E-Mail This Article to a Friend FINGER-POINTING Did gay marriage do in the Dems? BY DEIRDRE FULTON

Earlier in the week, the Democratic National Committee sent an e-mail to its supporters. "Help determine the Democratic Party’s next steps," the subject line read. "We plan to use your feedback to help develop our strategy in 2005," said the message from DNC chair Terry McAuliffe. "As always, you will continue to play a critical role in the future of the Democratic Party. What we created together will be the backbone for Democratic victories in the future." McAuliffe and the DNC probably have gotten an earful, or an inbox-ful, of pointers.

A lot of post-election speculation has focused on "moral values" — particularly in relation to the gay-marriage question. Anti-gay-marriage measures were on the ballot in 11 states, leading some political analysts to conclude that the issue galvanized morally conservative voters to support George W. Bush over John Kerry.

It’s clear that in some quarters, there is a strong desire for the Democratic Party to reconsider its approach to the gay-marriage issue. Witness a moderate liberal from a cultural-vanguard state, Democratic California senator Dianne Feinstein. She spoke for many when she wrote in Sunday’s New York Times: "I think the whole issue has been too much, too fast, too soon. And people aren’t ready for it."

Should gay marriage be blamed for last Tuesday’s devastating loss? Should Democrats distance themselves from the issue to curry favor with Red America? Gay-rights supporters certainly don’t think so. But while organizations like the National Gay and Lesbian Task Force (NGLTF) and the Human Rights Campaign insist that gay issues did not make or break last Tuesday’s results, they still find themselves struggling against intense scrutiny and, in some cases, backlash.

"We’re being urged to be silent," says Carisa Cunningham, director of public affairs for the Boston-based Gay & Lesbian Advocates & Defenders (GLAD). And while they insist they will not be pushed to the side, many gay-rights advocates have been forced onto the defensive this week, issuing statements that read like arguments against labeling gays the spoilers of 2004.

Take GLAD’s civil-rights project director, Mary Bonauto, who represented the plaintiffs in Massachusetts’s gay-marriage case. In a Boston Globe op-ed on Tuesday, co-written with MassEquality campaign director Marty Rouse, she issued a pre-emptive strike against those who want to sweep gay marriage under the rug, arguing that "the more balanced, informed lesson for Democrats or anyone who cares about issues of equality might be more education, not less; more conversation, not less; and a dialogue that stresses the value and importance of equality in this country."

She and others cite exit-poll data that showed 62 percent of Americans to be in favor of "some sort of relationship recognition" for same-sex couples. Others, such as Paul Freedman in Slate, highlight data that compare Bush-voter turnout in states where gay marriage was on the ballot to turnout where it wasn’t. Overall, the difference is negligible, which would imply that gay marriage isn’t what brought millions of religious conservatives to the polls.

The NGLTF points out that in several states where gay marriage was on the ballot, Kerry actually did better than Al Gore did four years ago. And despite his loss in Ohio, Kerry got about 30,000 more new votes in the state than Bush did.

"My initial impression is that [gay marriage] is only a part of a much larger story," says Elaine Kamarck, a lecturer at Harvard’s John F. Kennedy School who served as the senior policy adviser to Al Gore’s presidential campaign. "Democrats have bigger problems than gay marriage."

Whatever those problems may be, gay Democrats have no intention of subordinating their concerns to any overarching notion of the party’s greater good. This week, when the NGLTF holds its Creating Change conference in St. Louis, press secretary Roberta Sklar anticipates some "refocusing" and perhaps some shifts in strategy. But there will be no backing down or stepping away.

"We don’t expect them to leave us behind — we’re a serious part of their constituency," Sklar insists, while admitting that some may want to "triage the gay community" and "cut us loose." She adds, "Ultimately what’s going to save the Democratic Party is when they embrace the ideals they’re supposed to be about."