Opponents Of Same-Sex Marriage Release TV Ad (Updated)


The National Organization for Marriage is out today with the first television ad opposing attempts to legalize same-sex marriage in New York.

The group, led by Ossining’s Maggie Gallagher, said it is spending $100,000 on the ad, which will run in the Long Island, Albany, Poughkeepsie, Watertown, and Newburgh areas. The initial ad buy is set to run May 28 through May 31.

“Marriage really matters because children need a mom and dad,” Gallagher said in a statement.  “New Yorkers do not want government redefining marriage for our children or grandchildren; we do not want public schools teaching first graders that gay marriage is okay, that’s a decision that should be left to parents and our values.”

The ad encourages New Yorkers to call their state senators to oppose the same-sex marriage bill.

“The rights of people who believe marriage means a man and a woman will no longer matter,” the 30 second ad states. “We’ll all have to accept gay marriage whether we like it or not.”

The ad comes after the Empire State Pride Agenda has produced two ads featuring families who want a gay family member to be able to marry in New York.

Updated: The Pride Agenda said the ad’s claims are untrue and has a fact sheet that seeks to bust myths about same-sex marriage.

The Pride Agenda said the ad carries “many of the same false messages that we’ve seen in anti-marriage equality campaigns across the country. One of their most deceiving claims is that children will be forced to learn about marriage in schools. This is absolutely untrue-and education officials in Albany have already stated that teaching about marriage of any kind is not mandated by any New York State curriculum. These ads are dishonest and are simply meant to scare people.”

<object width=”425″ height=”344″><param name=”movie” value=”http://www.youtube.com/v/I0LSHO9Gen4&hl=en&fs=1″></param><param name=”allowFullScreen” value=”true”></param><param name=”allowscriptaccess” value=”always”></param><embed src=”http://www.youtube.com/v/I0LSHO9Gen4&hl=en&fs=1″ type=”application/x-shockwave-flash” allowscriptaccess=”always” allowfullscreen=”true” width=”425″ height=”344″></embed></object>


About Author


  1. Seems Maggie Gallagher is out making a living again spreading fear. The 990 Public Tax Filing for NOM shows that she took 42% of the total donations made to NOM in 2007 as salary, proving once again there is Profit in Prejudice.

    Spending 100,000 dollars on an add while children go to bed homeless; families loosing their homes in foreclosures, not to mention foster care children agining out of the system and becoming homeless and or arrested at alarmingly higher rates doesn’t seem that Christain to me.

    Maggie wouldn’t have the income she has right now if people took one line from the bible “Love one another as I have loved you”. Instead this woman markets fear to perpetuate a salary.

    How many unwed teens will give birth this year? How many of those children will be raised on assistance programs generated by our tax dollars? She’d rather gay men and women not raise children, even though they may be in the financial position as well as the emotionally supporting and caring position to do so.

    Maggie mentions the Catholic Church in a lot that she does, but doesn’t mention that she herself was an unwed mother, and now married only has 2 kids. Makes me wonder which part of the Catholic Church dogma did she forget when it came to Birth Control?

    Her ads generate fear, prompt people into donating money and produces her 6 digit income. I would suggest to any good Christain they they donate their money if they are truly worried about children to an time honored charity and not one that promotes taking the rights of every day citizens away.

  2. I sat with my 3 young children in shock and watched a commercial about a mother having gay children that should be able to marry their significant others. Just curious if the previous poster thinks that it is OK for gay activist groups to spend all of their money on advertising instead of helpin the needy? This is our country and we need to fight for morality. It would be nice if we didn’t have to spend money on adds to defend the God given institution of marriage so we could spend more on ministering to the less fortunate. Unfortunately the loud minority (last poll showed 57% of Americans opposed to same-sex marriage) is forcing Christians to turn our attention to political issues.

  3. The ad was factually correct. What radical gay activists don’t like is when the People point out the end game of their extreme agenda. They believe that they have the right to say and do whatever they like without any objection.

    Their newest declaration, the Dallas Principles. Here is one of their extreme beliefs; 4.Religious beliefs are not a basis upon which to affirm or deny civil rights. Translation: drop your religous views of sexuality or we will destroy you via litigation. Now that’s real tolerance. They keep talking about bigotry while conspiring to engage in religious bigotry and discrimination against those of whom they disagree with. Common sense Americans are on to their game.

    From NY’s top court;

    “First, the Legislature could rationally decide that, for the welfare of children, it is more important to promote stability, and to avoid instability, in opposite-sex than in same-sex relationships. … The Legislature could [also] rationally believe that it is better, other things being equal, for children to grow up with both a mother and a father. Intuition and experience suggest that a child benefits from having before his or her eyes, every day, living models of what both a man and a woman are like.”

    “The idea that same-sex marriage is even possible is a relatively new one. Until a few decades ago, it was an accepted truth for almost everyone who ever lived, in any society in which marriage existed, that there could be marriages only between participants of different sex. A court should not lightly conclude that everyone who held this belief was irrational, ignorant or bigoted. We do not so conclude.”

    No fear, just truth.

  4. Also remember that just a few decades ago it was also “morally sound” to deny African Americans and women many of the same rights and privileges of white men. Heck the founding fathers saw no conflict of “the rights of man” and slavery.

    Morality always changes as man grows and develops. There is no “Gold standard” of morality. The Christian angle is weak to me because even the Christian community cannot even unify or agree on set principle or even dogma. I fail to see how Christian ideology is the prime moral authority when so many Christians are for equal marriage rights.

    But what has always amused me of this debate is the cries for the children. Here we see such focus on the dire need for a child to have a mom and a dad. What the heck does that mean? Our nation is suffering from a nearly 50% divorce rate and an alarming rise of teenage and single parents. If the need for a mom and a dad is so strong then why is there no push to destroy divorce or mandate parenting of both sexes to their children? How about the alarming numbers of “dead-beat” parents. There is no manual or training for parenting. It is an assumed responsibility and many are not very good at it. But we simplify that right blandly because it is a man and a woman.

    Even more outrageous is that in the absence of marriage there is nothing to stop gay couples from having children and raising them anyway. We as a nation allow single parents, single adoptions, and allow gay lifestyles to exist. So ironically enough gay couples already can have children in this country if they have the means to either have a child or adopt one.

    But none of this is extremely relevant since the crux of the gay marriage rights debate focuses around legal recognition of gay partnerships in relation to what hetero couples receive. It is not so much for children, although some legal rights would exist.

    Homosexuality has been prevalent in human society for thousands of years and if you are open to science it is not at all surprising especially as the population of our species grows. Simply put, the more humans there are the greater likelihood of homosexuals there will be. The existence of these homosexuals has done little to influence the sexual preferences of those around them. It’s common sense. Obviously homosexuals must come from somewhere so hetero unions produce them and likewise many children raised by homosexuals lead normal hetero lifestyles. It’s no different than the fears of inter-racial marriages that have eased over the years as well.

    homosexuals are going to be gay no matter what laws there are. They will continue to date and marry and raise children whether their unions are legally recognized or not. Since it is quite obvious that their is no more social risk to society from gay couples than hetero ones it seems utterly pointless to continue to deny them the same rights and privileges that we hetero couples get.

    To rationalize the anti-gay position I would like to see a far more concerted effort by activists to also oppose divorce, support and bring back Eugenics, forced sterilizations, denying marriage to irresponsible hetero individuals, etc… But this is not happening. Any man can marry any woman he chooses and vice versa without any government intervention and they can receive all the rights and privileges that marriage offers regardless of if the union is based on true love, convenience, family unions, business propositions, etc.

    men and women get married in this country every day for wrong reasons. Some get married for citizenship, for money, due to pregnancy, etc and it would seem anti-gay activists would fight for these rights no matter what it costs the children who suffer such unions but due to religious ideology that a large % of Americans ignore.