Empire State Blues
What’s next for marriage?


Gay marriage was sold to many conservatives as the beginning of that process of marriage renewal. Instead, we are seeing quite clearly that victories for gay marriage lead to renewed calls for accepting family diversity under the powerful new “equality” banner institutionalized in marriage law. (Did you see the LA Times story last week that lauded the Census news on family decline on the grounds that Heather can now have three mommies, thanks to separation and re-partnering among lesbian couples? Heck, in a couple of years she can have six mommies. Families are now wonderfully fluid and to fail to applaud that would be narrow-minded bigotry.)

Our children are being re-educated as we speak.

NOM’s next immediate challenge is to get a vote reversing gay marriage in New Hampshire — to show once again, as we did in Maine, that history is not unidirectional.

In New York, we have to demonstrate once and for all that it is a very bad idea to vote for gay marriage if you are a Republican. Dede Scozzafava was not enough, apparently. Okay. If that’s what we have to do, it’s what we have to do.

Fundamentally, we are also going to need a large anti-defamation project behind the gay-marriage line, to locate the many people now feeling silenced and harassed and create for them a legal and cultural environment where people have a shot at passing on a Christian (or other traditional) marriage culture to their own kids and in their own communities. I’m getting e-mails and phone calls from people losing their jobs because they spoke up for marriage as one man and one woman. Extraordinary!


Lopez: Why weren’t churches able to stop gay marriage in New York like they did in Maryland?

Gallagher: I do not think the black church was as seriously engaged — and the black Democrats were more integrated into the hard Left in New York. The governor was much stronger, and more committed in New York than in Maryland. And of course key Republican donors who are gay (Ken Mehlman) or have gay family members weighed in in a big new way, trumping the base with Republican leadership.

They also wrote big checks. We estimate at least $2 million was spent in the run up to passing gay marriage in New York. 

That’s a lot of money outside of an election cycle. 


Lopez: It can look like conservatives don’t care about the issue of traditional marriage so much. What’s that about? Is it about what bad stewards we can be of marriage?

Gallagher: Conservatives care about it. A lot of libertarian elites, not so much. They seem to think we can redefine marriage — and make the Judeo-Christian tradition akin to racism in the public square — and American civilization can go on just the same. I think they are making a big mistake in thinking that.

We had, until New York, a virtually unbeaten string of victories for marriage. One setback, and even NRO is saying “conservatives don’t care about it.” Why is that?

The base cares. The majority is still with us — which is why gay-marriage advocates are never willing to permit a referendum, even in blue states.

But there is little “echo” effect. Conservative networks, not just liberal networks, have been shut down on this. Fox News doesn’t cover it. Even talk-show hosts who are with us hesitate to speak — why? Every one has a different reason, but it’s always a reason not to speak.

This is a quite powerful movement that is quite serious about shutting down the debate and redefining the Book of Genesis as bigotry. Will they succeed? Maybe in the short or medium term. But in the end, a civilization built against nature falls. Every time.

But a lot of damage can be done in the meantime.