Added: 3 years ago
From: UCtelevision
Views: 1,774
Sort by time | Sort by thread (beta)

Link to this comment:

Share to:
see all

All Comments (25)

Sign In or Sign Up now to post a comment!
  • Thanks, Maggie!!

  • Travel around the world with an Latino women **rockmycity.info**

  • Where's the rest of the debate? The video ends mid-sentence. Has the rest of the debate beem posted on YouTube?

  • @TheStrong32 Yes I wish it was not truncated, too.

  • Maggie really didn't make any argument against same-sex marriage. Of course children do best with their biological parents, but any children adopted by same-sex couples would already have that possibility taken away from them. The "social experiment" argument has nothing to do with the issue of adoption.

  • We have come a long way since this debate, 5 states + DC now give marriage to gays =). Maggie and her hateful organization will loose, they know it. It's only a matter of time.

  • Following Gallagher's rambling, own goal 'argument', her son, who had no access to his father for 10 years, will grow up to be a juvenile deliquent, physically ill, an unwed father, mentally unstable, and a promiscuous, school failure.

  • if the main concern is really for children (provided the best environment for a child is to have two biological parents) and the institution of marriage, why not focus on making divorce and having children out of wedlock illegal?

  • A fragmented straight couple is not equivalent to a stable same-sex couple. Her entire case is a fallacy of incomparable analogies. The same social scientists who have found that fragmented straight couples are inadequate for raising children, has also found that stable same-sex couples are proficient for raising kids.

  • Lot's of heterosexuals marry for money not love which is a form of prostitution. Marriage is about two people who love each other.

  • It's almost devastating how much effort and time Maggie Gallagher puts fourth in an effort to make sure that homosexuals are not treated equally. It's frighteningly unchristian actually because the homosexuals are the ones getting crucified. She argues with technicalities yet she validates homophobia for a lot of people by claiming to have a PC and logical stance against it. Kids are murdered for being gay, they're called slurs...how can she not think she's helping this to permeate?

  • @GlanceofGlory I have thought about that also, GoG, if she would focus on strengthening all marriages instead of singling out some that do not deserve support. She always denies that her attitude and advocacy has anything to do with the social problems LGBT and especially LGBT youngsters suffer in this country.

  • She is evil.

  • :O Maggie Gallagher now supports gay marriage!!!

    /watch?v=yaGxeXMnwZ8

  • does Maggie Gallagher believe in adoption? or is that just a social experiment threatening the safety of our children.

  • her argument is that a biological mother and father make the best possible environment for a child, this I highly doubt. I think more important is that the marriage is stable and the child/ren are properly looked after. But regardless of this, a better question is, "Is an orphaned child or a child put up for adoption better off living in today's broken foster care system full of abuse or in the hands of two loving same sex parents?

  • @cphoover11 go home and look your parents in the eyes and tell them that two total strangers totally committed to each other could have done as good as or even a bettert job than you did.

    Or, your child comes home from school today and stated that two strangers in a committed relationship could have done what you've done. Nothing special about you. The gov't has a rational basis to remove children at birth and place those children in homes that the gov't sees most fit in spite of the parents.

  • This woman is unbelieavable. She didnt say anything about gay marriage. She concentrates and all the problems and also supported the statements Mr Rauch said about living in unmarried household. She has no strong argument against gay marriage whatsoever.

  • She focused on the social purpose of marriage and what the possible affects of changing that institutions public definition and purpose. She doesn't make the arrogant assumption that gay and lesbian relationships are identical to each other or to opposite-sex relationships. As such she advocates gay institutions dedicated toward the gay experience which focus on gay needs rather than flipping the marriage system we have which is rooted in opposite-sex experience.

  • This is the problem. There is no one serious scientific study supporting her statements. There are many studies on same sex parenting that show no difference with straight parents when it comes to raising kids.

    Also, I dont know what are you talking about when you say "flipping the marriage system." Theres no much change here to make. Its still two people coming together and live their lifes as a couple. That wont change and thats where the marriage system is rooted in.

Loading...
0 / 00Unsaved Playlist Return to active list
    1. Your queue is empty. Add videos to your queue using this button:
      or sign in to load a different list.
    Loading...Loading...Saving...
    • Clear all videos from this list
    • Learn more