The Senate recently rejected a Federal Marriage Amendment, which would have banned same-sex marriages. Some say this issue is simply a diversion from more important issues. Others feel it will have an impact on this fall's election. How do you see it?

I believe the redefining of our traditional view of marriage by legalizing same-sex marriage issue is the most important social issue of this election. Democrats, stalwart champions of gay rights, are reluctant to discuss any support of gay marriage.

Gays and Lesbian are an important supporters to the DNC (just like the NRA or conservative Christians are to Republicans). They have made numerous promises to the gay community who have, in return, given Democrats their support and money.

During interviews prior to convention week, top Democrats were struggling with how to handle the gay marriage issue. "This convention will not be about those (gay rights) issues. It's not going to happen," DNC Chairman and Clinton acolyte Terry McAullife told the Boston Globe.

Our political leaders have an obligation to talk about same-sex marriage because gay and lesbian couples are legally marrying in Massachusetts, then returning home to their native states in hope that courts will force the states to recognize the marriages under Full Faith and Credit in the Constitution. The first such lawsuit was filed on July 20 by a lesbian couple in Florida, married in Massachusetts, who returned home to Florida and is suing to make that state recognize their marriage.

The Advocate writes that DNC chairman McAullife is among the "most dangerous men in America" in the fight for Gay Lesbian Bisexual Transgender (GBLT) equality. The magazine's Web site reported, "Commentator Laura Flanders blasted the chairman for the Democratic Party's 'going weak' in supporting civil unions instead of full marriage rights for same-sex couples, and for what she claimed was a lack of dedication to gay and lesbian rights despite the party's appeals to them for financial support."

Gay and lesbian advocacy groups must have had reason to believe that Democrats supported same-sex marriage, not just civil unions, for Flanders to have made those comments. I would like for the DNC leadership to explain how they can be for gay and lesbian rights in every single area but this one.

McAullife refused to give gays and lesbians a leading role at the convention. He refused to allow the same-sex marriage topic to be discussed. Considering how important gay support is to Democrats, it seems as if he is trying to mislead the American people about the relationship between the DNC and the gay and lesbian activist groups.

A leading gay rights advocacy organization bragged that gay voters could significantly influence the Democrats' choice of a nominee. "The 2004 Democratic presidential candidates, as a group, hold the most pro-gay positions ever taken by a field of candidates for president," said Matt Foreman, executive director of the National Gay and Lesbian Task Force (NGLTF).

Some of the issues the Democratic party ranked high on in a GLTF survey included: legal recognition of "domestic partnerships, civil unions and same-sex marriage; tolerance education teaching children that homosexuality is an acceptable lifestyle choice; hate crimes laws establishing greater penalties against homosexuals than heterosexuals; "comprehensive sex education" curricula that include the disputed theory of condom use to prevent the spread of HIV/AIDS; homosexual couples receiving Social Security survivor and spousal benefits and allowing homosexuals to serve openly in the military (killing the "don't-ask, don't-tell" policy).

The DNC should be honest about their support of gay and lesbian rights and discuss openly, at the convention, on national television, in prime time the issues the gay, lesbian and transgender community are lobbying for them to support and which ones Team Kerry/Edwards will support.

What the Democratic Party wants is for their politicians to argue same-sex marriage is a "state's rights issue," knowing full well that activist judges will overrule the legislators like they did in Massachusetts. The Democratic leadership understands that same-sex marriages and/or civil unions can become law without any liberal politician having to run on the issue and voters having no say in the matter. Judges will decide.

All one need do is look at how President Bush's conservative judicial nominees have been blocked in the Senate to understand the liberals agenda for the courts.

Republicans and conservative Democrats find themselves in the unenviable position of being branded "mean-spirited, bigoted homophobic religious fanatics" for opposing same-sex marriage while Democrats have found a way to support an issue that they concurrently oppose, in effect taking no position and making everybody happy.

Neither political party should be allowed to hide behind "what ifs" and doubletalk on this issue. If the Republicans are against these issues, they should say so in public and be specific in how they are going to address the unfair discrimination faced by gays and lesbians in America concerning taxes and Social Security. If the Democrats are for some of these issues they too should be honest. Oddly enough, the "compromise" of civil unions only applies to state issues while excluding federal benefits such as the assignment of Social Security to a life partner or filing "married filing joint" for a tax break, issues high on the gay rights agenda.

I think the American people deserve to know what each party considers thoughtful solutions to these issues before, not after, the election.