Posted on 03/16/2013 5:32:36 AM PDT by IbJensen
Ohio Republican Senator Rob Portman, a longtime opponent of same-sex marriage, said on Friday he now believes gays have a right to marry after learning two years ago that his son is gay.
Portman, who was on the short list to be 2012 Republican presidential candidate Mitt Romney’s running mate, made the announcement in an opinion piece in an Ohio newspaper and gave interviews on his change of heart.
“I have come to believe that if two people are prepared to make a lifetime commitment to love and care for each other in good times and in bad, the government shouldn’t deny them the opportunity to get married,” Portman wrote in an op-ed piece in the Columbus Dispatch, titled “The Freedom to Marry.”
Indeed.
The “problem” as I see it — and I put “problem” in quotes because I don’t really see it as one — is how to integrate gays into the broader American experience. They’re out, they’re proud, and they should be. Nobody is forcing anybody back into any closet, or re-criminalizing anyone’s love life, without instituting an authoritarian kind of religious state that is antithetical to American values and liberties.
But legalizing gay marriage isn’t quite the answer. Let me explain.
The vile progs want to institute gay marriage also, but not because of any love or concern for gays. Watch how easily and cruelly they throw around accusations that so-and-so is a [UNPRINTABLE WORD FOR GAY] or a [ANOTHER UNPRINTABLE WORD FOR GAY] and you’ll see what I mean. No, for the progressive left, gay marriage is just another club for beating America’s churches into submission to the State. First Catholic birth control, then Baptist gay marriage, and so on. Progressivism is a truly jealous god and will have no other gods before it — not even yours.
Instead, the proper course is to abolish marriage as a government institution. Civil unions for all who want them, gay or straight, for legal purposes of wills, benefits, hospital visitations, etc. But leave marriage where it originated: With the churches. My church will proudly marry gay couples, maybe yours won’t. But no one will be forced to do or recognize anything they don’t want to. Everyone’s rights are protected; everyone’s liberties are respected.
And, oh yeah, the vile progs lose a big battle in their war against freedom of expression.
How’s that for a win-win-win?
This evil, hell-bent gay-rights movement is communist-founded which openly announced, in its modern (post-Stonewall) manifestation, its objective of destroying marriage. Homosexual-Lesbian state-approved weddings is just another club to beat America’s churches into submission to the State."
I believe that the infestation of the Roman Catholic Church by a gaggle of homosexual pedophiles was conceived in communist minds in order to undermine Christ's Church and cause it to crumble. Their second target enemy was the western world, especially America.
How proud he must be. And now as father of the ‘bride’ he must make sure his son gets the nicest gown and an expensive reception.
And hopefully the near future sees him having lots of butt-grandchildren.
WRONG PARTY THERE ROB!!
Sen Portman was waiting for the right time to come out of the closet about why he supported gay marriage. Is this the lamest excuse ever? Back in the pagan days and in Sodom and Gomorrah they had plenty of cornholing and plenty of gay marriage. One Roman emperor married a horse. Gay marriage is a signal of a society in decline
I’ve been trying to come up with an analogy, so how about this:
One of President Obama’s daughters gets married (to a man) - then, using the same logic, the president is REQUIRED to change position and be against gay marriage, based on the principle that both forms of marriage cannot exist at the same time, for any length of time - as being proven out in Europe, where marriage, to younger people, is now pretty much a thing of the past.
If he’s going to betray us on that, what’s next? Would he send a donation to Planned Parenthood if he learned his daughter had an abortion? Or, as Andrea Lafferty satirically pointed out, if one of his children were a habitual drunk driver, would he suddenly announce that drunk driving should be legalized and renounce his previous opposition? It is possible to love your children without always condoning - much less institutionalizing - their choices. Yes, it is a CHOICE. I’m willing to bet the odds are 1,000,000,000 to one that if this were 10 years ago, or 100, or 1000, the younger Mr. Portman would have quietly lived his life with the partner of his choice, probably but not necessarily a woman, without politicizing his personal bedroom activities; and his father would have loved his son without seeking to change 4 or 5 thousand years of tradition on his account. From now on we can call Mr. Portman an ex-conservative, and were he to run for office again I hope his constituents will keep that in mind.
Someone get to this guy as soon as possible and tell him he's NO LONGER A REPUBLICAN and will not get financial support for any of this.
We know the American people will not vote for Republicans if they think the party is overrun with gays ~ SEE;2006
If he discovered that his son was a heroin addict, would he then come out in favor of legalizing heroin?
Portman strikes me as simply one of two things (or a blend of them): a faux traditionalist or a parent who refuses to admit his kid is screwy. Ohio country club Republicans are real dandies.
Mr. niteowl77
Just, FYI, I have been on this forum since 2000, and am certainly no troll. I vote conservative candidates only - no RINOs.
Personally, I don’t care if gay people have civil unions or whatever the heck they want to call them. Marriage is an institution of the church. That said, if civil unions keep gay men out of the bath houses and spreading HIV, then I am for it.
True, the same as many parents whose kids are drug addicts, doesn’t mean you think it is an okay “lifestyle choice”
First of all, he didn’t turn “gay.” He’s become a homosexual . . . period. “Gay” means happy, and if he thinks that the homosexual lifestyle will make him happy, he’s got another thing coming: alcoholism, STDs, gay men’s bowel syndrome, AIDs, suicide, violence, more than likely a lifespan of 39-41 years tops, etc.
I would encourage such a child to go back to church, get counseling from his priest or reverend, pray, and hope that Christ will lead him out of such a horrible lifestyle.
That’s a hell of a lot better advice than to be an enabler. Portman should be ashamed of himself.
Do you believe the homosexual/lesbian agenda is on a roll and have pulled out the stops in order to get this agenda into the curriculum of the government schools? This action of the perverts is not limited to their bathhouses...it is being introduced as a proper lifestyle for young kindergartners.
This marriage evil is just another ploy to gain acceptance and shove polite American society out of the picture.
There is something radically wrong, a fact which most of us here would agree, with a young man who probably achieved his first orgasm with a member of his own sex and liked it so well he embraced it as his life’s passion.
He doesn’t see anything wrong with shoving his pee-pee up another guy’s poo-poo and then his face up his partners backside.
Examine that scenario.
It’s not only aberrant; it’s radically aberrant and abhorrent.
He seems mighty enthusiastic about it. Wouldn’t be surprised to see him come out himself at some point. After all, don’t they claim it’s genetic, not choice?
It is the liberal world view: as a liberal believes and lives so should the rest of us.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.