Friday, May 16, 2008

oo! oo! oo! this made me pissed!

Okay, so I wasn't gonna post again before I left but then I was listening to NPR and I heard them interview Maggie Gallagher, the defense of marriage advocate and I got so ticked I couldn't stand it. I've been following the gay marriage thing for a while now and I was totally stoked by yesterday's ruling. I am one of those folks who totally believes that it is a civil rights/human rights issue.

I'm not saying that folks can't disagree with me. They can and do all the time. My real beef is when you read some of the crap espoused by folks like MG and realize what a complete lack of critical thinking skills her argument possesses. Or perhaps it's more to say what an narrow argument she puts forth. This morning when she was being interviewed one of her primary complaints was that the ruling made individuals like herself look bigoted because the case is being portrayed as a human rights issue. Big news Maggie depriving basic rights to group who is biologically or socially different than yourself is indeed prejudiced.

If for some reason you would like your blood to simmer the way mine did this morning you can check our Gallagher's rhetoric here. Being an ex sociology major I would be seriously curious where she gets her numbers from.

2 comments:

Anonymous said...

Maggie Gallagher also wrote on NationalReview.com in 2003that "Polygamy is not worse than gay marriage, it is better. At least polygamy, for all its ugly defects, is an attempt to secure stable mother-father families for children." http://www.nationalreview.com/comment/comment-gallagher071403.asp

I was completely shocked by her value judgment and lack of critical thinking skills, as you said, to continue to try to make people think that marriage should be a concept that ties to nothing but reproduction capacity. She continues to speak to the form of a family on the surface level when her only requirements for a family are a child, a mother, and a father, and she mentions nothing about the love and caring--the essence of what makes a couple and a family important to us and to the society. For her to promote what a family should look like as opposed to qualities that make life better for us and for society as a whole--I simply find her message superficial, ignorant, trivial, and socially irresponsible.

We need intelligent, serious people who can lead others to think critically about important issues to make our future better and stronger, to promote important qualities that should be shared by all people, not a person like Maggie Gallagher who writes, "By embracing gay marriage the legal establishment will have declared that the public purposes of marriage no longer include anything to do with making babies, or giving children mothers and fathers." Spare me the time from listening to her badly-informed concept of "the public purposes of marriage." We need people who can reason and articulate way better than Maggie Gallagher.

Hei

Liv Moe said...

man! that was quite the well composed comment. hello hei!