Creep of the Week: Maggie Gallagher

By |2008-11-13T09:00:00-05:00November 13th, 2008|Opinions|

“Biology is destiny.” In other words, if you have a penis you are destined to take apart clock radios and shoot squirrels with a BB gun and will want to have penis/vagina sex with your lawfully wedded wife. If you have a vagina you are destined to bake brownies and crochet baby booties for all of the children you bear as a result of having penis/vagina sex with your lawfully wedded husband.
That’s it. Case closed.
Or so says Maggie Gallagher, president of the New Jersey-based National Organization for Marriage, a major contributor to the “Yes on 8” campaign in California.
In an opinion piece published in the Los Angeles Times on Nov. 1, Gallagher wrote that keeping gays from marrying is rooted in “biology, not bigotry.”
How so? Well, according to Gallagher, “The answer is not hard to see. When a baby is born, a mother is bound to be somewhere close by. But if we want fathers to be there for children, and the mothers of their children, biology alone will not take us very far. We need a cultural mechanism to connect fathers to the mother-child bond.”
In other words, one-woman one-man marriage is so important and special because without a legally binding contract, a man would abandon his female partner as soon as a visible baby bump appeared and go off in search of fresher tail.
Are you kidding me? Gays can’t get married because heterosexual guys can’t be trusted to stick around and rear their young?
Isn’t that akin to telling someone else to put on a sweater because you are cold?
Not only is Gallagher’s claim illogical, it isn’t even rooted in biological reality. But then, “reality” is a godless liberal concept.
In a rebuttal published Nov. 7, Katherine Gould, author of “A Tiger in the Bedroom: Lessons From Mother Nature’s Sex Shop,” calls Gallagher out on her bullshit.
Responding to Gallagher’s claim that men will abandon their young unless they’ve got a “heterosexuals only” marriage, Gould writes, “This statement is completely wrong. In fact, fathers stay close to their children’s mothers because of – not in spite of – biology. Until very recently in human history, it was extremely difficult for a single person to successfully raise a human infant. Men who abandoned their mates found that their progeny were more likely to die and their genes didn’t survive to the next generation. Those men who stayed around to help rear the young were more likely to see their offspring survive to adulthood and pass on their genes, including the genes for sticking around to help care for the kids.”
Of course, Gallagher isn’t interested in that. After celebrating the anti-marriage “victories” in California, Florida and Arizona on Nov. 4 Gallagher and NOM have moved onto excluding gay and lesbian families from marriage in New York and New Jersey.
“There is no biological reason that two women or two men cannot adequately form a union that protects and nurtures children. Animals do it all the time,” Gould adds. “If you oppose gay marriage on moral grounds, so be it; your morals are your own. But don’t try to get biology to back up your argument. Biology is far more open-minded than we ever give it credit for.”

About the Author:

Avatar