How Gay was the Wedding?

The epiphany came as I was watching a dance floor of 50 years olds mightily gyrating away to the song "YMCA" made famous by the Village People. I was at a wedding reception in a smaller city filled with working-class, conservative families celebrating the latest family nuptials. Other than the usual list of wedding reception novelty songs (which might include YMCA), the music that drove them in throngs to the dance floor was music first created for a gay or gay friendly audience.

As one wedding DJ has commented:

"Is it selfish to deny your guests certain wedding-song standards that you find overplayed (or just plain bad) when it brings them joy? Based on last weekend’s experience, many people love flapping their arms to “The Chicken Dance” or spelling out “Y.M.C.A.” (On the Village People, Keith Phipps mused, “I’ve always wondered why a song about cruising for gay sex would be so popular at weddings.)"

In addition to the music, quite a few of their servers were gay. Florist: gay. Wedding cake: gay baker. Food: gay chef. Event coordinator: gay. This doesn't even count most of the gowns and formalwear presumably designed by someone who was gay as well.

In short, while these reception attendees had no problem with gay's supplying things for their weddings from the bridesmaids shoes to the frosting on the wedding cake, they seemingly have a problem with gay's getting married to each other if we are to believe certain politicians. The 2004 call for a constitutional ban on gay marriage was something most moderate Americans had hoped was left behind with other campaign trickery that was used to scare voters into voting for Bush, or else...

However, with the midterm elections coming up the old gay boogie-oogie-oogie scarecrow has been hauled out for an encore by political conservatives and the religious right to try and stop potential Republican election losses this fall. Once again, the mantra is to get voters to vote not based on the qualities of the candidates but to "SAVE" the sanctity of marriage.

Hopefully, things have changed enough over the past two years that most Americans will see the gay marriage red-herring issue for what it really is: faith-based discrimination. This isn't the view of some vast left wing conspiracy, it also happens to be the view of Vice President Cheneys' daughter and an entire country of millions of people, our friendly neighbors to the north - Canada.

In reality, trying to raise an ammendment to the US Constitution banning gay marriage is a useless exercise serving nothing other than being a political ploy as most studies and polls continue to prove it would never pass with the needed majorities. The US Constitution was designed to make poorly thought through ammendments difficult to add on purpose to protect us from momentary lapses in bad judgement like this one.

There has always been a simpler solution to the debate on gay marriage, one which most level-headed moderate voters could appreciate, but which the firebrands to the left and right abhor because it entails compromise and no one would be able to claim to have "won". Return to the roots of our forefathers and once again appropriately separate church and state.

Marriage today serves two taskmasters poorly. In a wide range of religions marriage is the blessed wedding of two people in accordance with each church's interpretation of their faith on matrimony. At the same time in the laws of the federal and local governments, marriage bestows certain rights and benefits which absent being "married" are otherwise unavailable to its citizens.

Separate the civil rights and benefits from the religious act of marriage. Allowing civil unions that are equal in every secular aspect to marriage allows gay partnerships to have access to the same civil rights. Allow each religion to decide separately if they choose to include gay "marriage" within their faith or not.

Gay's will holler back that separate is not equal. But this type of compromise would allow for equality and recognize that there are real differences with more fundamentalist faiths that would otherwise have a hard time coexisting. Better to focus on what is tangible - full civil rights throughout local, state, and federal laws without the burden of trying to legislate every religion to accept gay marriage being imposed on their faith.

At the same time, Americans of faith need to be more enlightened and accepting of those who are gay. Recognize that they are your God's children as well and your place is not to be their judge. Why? Because at that last wedding you attended despite your value system you had no problem joyously dancing to these lyrics:

Young man, there's a place you can go.
I said, young man, when you're short on your dough.
You can stay there, and I'm sure you will find
Many ways to have a good time.

It's fun to stay at the y-m-c-a.
It's fun to stay at the y-m-c-a.

They have everything for you men to enjoy,
You can hang out with all the boys ...