Per Evan’s post…I’m reposting this cartoon I did a while back. Mrs. Gallagher and her organization have relentlessly stoked a climate of hate against innocent people to serve nothing more noble then their animus and contempt. To call her Cluture Krieg against gay people, loving same-sex couples, children even, monstrous is giving it a label more generous then it deserves.
She asked once, rhetorically and cynically if it was really true that she had blood on her hands. This image came instantly to mind.
A society that is serious about marriage would gently stand up to gay people and say ‘not this, not now… There is no gentle way of cutting off your neighbor’s ring finger. There is no gentle way of telling the children of gay parents that their family is a shameful thing, if not an outright cancer on civilization. There is no gentle way of telling a teenage kid just awakening to adulthood that their desires are ugly, shameful things that will destroy civilization. There is no gentle way of telling a gay kid that they are incapable of loving another person with the same wholeheartedness that heterosexuals can, that they are damaged goods whose love life can only amount to “playing dress-up in their parents’ clothes…” as NOM board member Orson Scott Card once said. That moment in our lives, when we are just discovering love and desire, should be one of the most magical times in our lives and Mrs. Gallagher and her fellow travelers in the anti-gay industrial complex have turned it into a nightmare. Because we have to hate ourselves at least as much, and preferably more then they hate us.
“Monstrous” doesn’t begin to describe the brutal scorched earth war on the human heart that she is a willing part of. But we’re trying hard to be civil here.
She’s either not a Mrs. or she’s Mrs. Srivistav, not Mrs. Gallagher.
Well said indeed. (Well written too).
I would add that a society that is serious about marriage would gently fold away the harmful rhetoric that engulfs our community and take up arms against divorce with the level of resources and organisational flare commensurate with the harm that arises from the broken institution of marriage in current form.
That they don’t gives the lie to Maggie’s stated sincereity, and to NOM’s claim to having the interests of children and society at heart. They don’t. They might have the self-belief or indeed the self-delusion that they do but they don’t.
What NOM is anti-gay. That is why they can’t win a public debate in the long run. Too many of them are homophobic. They associate with too many types who espouse hate, pour out vitriol.