Kathryn Lopez at National Review Online chats with Maggie Gallagher about NOM's new Marriage Anti-Defamation Alliance and its role in defending the livelihood of those who exercise their core civil rights when protecting marriage:
LOPEZ: What exactly is the Marriage Anti-Defamation Alliance? And how much of a need is there for it anyway? How many Tureks could there be out there?
GALLAGHER: Marriage ADA’s goal is an America where people on all sides of the gay marriage debate feel free to participate peacefully in the democratic process without fear of threats, harassment, or retaliation. I know that Frank is not the only one, because I’m getting e-mails from others who’ve faced similar threats. The goal of too many gay marriage advocates is to isolate, intimidate, and silence Americans who believe that marriage is the union of husband and wife, because children need their mom and dad. Marriage ADA is a response to these tactics of branding civil, thoughtful participation in democracy as hatred and bigotry.
I hope, by creating community, to inspire more Americans to stand up for their rights to preach, teach, and live the idea that to make a marriage you need a husband and a wife. There are too many of us to stigmatize if we stand together.
13 Comments
Anyone can preach, teach and live an idea within the legal bounds as proscribed by local, state and national parameters. For some, "civil, thoughtful participation in democracy", may be interpreted as hate speech and, as long as laws are followed, anyone can call it as they see it. This web-site is a fine example.
We do though live in a land where thoughts and ideas are explicitly protected. This is something else these people seek to change, they want this speech illegal on the basis that they disagree with it. I am thankful for this alliance, we do *NOT* support marriage out of hate for gays. We do so only because marriage ad one woman and one man is the only truly workable model for a just society which protects the rights of all.
Richard: Interesting choice of words: "as long as laws are followed." Hate speech is still legal in this country, and the right to free speech is limited only in very specific cases. What the people who label themselves as homosexuals want is to create laws that limit speech; they're starting it with the anti-bullying crapola in the public elementary schools.
Sticks and stones, Richard. As long as no one's hurting anyone, people should feel free to say whatever they want about anybody.
Limiting marriage to one man and one woman, which obviously excludes same sex couples from the benefits and protections of marriage, does not protect the rights of all.
Free speech is the law in America. If someone expresses an opinion that he does not believe in the practice of homosexuality or in homosexual marriage, he is exercising his right to free speech.
So why do the gay bigots tell him to shut his mouth?
"Legalizing SSM won't affect anyone else."
Right.
That's why there are people who have expressed their opinions against the practice of homosexuality or against the legalization of SSM, who have been either suspended or fired from their jobs, like Jerry Buell and Frank Turek.
That's why a father who opposed teaching LGBT indoctrination in his child's class, without the parents' prior consent, was arrested and put in jail.
Latest official updated national poll on households in the U.S. just released; same-sex enthusiasts account for 1% of all households in the U.S.
Do we really want to change the meaning of words just so less than 1% of the population can pretend that what they are doing is normal; ridiculous!
The relized costs vastly outweigh any possible benefit - as if there were any.
"Latest official updated national poll on households in the U.S. just released; same-sex enthusiasts account for 1% of all households in the U.S."
Why in the world do you think this argument works for your side? What percentage of households need to be same-sex in order to qualify for fair treatment? 3%, 5%, 10%, 33%?
And if it's true we represent such a tiny minority, how is it that our forming life-long, committed relationships jeapordizes all civilization?
Buce- Why do YOU PEOPLE, keep asking the same stupid questions over and over again when you have been given amny reasons why, try paying attention to NOM's posts here, and check the archives...Keep going over the material until you get it, if you don't, hey, another lost soul...
Bruce,lifelong commitment to doing something that is wrong compounds the error,and "fair treatment" requires a public policy of hostility toward efforts to establish or persist in those unhealthy commitments.
Bruce's questions are valid, and the responses are (predictably) empty. "US PEOPLE" ask questions like this because they deserve real answers, and thus far none are forthcoming.
The anti-gay contingency loves to trivialize the significance of the LGBTQ community by saying how tiny that population is, and yet somehow the LGBTQ community is also one of the biggest threats to The American Way.
You boys go ahead and keep trying to have your cake and eat it, too, endorsing your "public policy of hostility" all the way... mostly, the rest of the world will continue to evolve and progress around you.
"Buce- Why do YOU PEOPLE, keep asking the same stupid questions over and over again when you have been given amny reasons why, try paying attention to NOM's posts here, and check the archives..."
Because I think those questions are the most pertinent, and your side either avoids answering them, or provides answers which our side soundly refutes.
Bruce,the soundness of those "refutations" is a figment of your imagination.
Bruce,
Your side has soundly refted nothing; FYI,
sticking your fingers in your ears while chanting "na, na, na, na na." wil never refute the facts.
What are you; 6?