One conservative's dramatic reversal on gay marriage

[BaBamSam 239]

Social issues, as a whole, are fairly important. I've said it before, but if the 'real' Republicans wish to remain an exclusive rather than inclusive party, they're going to have a rough time.

I personally don't care if someone BELIEVES that marriage is between one man and one woman. They're entitled to believe whatever they'd like. Just don't rule the nation as if your personal and/or religious beliefs should be made into laws.

:thumbs: :thumbs: :thumbs:

[JohnR! 5,495]

The Klan is a historic part of the Democrats. One of the most notable and defining Democratic Presidents of the last century was a fervent supporter of the Klan. Republicans are historically the party of Abolition.

Ironic isn't it, that the republican party of today came to embrace all up against which they once stood.

Edited March 15, 2013 by Gegel

[I AM NOT THAT GUY 5,715]

Ironic isn't it, that the republican party of today came to embrace all up against which they once stood.

Such as?

[JohnR! 5,495]

Such as?

I guess you'd have to be there, on planet Earth...

[I AM NOT THAT GUY 5,715]

I guess you'd have to be there, on planet Earth...

No answer. That is what I suspected.

[Karee 4,190]

No answer. That is what I suspected.

You new here? That's how he rolls.

Edited March 15, 2013 by Karee

[GandD 5,966]

I think the cool part about this is that the guy was able to overcome his preconceived notions to support his son. You know the kid was DREADING having that discussion with his parents. I've known too many people in my neck of the woods that have disowned their children after they came out. Look, I'm not into the whole defining yourself by one belief thing and I know people hate on SOME homosexuals for "defining themselves by their sexual orientation." Well, realistically, its the people that hate on them for being homosexual that make it their rally cry. If your family disowns you or you get looked over for a job because you're homosexual, you're going to be very proactive about changing people's belief window. If conservatives would let other people do what they want, they wouldn't have to hear about them asking for it all the time. Sorry, I guess I've heard too many people say stuff like "you don't see me going around telling everyone I'm heterosexual". Well, that's because being heterosexual doesn't have any real negative consequences. (Yes yes, the funny guys are gonna say "my ex-wife was a consequence blah blah")

[The Nature Boy 4,224]

Washington (CNN) -- You probably recognize Sen. Rob Portman from his tireless campaigning for Mitt Romney in 2012. He was even on the short list to be Romney's running mate.

He's been a leading Republican voice on economic issues for four decades.

Now, the prominent Ohio conservative will be known for something else: reversing his hardline position against gay marriage.

He invited CNN to his Senate office to reveal the news.

"I'm announcing today a change of heart on an issue that a lot of people feel strongly about that has to do with gay couples' opportunity to marry," Portman told CNN.

It has to do with another revelation, one deeply personal. His 21-year-old son, Will, is gay.

"I've come to the conclusion that for me, personally, I think this is something that we should allow people to do, to get married, and to have the joy and stability of marriage that I've had for over 26 years. That I want all of my children to have, including our son, who is gay," said Portman.

Will Portman told his father and mother he is gay two years ago, when he was a freshman at Yale University.

"My son came to Jane, my wife, and I, told us that he was gay, and that it was not a choice, and that it's just part of who he is, and that's who he'd been that way for as long as he could remember," said Portman.

What was the Republican senator's reaction?

"Love. Support," responded Portman.

And complete surprise. He told CNN that he never suspected that his son was gay.

Portman says his son, now a junior in college, helped him work through his decision to announce his change in position on gay marriage and blessed the idea of publicly announcing Will Portman's sexuality.

"I think he's happy and, you know, proud that we've come to this point, but he let it be my decision just as you know, it's going to be his decision as to the role he plays going forward in this whole issue," said Portman.

Until now, this was a secret to most people in politics, but not everyone.

Last year, when Romney was vetting Portman to be his running mate, the Ohio Republican informed both Romney and his top campaign advisers that he has a gay son.

"I told Mitt Romney everything," said Portman with a laugh. "That process is, intrusive would be one way to put it. But, no, yeah, I told him everything."

Portman, who was ultimately passed over as the GOP vice-presidential candidate in favor of Rep. Paul Ryan, said the fact that his son is gay was not the deal breaker for Romney. How does he know?

"Well, because they told me," said Portman.

Portman told CNN he sought counsel from a Republican who did serve as vice president: ####### Cheney, the highest-ranking Republican with an openly gay child, his daughter Mary.

"I spoke to him personally; I actually met with him," said Portman.

He said Cheney's advice was simple: "'Follow your heart.'"

"He was a good person to talk to because he also was surprised by the news, in that case, you know, his wonderful daughter, who he loves very much. And it forced him to re-think the issue too, and over time, he changed his view on it," said Portman.

"I followed his advice. You know, I followed my heart," he said.

Though he is a staunch conservative, Portman was never outspoken against gay marriage. But he consistently voted against it.

While in Congress, he supported a constitutional amendment to ban gay marriage, voted for the Defense of Marriage Act and voted for a bill prohibiting gay couples in Washington from adopting.

In 2011, 100 University of Michigan law school graduates walked out of Portman's commencement address to protest his position on gay rights after circulating a petition trying to get him removed as the event's speaker.

"The decision to host a graduation speaker who is openly hostile to LGBT rights is deeply unfair to the LGBT students who will be in the audience this year celebrating their graduation," read the petition.

Portman admitted that when the protest occurred, he already knew his own son was gay.

"It was a little odd. Look, and to be honest with you, it didn't affect that decision-making much, because it was, I didn't think it was appropriate," Portman said. "But look, they had their freedom of speech rights to be able to do what they wanted to do."

"But you know, what happened to me is really personal. I mean, I hadn't thought a lot about this issue. Again, my focus has been on other issues over my public policy career," said Portman.

Asked about why he is announcing this change of heart, since his son revealed it to him two years ago, Portman cited two reasons. He just recently became comfortable with his decision to shift his position on gay marriage, and also he said he knew the Supreme Court is considering a pair of gay marriage cases, and reporters would likely ask him for his position.

"I thought it was the right time to let folks know where I stand so there's no confusion, so I would be clear about it," said Portman.

What would Portman say to gay constituents who may be glad he's changing his position on gay marriage, but also wondering why it took having a gay son to come around to supporting their rights?

"Well, I would say that, you know, I've had a change of heart based on a personal experience. That's certainly true," he responded with a shoulder shrug.

But he also repeated a reality. His policy focus has been almost exclusively on economic issues.

"Now it's different, you know. I hadn't expected to be in this position. But I do think, you know, having spent a lot of time thinking about it and working through this issue personally that, you know, this is where I am, for reasons that are consistent with my political philosophy, including family values, including being a conservative who believes the family is a building block of society, so I'm comfortable there now."

To be sure, Portman was anything but comfortable discussing something as private and personal as his son's sexuality, even noting how foreign it felt for someone with his Midwestern upbringing and sensibilities to talk publicly about such issues.

At times, the press-savvy politician even seemed to tremble a bit. But it was also clear he was willing to endure the discussion in order to publicly tell his son that he is proud.

"He wanted to tell us that there's something about him that we didn't know," Portman said, reflecting on the day two years ago his son Will first told his parents he was gay.

Portman quickly added that it "of course hasn't changed our view of him at all."

http://www.cnn.com/2....html?hpt=hp_c1

Although I applaud his decision, I think most politicians are scum. It probably had more to do with the fact that the demogrphics on that issue are changing so rapidly that he wanted to get on the popular side. Probably even pimped his son out as a prop.

[Penny Lane 8,159]

Although I applaud his decision, I think most politicians are scum. It probably had more to do with the fact that the demogrphics on that issue are changing so rapidly that he wanted to get on the popular side. Probably even pimped his son out as a prop.

Except he found out two years ago. If that was something he wanted to jump on and use to his advantage, his timing is quite odd.

[The Nature Boy 4,224]

Except he found out two years ago. If that was something he wanted to jump on and use to his advantage, his timing is quite odd.

Just saying he probably changed because some big $$$$ wanted him to, then wanted to act like he did the right think because of his moral obligation. .

[Penny Lane 8,159]

Just saying he probably changed because some big $$$$ wanted him to, then wanted to act like he did the right think because of his moral obligation. .

Quite the conclusion to jump to.

This is why I love P&R. Nothing is the way it seems. Always a hidden agenda behind everything.

Edited March 15, 2013 by Evylin

[Danno 1,228]

Social issues, as a whole, are fairly important. I've said it before, but if the 'real' Republicans wish to remain an exclusive rather than inclusive party, they're going to have a rough time.

I personally don't care if someone BELIEVES that marriage is between one man and one woman. They're entitled to believe whatever they'd like. Just don't rule the nation as if your personal and/or religious beliefs should be made into laws.

This is the part that makes you look silly.

You have already said you would stand in the way of people who are legally able to marry now.... from getting married, why

Because you you think only consenting adults should be able to marry.

When that is not the law in most places nor the tradition.

Yur a phoney just admit it.

I on the other hand recognize that lines not only must be drawn but are drawn now and will be in the future.

Some people will be told "sorry" ... we don't allow that, if it be men and men.... Brothers marrying brothers or off shoots of the Mormon church who want to wed several 16 year old girls or fathers marrying their "consenting" adult daughters.

Because you are not aware does not mean that others, using your principle are not ready to fight for their "rights" too.

Trust me with 340 million people there are many many out there.

[Love's JAA 100]

You really are totally clueless! Why should it justify a 45 year old stranger sexually assaulting two 15 year old girls just because their parents were willing to be complicit in the rapes and guilty as well of child abuse/neglect!?

A minor cannot, by definition, give consent for sexual relations with an adult.

Talk about embracing social chaos!!!

I think what Danno might mean is that the age of consent is somewhat arbitrary. Someone somewhere picked an age that was deemed of legal consent. This age has varied from state to state, and by purpose. Age of legal consent and age of intellectual/emotional maturity are not the same thing.

Don't misunderstand me, I believe we do need to maintain some age floor on these matters. I just happened to have this argument once with my brother. He seemed to play the religious conservative on the one hand, and the libertarian at the same time on the other. Like trying to hit a moving target.

[Danno 1,228]

Ironic isn't it, that the republican party of today came to embrace all up against which they once stood.

The Republican Party?

How long ago was it nearly every Democrat said the same thing? (and many still do)

Holy Smokes it took Obama the pressure of the DNC 2012 to push him into coming up with the "evolved" stunt.

[Penny Lane 8,159]

This is the part that makes you look silly.

You have already said you would stand in the way of people who are legally able to marry now.... from getting married, why

Because you you think only consenting adults should be able to marry.

When that is not the law in most places nor the tradition.

Yur a phoney just admit it.

I on the other hand recognize that lines not only must be drawn but are drawn now and will be in the future.

Some people will be told "sorry" ... we don't allow that, if it be men and men.... Brothers marrying brothers or off shoots of the Mormon church who want to wed several 16 year old girls or fathers marrying their "consenting" adult daughters.

Because you are not aware does not mean that others, using your principle are not ready to fight for their "rights" too.

Trust me with 340 million people there are many many out there.

Sure, Danno, I'm a phony. Whatever you say.