Maggie Gallagher addresses NOM's claim about gay marriage and children

In my last post, I talked about National Organization for Marriage's Maggie Gallagher attempt at covering her tracks in regards to claims of racism she lodged against those angry at Maryland legislator Sam Arora.

Gallagher had initially implied that the anger of the lgbt community over Arora's shift from supporting gay marriage was due to racism. However, this was not the case. Lgbt anger at Arora dealt with his backtracking on gay marriage even after he campaigned for and supported the issue.

In the midst of her efforts to wipe away her initial claim, Gallagher emailed me. I took that opportunity to ask her for a response on another matter regarding NOM's claim that gay marriage was being "taught" to kindergartners in Massachusetts because of that state's law allowing gay marriage.

The Pulitizer-Prize winning site PolitiFact had called NOM out in February after investigating and finding this claim to be false. However, NOM continued to push the claim, even to the point of sending out mailers last week in Maryland saying the following:

Massachusetts public schools teach kid as young as kindergartners about gay marriage. Parents have no legal right to object!

This was the initial claim - word for word - which PolitiFact said was false.

Gallagher's response to me was as follows:

Contact Brian Brown for NOM's response.

But personally I think deciding the two instances Politifacts says were offered (I don't know the details only what PolitiFActs claims happened) were insufficient might justify a finding of "unproven" but hardly shows it is "false."

Moreover in the court cases surrounding these incidents, all the major gay marriage groups argued that in fact parents have no right to prevent their children from being exposed to gay marriage in public schools.

We have never claimed the law will require teaching about gay marriage. We have only said that once it is the law, it will be taught in public schools.

In fact don't you think it ought to be?

Now in all honesty, there should be some fairness to Gallagher there. She is the Chairman of the Board at NOM, and not the operational CEO.

But still her answer to my response leaves a lot to be desired. It does appear to be misleading.

Arora controversy has National Organization for Marriage scrambling for cover

The situation with Maryland delegate Sam Arora which nearly derailed gay marriage in Maryland is fastly blowing up in the face of the National Organization for Marriage, the organization trying to prevent gay marriage from taking place.

Arora is the Maryland legislator first supported the gay marriage bill. He campaigned on it, raised money because of it, and engaged in discussions with lgbt families in terms of why this bill is important.

And for while he decided, even after all of this and publicly giving his support to the bill, to change his mind and vote against it.

Arora faced a serious firestorm from voters who felt betrayed, angry, and hurt at his shift. Because of this, he changed his mind again and said he will vote for the bill, while emphasizing that the question of gay marriage in Maryland should be the subject of a referendum.

Into this controversy stepped Maggie Gallagher, head of NOM, via a post on the organization's blog during Arora's initial change:

First, if Sam Arora is wavering under this media firestorm, he must be hearing from hundreds of constituents who do not want him to vote for gay marriage.

Secondly, as someone married to an Indian-American, I find it interesting that the gay marriage machine appears to be re-focusing its attacks from Black Democrats who oppose gay marriage to an easier target: Indian-Americans.

Tiffany Alston appears now to be off the hook regardless of how she votes.

Supporters of the Maryland gay marriage bill seized on Gallagher's comment, claiming that she was unfairly accusing those angry Arora of being racists. And they had a point. Nowhere in her post did Gallagher address the simple fact that the ire at Arora was solely because of his backtracking of an issue which played such a central part in his election.

Know Your LGBT History - Black Shampoo

To paraphrase Jane Fonda, there are a lot of things to say about the happenings of this week. But this isn't the time to say them.

What it's time for another segment of my Know Your LGBT History posts.

I apologize for today's post because it's as bad as last week's. However, again I reiterate how important it is for the lgbt community to understand how far we have come concerning images of ourselves on television and movies.

Today's post is about a little-seen blaxploitation movie entitled Black Shampoo (1976). Like many other blaxploitation movies (i.e. Blackenstein, Dr. Black and Mr. Hyde, Blacula) Black Shampoo is supposed to be a black version of a more widely seen movie.

In this case, it is Warren Beatty's movie Shampoo.

However this version has less to do with angst and relationships and more to do with violence and the glorification of the stereotype of the "big black buck."

John Daniels (who never had a starring role after this one because his acting was abominable) stars as the owner of a hair salon whose touch makes women so crazy that he generally ends up doing more than their hair, if you get my drift.

The conflict comes when he is trying to rescue his receptionist from the mob.

For the purposes of this blog, let's focus on one of his assistants, Artie. Artie is a stereotypical gay man - weak, flighty, and subject to all sort of abuse.

Naturally he also a living version of "Chekov's gun," in that you just know that he is only in the movie for something awful to happen to him. And it does at 1:14 of this trailer.

My gosh, we have come a looooong way:



Past Know Your LGBT History Postings:

Religious right group stoops to tacky images and other Friday midday news briefs

CWA: Obama the "Despot" is Discriminating Against Americans by Not Defending DOMA - It's so hard to take the religious right group Concerned Women for America seriously when they push drivel like this with pictures like the following:

And in other news:

Liz Hurley to play bisexual villainess in Wonder Woman reboot - That ought to be interesting.

Clashes Pit Parents vs. Gay-Friendly Curriculums in Schools - Cause lgbts don't have children attending America's schools. Yes that was sarcasm.

Harding University Attempts To Silence Gay Students’ Voices - Hot mess happenings at Harding University.

Gingrich Secured $200,000 For Iowa Judge Recall Campaign - These were the judges who overruled Iowa's law against gay marriage. I wonder how Gringrich would have felt if those judges supported adultery. Probably would have thrown them a fundraiser.

Lgbt community hit with betrayal in Maryland?

MAJOR UPDATE - Arora will grudgingly support the gay marriage bil. Thanks for the sour persimmons, cousin. Meanwhile, Maggie Gallagher continues to tackily push the "race card."

This is Sam Arora, a Maryland delegate who campaigned on the fact that he would vote for gay marriage.

He knocked on doors, sat down with same-sex families, and accepted donations (a list is here) while expressly saying that he supports marriage equality.

And now after he is in office, he is planning on changing his vote.

Naturally the members of the lgbt community who supported him, who introduced him to their families, who told him their life stories and why this piece of legislation is important are furious.


And some are asking for their donations back.

Now Maggie Gallagher of the National Organization for Marriage is claiming that lgbt anger is strictly racism because, according to her, the lgbt community is ignoring another delegate who may switch votes.

She also claims that Arora is changing his vote because of, as she puts it, IMMENSE pressure from folks opposed to bringing gay marriage to Maine.

Arora has not given a reason why he is changing his mind. And based on NOM's past actions and statements, folks should take what Gallagher says with a grain of salt - i.e. every word dripping from her mouth is a lie including the words "and" and "the."

However, if the situation with Arora is true, this is a huge setback and betrayal.

Seems to me that if you campaign specifically on an issue and folks - along with their families - sit down and talk with you about how important the issue is, and they get a promise of support from you, then you should follow through with that promise.

It's just basic decency.

Now if Gallagher and company want to mark basic decency as one of the qualities they are willing to step over in pursuit of their goals, that is their prerogative.

However, Mr. Arora should aspire to something better.

This issue is not about racism. It's about lies, broken promises, and betrayals of constituents and their families.

Jonathan Capehart of The Washington Post said it best:

The outrage directed at Arora is understandable. As is the sense of betrayal. He raised money from gays and lesbians based on his support for marriage equality. He secured the endorsements of Progressive Maryland and of Equality Maryland because of it. In fact, get a load of what he wrote as an addendum to his questionnaire for Equality Maryland:

I am a former law clerk to Attorney General Doug Gansler. I publicly supported his decision to recognize out-of-state marriage licenses for same-sex couples and immediately put out a release praising his findings. For me, it's simply a matter of equal rights under the law.

If this situation turns out the way it's trending, then NOM and Maggie Gallagher will have a lot to crow about. No doubt the spin will be how Arora "fought with himself" and "fought the slings and arrows of the radical homosexual movement to protect marriage."

I don't think that spin will work this time. There are some situations so ugly, so starkly monstrous that all of the spin in the world can't clean them up.

This looks like one of those times.


Folks, if you are going to write to Arora, Gallagher, or even vent, please be aware that this is one of those situations where Gallagher and company stalk pro-lgbt blogs looking for the ugliest comments they can pull to use against us. Don't let your anger allow you to be played.

500,000 hits later, a reminder to the lgbt community to keep on pressing

You will forgive me for not doing a usual post tonight. A little before noon today, this blog had its 500,000 visitor. That's over 500,000 readers in less than five years, which is not bad at all for a part-time blog which makes me no money at all. In commemoration of this, I want to repost my most popular piece, Message to the Religious Right. I wrote it in 2008, just weeks after we lost the Proposition 8 vote in California in response to Newt Gingrich claiming that our justified anger over the travesty was because lgbts are "secular fascists." I hope you all take this piece to heart and never lose your anger when things don't seem to be fair for us. But at the same time, never lose your hope. We are going to win this:

Message to the religious right - this isn't just about marriage, it's about history

I keep hearing all of this nonsense about us lgbts attacking people, about us using intimidation and violence to oppress people, about us somehow being ugly aggressors.

Newt Gingrich (who wrote the book on deceptive messaging during his tenure in the U.S. House of Representatives) actually accused us of being "secular fascists."

Gingrich's attack on us seem to be the prevailing theme with those on the other side of the Proposition 8 argument.

And I think there needs to be some historical perspective on this matter.

True, Proposition 8 has galvanized our community. We have become a bit more politically engaged in our anger. That is a good thing.

However, any display of violence on either side of the argument should never be tolerated.

Nor should letting the religious right frame the moment.

I have a few questions to people like Newt Gingrich, Bill O’Reilly, Chuck Norris, Gary Bauer, Peter LaBarbera and the rest who are trying to push this "gay intimidation" image.

Where were you in the late 1970s when Anita Bryant accused us of trying to “recruit” children?

Where were you in 1983 when Paul Cameron accused gay men of stuffing gerbils up our rectums and castrating children? Or afterwards when he went from state to state pushing his phony research papers all designed to make us the boogiemen of American society?

Where were you when Jerry Falwell exploited the AIDS crisis to generate more money for the Moral Majority? Or when those dying of AIDS were cast out of their communities and excommunicated from their churches?

Where were you when Colorado passed that law in 1992 that basically said cities in the state had absolutely no right to protect gays and lesbians from discrimination?

Where were you when over the course of 20 years all of those phony “pro-family” groups told lies in front of federal and congressional state houses in attempts to beat back pro-gay laws or spread discredited research that gave “upstanding, moral” families the perfect excuse to put their gay sons and daughters out on the cold streets?

Where were you when organizations like Concerned Women for America, the Family Research Council, the Traditional Values Coalition, and Focus on the Family unconsciously gave reasoning for groups of roaming thugs to bash our heads in, chase us out in heavy traffic, beat us to bloody pulps with nail embedded boards, and hang us from fences on dark and lonely roads?

How is it that you can dare call us aggressive when for over 30 years, you have done everything in your power to make America hate and fear us?

How it is that you can dare infer that we don't have a right to get just a tad angry when for over 30 years, you have done everything in your power to make us hate and fear ourselves?

Every lie, every indignity, every attempt to dehumanize the lgbt community has brought us to this point. The Proposition 8 vote was the last straw in a chain of indignities that stretch as long as Jacob's ladder.

This ain’t just about marriage. Nor is this a single moment in time.

We are not the aggressors. We are learning to fight back.

When I was coming out, it wasn’t the fact that I was gay that bothered me more than the knowledge that so many had already written my life for me; told me who I was, what I liked, what I didn’t like, and even where I was going after I died.

Worst of all, they had the nerve to tell me that I had absolutely no rights to the words "values," "family," "tradition," or "honor."

And you know what the saddest thing about this is? I was not alone. Hundreds of thousands of lgbts went through the same experience. It was our "rite of passage."

So while I may not have a media spin machine behind me and therefore very few will give a damn about what I say, while I may not be a member of a religious think tank who is presently working to use this moment to again dehumanize lgbts, and while I may not be considered as a "leading gay talking head," I am an American, a human being, and a child of God.

Therefore, I will never forget what has brought me to this point of outrage.

And I will do my best to make sure that this country never forgets either.

Lastly, I will do my best to make sure that YOU never forget.

Black church leaders meet with lgbt community and other Thursday midday news briefs

Black Church Leaders Ask Forgiveness From the LGBT Community - The Root is an awesome site and this article NEEDS more coverage.

Ohio’s Radical Anti-Union Bill Also Has A Hidden Provision To Deny Equal Rights To Same-Sex Couples - SURPRISE! Why not kick everyone in the pants!

Now comes the part of the week day minute where FRC tells us how 'immoral', 'harmful', 'ungodly' we are - If I am praying with the Family Research Council, I want some lightning insurance.

Indiana's Jud McMillin: A Tale of Glass Houses & Rocks - NAAAAASTY but necessary. People who live in glass houses shouldn't touch sex arousal instruments.