Ohio's Portman flips, backs marriage equality

[ProSense]

Ohio's Portman flips, backs marriage equality

By Steve Benen

As recently as 2004, Sen. Rob Portman voted to change the U.S. Constitution to permanently prohibit marriage equality. Now, however, the Ohio Republican has changed his mind.

Senator Rob Portman, the Ohio Republican, has switched his stand on gay marriage, saying he now supports it after his son told him he is gay.

Mr. Portman, who had been considered one of the leading candidates to be Mitt Romney's running mate in 2012, told Ohio newspapers that his son Will told him and his wife, Jane, in 2011 of his sexual orientation.

"It allowed me to think of this issue from a new perspective, and that's of a Dad who loves his son a lot and wants him to have the same opportunities that his brother and sister would have -- to have a relationship like Jane and I have had for over 26 years," Mr. Portman was quoted by Cleveland.com as telling reporters in an interview in his Washington office.

The number of elected Republican officials who are on record supporting marriage equality is extraordinarily small -- I believe Portman is alone among today's Senate GOP...Portman's announcement also raises related questions. The Ohio Republican was, for example, a finalist for the Republican Party's vice presidential nomination last year, and Portman told Mitt Romney about his gay son. Did this play a role in Romney's decision to choose someone else? I have no idea, but it seems like a fair question...if Portman learned about his son's sexual orientation in 2011, why did it take the senator so long to come around? And why was he still endorsing discriminatory policies in 2012?

While we're at it, the Cleveland Plain Dealer noted that Portman could support legislation to repeal the Defense of Marriage Act, but the senator said he hasn't done this because he says "economic policy issues are his specialty." First, senators are required to tackle a variety of issues. Second, I've seen Portman's positions on economic issues, and if they're his "specialty," he's in trouble...What I find discouraging, though, is that the Republican senator was content to support discriminatory policies until they affected someone he personally cares about.

What about everyone else's sons and daughters? Why must empathy among conservatives be tied so directly to their own personal interactions?

- more -

http://maddowblog.msnbc.com/_news/2013/03/15/17325161-ohios-portman-flips-backs-marriage-equality

[Mass]

1. Good for him, but has any GOP elected official supported same sex marriage just because it is the

right thing, not because somebody they care about is affected? Just wondering.

[CincyDem]

2. Because it's not empathy - it's selfishness

Empathy comes from feeling the world from another's perspective. In this case, empathy would be appreciating how parents of LGBT parents feel about their children and the diminishing effect of republican policies on their lives.

Rob's change of heart comes from the personal experience of realizing the effect of republican policies on himself.

That's self-preservation.

And while I don't know this for a fact, there's enough conversation around the neighborhood about the role of Ms. Portman in this miraculous turn around. Second hand from those who know her, Jane is one ferocious momma-bear and Mr. Rob knows that he'll answer to her if anything he ever says or does in public does anything to hurt her cubs' self esteem.

To me, this reinforces the phrase - behind every good man, there's a better woman. It's true in my home and it's probably true in Portman's home.

[Cirque du So-What]

3. Call me cynical

but I believe Portman's about-face is due more to political expediency than empathy.

[bigtree]

4. especially since his son reportedly came out 2 years ago

Patrick Gibson ?@Patrick_Gibson

Rob Portman comes out as vegetarian after watching Babe on DVD.

[Cirque du So-What]

5. Yep

I thought the same thing.

[JaneyVee]

6. Funny how that works once it hits close to home. Now lets see how they feel about

food stamps & welfare when they have to struggle to put food on their family's table.

[Bohunk68]

7. He changed. that's a good thing

Smugness about one's own purity doesn't fit well with being a Progressive. Does one's motives have to be totally pure to accept change? I'll take his change and hope that he can change others.

[ProSense]

8. Asking

"Smugness about one's own purity doesn't fit well with being a Progressive. Does one's motives have to be totally pure to accept change? I'll take his change and hope that he can change others. "

...questions is not "smugness." As Benen states, "To be sure, I'm genuinely glad Portman has done the right thing, and can only hope it encourages other Republicans to do the same."

[Bohunk68]

9. "smugness" was a carryover

from the other posts on this. If it doesn't apply here, good. I'll still take his change. Oops, better make that more clear. Other posts does not mean on THIS post. I meant other threads.

[RudynJack]

10. Good for him.

For those who condemn him for having been wrong on this issue, you know who was wrong on this 20 years ago? Everyone you know. Who was wrong on this 50 years ago? Everyone on Earth.

We have to appreciate growth and change - the world needs a lot more of it.