question courteously. I can see your point. I'm sure there are some closeted people and/or confused people in what I'll call the "anti-gay" camp. But there also are a lot of others who genuinely believe that total equality for LGBT people is not in society's best interests - even though this forces them to seem mean-spirited to gay friends and family. And it may be that their own personal lives have been messed up and because of this they are sensitive to anything that would seem to throw a monkey wrench into social stability. Even if what caused their heartache/pain had nothing to do with questions of sexual orientation, they are afraid of more social change. In Maggie's case I can see why she'd oppose anything that let men have sexual pleasure and socially-approved relationships outside of commitment to women.

    The situation is more complex than simply letting everyone live his own life because you're content with your own life.

    Posted by: Mary | Nov 23, 2011 11:04:40 PM

  16. I can't think of anything more destructive to mixed gender marriage than the thought of being stuck with Maggie Gallagher for eternity.

    Posted by: Michael | Nov 23, 2011 11:05:00 PM

  17. Mary, explain the last part
    The situation is more complex than simply letting everyone live his own life because you're content with your own life

    Posted by: George M | Nov 24, 2011 12:59:36 AM

  18. If her opposition to marriage equality wasn't based on bigotry, they wouldn't be spending so much money and effort trying to fight it.

    Posted by: the milkman | Nov 24, 2011 1:40:02 AM

  19. Funny, this actually happened to me last Thanksgiving, my anti-gay aunt went into a unprovoked rant about me and my "ruining of American life by fags" during dinner. I won't get into details however because the matter is STILL being worked out in court. All I have to say is: my family no longer serves alcohol and we have to have dinner in public every year now.

    Posted by: WK | Nov 24, 2011 4:26:50 AM

  20. She's ugly... just plain ugly... and I'm talking about on the INSIDE!

    Posted by: Jim | Nov 24, 2011 8:07:45 AM

  21. I disagree with her politically, but I refuse to make satire of her weight or fashion sense. There truly is no need, because her ugliness comes from within and ultimately, that's all that matters!

    Posted by: Bobby McMillin | Nov 24, 2011 9:02:46 AM

  22. Mary, I too am interested in hearing you further explain your position, because for the life of me I can't wrap my head around why, other than sheer animus, anyone would oppose full lgbtq equality. And I'm particularly intrigued because you are the first person I've heard from the opposition admit that denying us access to equal civil marriage is inequality. How can that possibly be justified rationally, especially when that harm causes such harm to lgbtq families. As a queer woman whose partner of fifteen years has been unemployed for about nine months and who has several very serious "per-existing conditions" we are forced to neglect because we can neither afford private insurance (all of the quotes were cost more than our mortgage treatment) nor ongoing treatment. If we were a straight married couple, I could easily and cheaply add her to my own employer-provided insurance. How can that kind of inequality be rationally justified as "in society's best interest"? And ours is a relatively trivial situation compared to others faced by lgbtq families, especially those with children who are unjustly prevented the benefits of two legal parents.

    As for the video itself, I find it telling that apparently people would need to turn to someone like Maggie for "talking points" in order to rationally explain what I am always told are their own, deeply held beliefs. If they truly believed these things from the depths of their beings and were not motivated by bigotry and sheer animus, wouldn't their reasons for believing this way be self-evident to them? I sure don't need to turn to glbtq leaders for tips on why inequality is unacceptable because it is the stuff of my life! And there's the problem -- marriage equality has nothing to do with the lives of those who oppose it.

    Posted by: Shelly | Nov 24, 2011 11:30:45 AM

  23. Mary, can you intelligently and rationally explain why you think your church's specific interpretation of Scripture should be forced onto all Americans?

    Do you not realize that that's in no way different than the Taliban enforcing conservative interpretations of Islam onto everyone?

    If you, Mary, belong to an anti-gay church (which you clearly do) then dont' worry - nobody who's LGBT will want to get married in your church. And the children who are gay who are growing up in your church will either break free and leave your congregation or will hang themselves in their closets out of fear of shaming the people like YOU whom they are unfortunately surrounded by.

    So, while you do indeed have the "right" to help drive the young children in your conregation to suicide, Mary, you don't have any business denying other's the freedom of THEIR religion nor their freedom from YOUR religion.

    Can you intelligently explain how my boyfriend and I marrying is going to have "negative consequences" for society? Can you be intelligent about it? I bet you can't.

    Maggie Gallagher has a son ,a confirmed bachelor, and a very nice young liberal man, who is working in the musical theatre field in NYC. dot dot dot. he desperately tries to distance himself from his mother. DOT DOT DOT.

    Why, Mary, do you think you and maggie have any standing? Why do you get to use YOUR religious beliefs to enact laws that force those beliefs onto those who do not share them?

    You, Mary, are like a Muslim or Jewish person banning Christians from eating bacon. You pretend that you're doing it out of Christian love, but it's the exact opposite - you're finding excuses because the truth is that bigotry resides in the place in your heart where LOVE is supposed to be.

    You've become the antithesis of everything that Christ lived for, Mary. Shame on you.

    Posted by: Little Kiwi | Nov 24, 2011 11:45:49 AM

  24. Oh, and Mary, re: my previous insinuation that she is out of touch with her sexuality, that was perfectly sincere and based on my personal experience with morbid obesity stemming in large part from internalized misogyny/homophobia as well an underlying anxiety disorder as a result of homophobia-motivated abuse. That degree of obesity has the effect of essentially erasing gender and sexuality, taking them out of the equation of day-to-day life because men typically do not treat you as a sexual object. I'd suspected previously, as I do with many morbidly obese women with intense interest in or involvement with gender and sexuality based politics (on any sides of the issue) that there's a good chance a similar dynamic is at play to my own situation. However, it wasn't until I saw her new haircut that I became convinced. I think you are likely not aware how HUGELY popular variants of that particular haircut were among lesbians in the 80s and 90s. I personally struggled against nature itself (in the form of my naturally kinky hair) to achieve same minus the bangs (which to my aesthetic sense ruin it), and at the time I still identified as straight! Because, at its heart, that's a classically male haircut from roughly the 20s-30s, and in my case, I was very consciously copying it from Paul Weller of The Jam/Style Council. But combined with morbid obesity, it speaks volumes to me of a woman deeply uncomfortable with her body and her place in this culture as a woman.

    Posted by: Shelly | Nov 24, 2011 11:47:33 AM

  25. to Shelly's point - nobody asks the "great big fat person" why they're single. comfort in food, and security in nobody asking you why you're not dating anyone.

    now, Maggie Srivastev is indeed married. for security reasons ;-)

    she had her son nearly 30 years ago. she became pregnant by a man she was not even in a relationship with, and thus has been "repenting for her sin" for decades by being as anti-gay as possible.

    right. the woman who touts "the traditional family" had a child out of wedlock, raised him as single mother, and now doesn't use the last name of the man she eventually married.


    hypocrisy and piety.

    Posted by: Little Kiwi | Nov 24, 2011 11:56:24 AM

  26. « | 1 2 3 4 »

Post a comment


« «UC Davis Pepper Spray Officer Also a Homophobe« «