No I don’t think she took cash.

She was paid by the Bush administration to support his “healthy family” programs in her column and in testimony before Congress. She failed to disclose this, and when she was confronted she tried to pass it off as an accident and that she would have supported them anyway.

So yes, she has long since lost all integrity and is pretty much discredited. But I think your details were a bit off.

BTW, isn’t Maggie Gallagher the same woman who took undisclosed CASH payments to write ‘independent’ articles supporting her secret donors? Wouldn’t that make her pretty much a discredited writer?

In answer to your question, I provided the links that came up on Google. My intension was to be helpful to our mutual cause. I am a counselor, and obviously, not a computer expert. Frankly, I felt hurt to read your characterization of my efforts as “appallingly-broken links.” I understand that emotions are high right now, and people have a lot of justifiable anger. Let’s be careful, though, to not direct that anger unnecessarily onto each other. That is exactly what our opponents want.

Re: your next point, I think it is very important that we understand our opponents psychologically. This gives us insights we need to create and utilize strategies that are effective in managing them. This is one of the big mistakes of the “No on 8″ campaign. Our leadership did not understand our opponents and we lost, at least in part, as a result. More important than this, though, we need to change the nature of our fight. For too long we have allowed ourselves to be on the defensive. This needs to change. Instead, we need to be scrutinizing our opponents and then using the same weapons (“tradition” and the Bible)they use against us on them. This is what African-Americans did in the Civil Rights Movement, and it worked.

Finally, I read your blog. You are very smart, and have a lot to contribute. I really hope we can work together to achieve our mutual goals. For me, that is full equality for all GLBT people throughout the world.

Warm regards,

Robert

Though I think there’s no need to dig for complex psychological reasons: others besides Gallagher have declared that marriage = the ability to have babies together.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maggie_Gallagher

http://archive.salon.com/sex/feature/2000/10/30/marriage/index.html

http://daisysdeadair.blogspot.com/2008/12/i-aint-gonna-work-on-maggies-farm-no.html

http://209.85.173.132/search?q=cache:duHnYbs73BgJ:jesurgislac.wordpress.com/2008/06/18/maggie-gallagher-redefines-marriage/+%22maggie+gallagher%22+%2B+%22single+mother%22&hl=en&ct=clnk&cd=15&gl=us

1. Maggie seems to be really obsessed with the “sex makes babies” mantra. She revealed why when debated Dale Carpenter at the Cato Institute back in 2006. We reported on it here:
http://www.equalityloudoun.org/?p=337
“Maggie Gallagher told her personal story at the Cato Institute forum in June. It seems that she had premarital sex, was impregnated, and was unable to convince the father to marry her. Her feeling of victimization as a single mother is what drives her mission to return the institution of marriage to its former role as authoritarian regulator of all sexuality. If same sex couples are denied the dignity and security of legal recognition, and GLBT people are demonized in the process, that’s just collateral damage…”
Comment by Jonathan — June 19, 2008 @ 3:11 am
http://209.85.173.132/search?q=cache:q4-bAblPeP8J:www.bookrags.com/wiki/Maggie_Gallagher+%22maggie+gallagher%22+%2B+%22single+mother%22&hl=en&ct=clnk&cd=19&gl=us

Please provide a source for your information about Maggie Gallagher.

Steve Lopez is not exactly a journalist. He’s a columnist who, in my experience, isn’t very careful about his facts.

This bleeding heart for the victim (whomever he as assigned as victim) is pretty typical of his writing.