AS A monster firestorm continues to burn highland enclaves of Southern California, the ban on gay marriages continues to sizzle in that state.

To those already united in same sex marriage and those who are planning to wed in civil ceremony, the year about to end may be their "an(n)us horribilis."

What's your take on the Mindanao crisis? Discuss views with other readers

The ban equates to a violation of human rights, of the gay community that is every person deserves the right to happiness, freedom of association, and sexual preference.

Our own organization of Filipino gay communities known as "Ladlad" must be incensed by the legal move to end gay marriage in that part of the US.

As pragmatic and realistic as they are, our own kind of generic gays do not turn ballistic nor panic in the absence of a law legalizing gay marriages.

Trust the old Pinoy ingenuity and creative improvisation. The "live-in" arrangement provides a happy union, with no questions asked, no eligibility demanded, and no documents signed in a mutual contract without expiration date.

Any sexual aberration involved, no matter how furious or violent, is settled by the "no harm, no foul" rule on physical contact.

Our gay community has made "ladlad" of their formal existence but has yet to get organized and lobby for a bill on gay marriage in the houses of Congress.

Perhaps Ladlad is afraid of the huge cost in the form of lobby money (lagay), which lawmakers usually demand before espousing an advocacy.

In the absence of a law, therefore, that legalizes same sex marriage, the live-in accomplishes the objectives, or most of them, anyway of matrimonial bliss..

Well, it is not the traditional matrimony that we know between persons of opposite sex tying the knots. Quite a rising number of such unions suffer a split during a fit of psychological incapacity.

Same sex marriage is not purely genital. It could be existential, with motives, feelings, and reasons surpassing a realm beyond a compass.

Now, I would not delve on a very complicated and immensely complex issue. I understand there is a Papal encyclical regarding the subject, which is the proper discipline of theologian Bishop Pablo David and his men of light.

I am only concerned about the superficial and visibly tangible aspect of the controversial union. I still have to make up my mind if I am for or against it. But definitely I am against homosexuals making "ladlad" of their status like Among Ed displaying half-million pesos in his ladlad moment.

Biblical truth forbids it -- the legitimate union is exclusive between man and woman. But that was millennia ago when the Creator wanted the first couple and their begotten offspring to multiply. He decided that he would create only two of them -- Adam and Eve. That was the first proof of God's providence for birth control.

Personally I see same-sex marriage or unions as one modest solution to the world's galloping population. In our country, such gay affairs will help President Macapagal-Arroyo to achieve her target of reducing the growth rate from 2.3 annually to 1.9.

This, without resorting to the rhythm/Billings mucous method, or to condoms, pills and other contraceptive invention which the Clergy abhors and a local few members do not use for fear of sinning.

Knowing the entrepreneurial talent of our gays, physically capable and healthy but indolent young men and those simply out of work have been shacking up with gay partners for economic reasons. The gays in turn are provided with a little heaven and a fulfillment of their feminine desires. Under this fast growing set-up, the gays help solve the unemployment problem and male poverty.

In a union between persons of the same sex, or between a gay and a straight, no marriage is required to sustain mutual love, if present, nor a wedding contract is required to create it when absent.

If marriages are made in Heaven, same sex unions often originate from beauty parlors, spa saloons and ballrooms. Watch out for the next macho-looking guy ogling your bulging crotch, people are not what they appear to be.

It is the lucky housemaid, indeed, who is twice blessed working in a gay household where she does not have a problem with a boss with a delayed period, including disposal of sanitary napkins, discarded panty hose and missed contraceptive pills.

The big trouble with a gay-straight partnership is when the boy gets bored or becomes materially demanding beyond gay capacity and when the "mistress" gets equally tired with his lover and suffers an economic overload -- they separate. Sometimes, this ends in a tragedy. It is usually the "ladlad" guy who is the victim of the "manyad" boy.

Indeed, what God has not joined together, circumstance will put asunder Hallelujah!

*****

Vice Mayor Vicky Vega Cabigting, the seeded unbeatable bet for reelection in 2010, was amused by my piece on her recent trip, along with Rep. Tarzan and Council allies to the land of the Chinese beauties.

The sportive and engaging Angeles City political leader promised she would reprise a Macau trip in the next opportunity. This time she will be with her loving and faithful husband, my former media colleague Arthur Cabigting. "I might even introduce him to your Ms. Koumintang," she added. That is a good enough reward for a job well done, Mang Art.

For more Philippine news, visit Sun.Star Bacolod.

(November 19, 2008 issue)
Write letter to the editor. Click here.