“Every single time the American people have had the chance to vote, 31 out of 31 times, they have affirmed that marriage is and should remain the union of husband and wife.” - Maggie Gallagher, Chairman of the Board of NOM
(WASHINGTON, D.C.) – Today, Maggie Gallagher, Chairman of the Board of the National Organization for Marriage (NOM), testified before the House Committee on the Judiciary’s Subcommittee on the Constitution: “Defending Marriage” hearing.
President Obama’s arrogant decision earlier this year to cease protecting the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA), after it passed in 1996 overwhelming with bipartisan support and signed into law by President Clinton, left the House of Representatives no alternative but to step-in and defend DOMA. DOMA defines marriage for federal purposes as one man and one woman, and clarifies that states do not have to recognize same-sex marriages performed in other states. Ms. Gallagher applauded the House of Representatives for “stepping forward and defending marriage by defending DOMA.”
Ms. Gallagher testified that: “Marriage is the union of husband and wife for a reason: these are the only unions that create new life and connect those children in love to their mother and father … This is the rationale for the national definition of marriage proposed by Congress in passing DOMA: ‘civil society has an interest in maintaining and protecting the institution of heterosexual marriage because it has a deep and abiding interest in encouraging responsible procreation and child-rearing.’”
“Marriage as the union of a man and a woman is the national norm, the consensus of state law, and of human history. Every single time the American people have had the chance to vote, 31 out of 31 times, they have affirmed that marriage is and should remain the union of husband and wife,” Ms. Gallagher concluded.
Ms. Gallagher’s testimony can be read in its entirety here:
11 Comments
Thanks for your courage and hard work, Maggie...great job!
Marriage Equality Activists just can't see the grave societal harm in including homosexual marriage, the difference below should be obvious:
".....This is the rationale for the national definition of marriage proposed by Congress in passing DOMA: ‘civil society has an interest in maintaining and protecting the institution of HOMOSEXUAL AND heterosexual marriage because it has a deep and abiding interest in encouraging responsible procreation and child-rearing.’”
How can homosexuals procreate. It is a biological impossibility. The science is as plain as gravity. Anyone seen any pregnant men lately?
If anyone wants to include couples of homosexual behavior, then EVERY couple would want to be included (blood-related, just any two roommates at a dorm who'd like some extra benefits.)
Couples of homosexual behavior have been told they have a natural right under the Constitution to have their unions recognized as civil marriage. Someone told them so, so now they believe it. No, they don't. It doesn't matter how hard they yell it out - they don't. Of course, if they can get the majority to agree, good for them. But they know that is hopeless, so they then try to push it through through legal tricks, twisting the US Constitution. They can't.
Well, many roommates can't either; but they don't complain.
Little Man:
Let us also no forget that the homosexual "equality" agenda is backed by the Communist Party which makes direct reference to the principles set forth by Lenin in it's "Resolution on Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual and Transgender Rights".
Maybe that answers the queston of who told gays that they have these imaginary rights under The Constitution.
Well you figured it out Don. I admit it. All gays get together with the Communist Party on the first Tuesday of each month at a secret underground location (former bomb shelter actually - how's that for irony) to strategize on how to destroy America and capitalism. Oh and also how to recruit children and outlaw the Bible. We talk about all that stuff but I'll never forget the night the Communists told us we could get married! Best. Night. Ever.
Ken:
Your poor attempt to mock doesn't change the facts. Furthermore, you may not even have the slightest idea where the Communist Party fits into the scheme of things for the homosexual "equality" agenda.
It is unlikely that someone would walk up to you and say, "Hi, Ken, I'm a Communist and I would like to exploit your discontent for my own purposes." Communists like to work surreptitiously as having their name associated with a cause usually results in Americans rejecting that cause on the face of it.
Gay people are being exploited by Communists for their own ends. Once they are finished using you they will toss you into the trash dump. Don't be fooled.
Ken:
Your poor attempt at mockery doesn't change the facts. The Communist Party backs the homosexual "equality" agenda and makes reference to statements by Vladimir Lenin, the first head of the Soviet state, in so doing. Furthermore, not a single homosexual activist organization has disowned the support of the Communist Party. Ain't that something!
Don: As has been pointed out to you before, The Communist Party of the USA also backs racial equality and justice, workers', farmers', and women's rights, the environment... the list goes on. That does not mean that those values are without merit. It does not mean that anyone who holds one or more of the same values can't defend their position, is a Communist, or must support the party's full agenda. Would you like to discuss the sorts of groups who share your opposition to same-sex marriage? It's a sign of true desperation that you keep repeating this claim over and over again. And frankly, it's quite silly.
Ken:
Oh, silly is it? I've known the Communist Party to be many things but "silly" isn't one of them!
Ken, why do you think that the Communist Party is backing homosexual "equality"? Do you think it's because communists are such patriotic Americans and that all they want to do is to better the world? What do you think their motive is for choosing to back your "cause"?
It's a sign of denial that you absolutely refuse to look objectively at the fact that the Communist Party backs your agenda. Why are you wearing blinders when it comes to the communists?
As regards "desperation", I think that the actions of Judge Walker and of Rhode Island Speaker of the House Fox are the prime examples of desperation! Your agenda is losing and losing big. Those supporting your side of the issue are now engaging in very ill advised actions and statements which are actually hurting your "cause". That is what happens when desperation sets in!
I should add to Don's remarks. The Feminist organization was founded by Betty Friedan--a Communist. Marxist ideology is about dividing --making groups hate each other....communist infiltration in the 30's and 40's and on has been well documented by Chambers and many others including released documents from the Soviet Union.
Gramsci and the cultural Marxists designed political correctness to destroy the freedom of ideas...to destroy the two pillars that made this country the greatest on earth: the natural family and Christianity.
Without those we will disintegrate and that is what the communists want. Read T. Dalrymple's book on dysfunctional, nihilistic people in England.....all is caused by the destruction of the child.....their right to have a biological mother and father who models, guides and gives them a reason for the future and an understanding of their past.
2 Trackbacks
[...] NOM Chairman Maggie Gallagher's full remarks can be found here. [...]
[...] before I went into my testimony this morning, I was approached by a man - and his friend with a flip [...]