In a landmark decision, President Obama just stated that he supports the legalization of same sex marriages. In his words this is “only fair” and since this announcement many people have had plenty to say about it. Of course, there are those that are extremely disappointed and there are those who happily approve the decision. I say that as President, your main concept should be to protect (not “protest”) the rights of the people. The gay movement was gaining strength and many Americans were coming out of the closet in solidarity for the same rights as most “conventional” married couples. As president, I just don’t see how you can ignore that. Religiously, same sex marriage is “morally” wrong. The whole concept of marriage is supposed to be a “union between a man and a woman.” While I agree with this in principle I just don’t think that we have the right to tell gay couples “how and who” to love. To me, it is the same equivalent to telling a woman what she “has” to do with her body. It is real important to keep government and religion separate. Whether or not you agree with the principle of same sex marriage it was “destined” to happen “anyway.” Certain states had “already” approved it and more were sure to follow. If the government had fought against it there was the possibility that there could possibly have been massive demonstrations as “potent” as the Civil Rights Marches of the 60’s. As a musician, I have already played for “same sex” marriages/unions (whatever you want to call them) and while it took some “getting used to” I came to accept that this was the direction that America was heading towards. I have noticed a large increase in same sex couples just “on the street.” The may not be as “blatant” with their sexuality in public but they are surely more “noticeable.” While there are still people who oppose this issue I say there “is” a way to rectify this. I say we should let them have the same rights as regularly married couples and if people have a problem with the Biblical “definition” of “marriage” then why don’t we just “label” it something else and still give them their rights anyway? Instead of calling it a marriage we can label it as a “life partner union” or something. As far as I am concerned, you can call it “Timbuktu” as long as the same rights are still “administered.” This is not about “what you believe in” but rather about “what’s right.” We can’t always expect other people to live their lives in accordance to “our standards.” As long as it crosses no “legal” grounds it is important to at least give it “consideration.” Most preachers will probably address this on Sunday, and it will be interesting to hear what they have to say. Whether you agree with this or not you have the right to be heard, just like these couples do. It is better to listen with an “open mind” as opposed to listening with a “hole in your head.” For the sake of being “fair,” I hope we opt for more of the “former” instead of the “latter.” Thank you, and I hope you have a truly “jolly” weekend.
Patti Labelle and Brett Jolly in concert outside at the Philadelphia Art Museum