DOMA | Maggie Gallagher | News

Maggie Gallagher: DOMA Decision Is A 'Head-On Declaration of War' Against Half of Americans - AUDIO

MaggieStill fuming over the Supreme Court's pro-equality decisions, NOM's Maggie Gallagher appeared on conservative talk radio host Lars Larson's show the other day to blast the Supreme Court for issuing a "head-on declaration of war against at least half of the American people." Right Wing Watch reports:

In an interview with Lars Larson, Gallagher said that the court's pro-marriage equality rulings limit the "democratic rights" of activists who seek to ban same-sex unions and argued that the justices could "not name" where gay and lesbian couples are protected in the Constitution. 

Earlier in the interview, Gallagher made the claim that Prop 8 supporters were "kicked out of court...[without] any justice"



Feed This post's comment feed


  1. That's the half that has multiple marriages and divorces.

    Posted by: Randy | Jul 9, 2013 10:57:47 AM

  2. She'd also like to know if you're going to have the rest of that sandwich.

    Posted by: Little Kiwi | Jul 9, 2013 10:59:29 AM

  3. Poor Maggie Gallagher. Waah, waah, waah! She says "the justices could not name where gay and lesbian couples are protected in the Constitution." Can she point out just where gay and lesbian couples are NOT protected?

    Posted by: rroberts | Jul 9, 2013 11:00:39 AM

  4. Maggie needs to worry about her own marriage and leave the rest of us out of her apparently extremely frustrating life. It seems that she and her fellow NOMbies are homophobic busy bodies with no sense of decency, fair play and equal rights for all citizens.

    Posted by: HadenoughBS | Jul 9, 2013 11:06:33 AM

  5. ...another Phat Pig who I hope when she goes- its sloooooo....and extremely Painful

    Posted by: disgusted american | Jul 9, 2013 11:07:13 AM

  6. A declaration of war against at least half of the population?


    Just a declaration of war against the small, fringe portion of the population that profits on anti-LGBT causes. Sorry, Mags. Looks like you may have to brush up that résumé soon. I'm sure there are a few Fortune 500s looking for experts in smear campaigns.

    Posted by: kpo5 | Jul 9, 2013 11:11:36 AM

  7. Maggie Gallagher is the poor man's George Wallace of the LGBT Civil Rights Movement. She should check the history books to see how he is remembered and realize that is her fate, if anyone remembers her at all.

    Posted by: andrew | Jul 9, 2013 11:16:08 AM

  8. She ignores the fact that the vast majority of the (less than) half of Americans who would fill out a survey saying they do not support marriage equality are probably pretty disinterested in the debate and could care less at the end of the day. It's only war if you're willing to fight and I don't think most of those opposed, at the end of the day, probably care very much about it at all.

    The battle is over, honey.

    Posted by: NOMNOMNOM | Jul 9, 2013 11:16:38 AM

  9. What, is it Myopic Catholic Hypocrite Pride Day AGAIN?!

    Posted by: Caliban | Jul 9, 2013 11:17:42 AM

  10. She sinks everso into the mire. Think of the life she has forward to living -- being on the opposite side of history, the very embodiment of human ugliness.

    Posted by: Gregoire | Jul 9, 2013 11:24:29 AM

  11. They are all understandably upset because the anti-gay industries and associated bigot money is coming to an end. Now they need to find another scapegoat.

    Posted by: Gerry | Jul 9, 2013 11:27:33 AM

  12. Is that a recent picture of her or did all the cameras in the world smash themselves in protest after it was taken?

    Posted by: Jack M | Jul 9, 2013 11:27:40 AM

  13. these whack jobs sure are hyperbolic / melodramatic pearl clutchers

    Posted by: Moz's | Jul 9, 2013 11:30:26 AM

  14. Well she is correct about one thing, half of America thinks she is revolting.

    Posted by: homer | Jul 9, 2013 11:32:10 AM

  15. "Gallagher said that the court's pro-marriage equality rulings limit the 'democratic rights' of activists who seek to ban same-sex unions and argued that the justices could 'not name' where gay and lesbian couples are protected in the Constitution."

    Well, you planet-sized she-cow, the justices basically depended on the Fifteenth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution, which sets out equal protection for law-abiding U.S. citizens.

    No one has a constitutional right to deny law-abiding citizens of equal protection, you festering c#nt. Not even morbidly obese Catholic women who couldn't keep their flabby thighs together to avoid getting knocked up and popping out a bastard son who's turned out as gay as a pink feather boa around Rupaul's swan-like neck.

    Or is that a bit catty...?

    Posted by: One of the CA 36,000 | Jul 9, 2013 11:39:02 AM

  16. "...and argued that the justices could "not name" where gay and lesbian couples are protected in the Constitution."

    Yeah, they actually DID do that: The 14th Amendment. Equal protection under the law.

    I suppose Maggie would also agree that it was a declaration of war against the 72% of the public that was against interracial marriage when the Supreme Court nullified state bans in 1967. Can't have it both ways, Maggie. You can't say one kind of discrimination is wrong and other kinds are right. Either the Supreme Court was correct in 1967 and in 2013, or they were wrong both times.

    Posted by: David in the O.C. | Jul 9, 2013 11:39:15 AM

  17. Maggie who? What half of America is she talking about? How does any of this threaten her?

    Posted by: deke | Jul 9, 2013 11:44:51 AM

  18. (1) It's not a war against people who oppose same-sex marriage because they are completely unaffected whether it passes or not.

    (2) Where does it say it in the Constitution? It's in the 14th Amendment, under what's known as the Equal Protection Clause: "...nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws." Oh, sure, it doesn't specifically enumerate LGBT people. It also doesn't enumerate African Americans, the clear intent of the Amendment. Unless she doesn't think LGBT people are "persons," it applies.

    Posted by: Kevin_BGFH | Jul 9, 2013 11:46:31 AM

  19. Poor delusional Maggie. Everything she whined about didn't possess a fact.

    But I guess she has to rationalize the failure of her life's work or how would she get out of the bed in the morning. She is just sad.

    Posted by: Bart | Jul 9, 2013 11:47:38 AM

  20. What we're listening to here is the last gasp of those that make a living off of fear and hate. Their pipeline to the cash flow is dwindling, and they know that actually interpreting the decisions by SCOTUS takes away from said pipeline; so what better thing to do than flap their arms and scream how victimized they are by this "miscarriage of justice." It will ensure a few more dwindling dollars, but not for long.

    Keep shining a light on these dimwits.

    Posted by: misha | Jul 9, 2013 11:49:59 AM

  21. It IS a declaration of war--on Maggie's fat income from spreading bigotry. She's flailing like a crippled walrus to keep her head above water. And yes, I use that simile advisedly.

    Posted by: jomicur | Jul 9, 2013 11:51:44 AM

  22. Actually, Maggie, the SCOTUS opinion that Kennedy wrote DID point out where in the Constitution (5th Amendment) married same-sex couples were protected against discrimination by DOMA. The dissenting opinions didn't contradict the majority opinion, but sought to avoid setting precedence by dismissing the case based on jurisdiction (sleazy cop out) and/or standing (did BLAG really have the authority to defend the law?).

    Posted by: AggieCowboy | Jul 9, 2013 11:54:04 AM

  23. If you stop reporting on her, she will cease to exist.

    Posted by: FernLaPlante | Jul 9, 2013 11:59:22 AM

  24. FOURTEENTH...! My bad.

    And I had a 1-in-27 chance to get it right...!! Dang.

    And AggieCowboy is right: Justice Kennedy cited the Fifth in vacating DOMA section 3.

    But Maggie, like ALL conservatives, doesn't let little things like facts get in the way of denying equal rights to people the Catholic Cult-- er, Church-- doesn't like.

    Kinda like how Maggie doesn't let a little thing like her (apparently) out-of-control diabetes keep her (apparently) from every Sizzler buffet she can waddle to.

    Posted by: One of the CA 36,000 | Jul 9, 2013 12:06:14 PM

  25. I feel so sorry for her gay son. That thing as a mother. I wonder if she used to wake him up for school by mooing at him?

    Posted by: Jonna the Woodswoman | Jul 9, 2013 12:07:18 PM

  26. 1 2 3 »

Post a comment


« «Zach Braff and Donald Faison Have a Wet Snuggle: PHOTO« «