It’s always entertaining and occasionally heartbreaking to watch politicians wrestle with sculpting their policy statements regarding gay people. Most Democratic politicians, including President Obama, have “evolved” towards support for gay civil rights. The many Republicans seeking a Presidential nomination are more perplexed; they need to satisfy the right-wing religious nutjobs but also the vast majority of younger Republicans who support stuff like gay marriage. Many of these candidates have been asked if they’d attend a gay wedding; Scott Walker admitted to attending the reception for a gay couple, but not the wedding, while the ever-hateful Rick Santorum wouldn’t get within miles of such a satanic ritual. Marco Rubio has decided that being gay isn’t a choice, but that marriage must still exist only between a man and a woman. Because these squirmings have become so incoherent, I’d like to help out, with a few more possible responses:
“I would attend a gay wedding, but I wouldn’t pay more than $25 for a gift.”
“I have gay friends, but I pity them.”
“My cousin is gay, and we invite her for brunch, but not dinner. I believe that dinner is only for a man and a woman.”
“I’m fine with gay people legalizing their relationships, as long as it’s not called marriage. I’d prefer to call it Subhuman Coupling or Non-Dairy Marriage Substitute.”
“I would serve as an usher at a gay wedding, but I’d wear sweats, to show that it wasn’t a real wedding.”
“I believe, and I have always believed, that the states should regulate my son’s choice of sleazy boyfriends who claim they’re attending online business school.”
“I would be willing to sit beside a gay person on a plane, if I received a substantial rebate.”
“I’ve known many fine, upstanding gay Americans, and I’ve had satisfying gay sex with them, but I don’t want them filling the Oval Office with fussy knicknacks and framed black-and-white photographs of well-muscled male torsos, so I’d only let them rethink the powder rooms near the Rose Garden.”
