While it is true that Ohio Senator Rob Portman’s about face on
gay marriage has not been embraced by conservatives; liberals
aren’t giving him any love either.
Portman’s change of heart came on account of his 21-year old son
Matt who revealed his sexual orientation to him two years ago. He
detailed this in an
op-ed in the Columbus Dispatch:
Knowing that my son is gay prompted me to consider the issue
from another perspective: that of a dad who wants all three of his
kids to lead happy, meaningful lives with the people they love, a
blessing Jane and I have shared for 26 years.
Matt Yglesias of Slate
takes Portman to task for his reasoning:
Remember when Sarah Palin was running for vice president on a
platform of tax cuts and reduced spending? But there was one form
of domestic social spending she liked to champion? Spending on
disabled children? Because she had a disabled child personally? Yet
somehow her personal experience with disability didn’t lead her to
any conclusions about the millions of mothers simply struggling to
raise children in conditions of general poorness. Rob Portman
doesn’t have a son with a pre-existing medical condition who’s
locked out of the health insurance market. Rob Portman doesn’t have
a son engaged in peasant agriculture whose livelihood is likely to
be wiped out by climate change. Rob Portman doesn’t have a son
who’ll be malnourished if SNAP benefits are cut. So Rob Portman
doesn’t care.
Meanwhile, over at the Huffington Post, Kenneth M.
Walsh
sings a remarkably similar tune:
While I would like to say that it makes me happy to have the
first Republican senator come out in support of marriage equality,
I am having a difficult time getting past the whole “I need this
EXACT situation to affect me PERSONALLY before I can do anything”
mentality that seems to persist in the halls of Congress.
Do I need to have a close relative have Parkinson’s disease to
think there should be government funding for a cure? Does a member
of my family need to be African American for me to think the Voting
Rights Act needs to be renewed? Does my house have to be destroyed
by a hurricane to vote for emergency relief funding? The utter lack
of empathy displayed by so many elected officials sickens me to the
point that if and when some of them finally see the light, I almost
hate them more… for showing a complete lack of conviction.
Yet consider what President Obama
told Robin Roberts of ABC News last May right after he reversed
his own view on gay marriage:
You know, Malia and Sasha, they’ve got friends whose parents are
same-sex couples. And I — you know, there have been times where
Michelle and I have been sittin’ around the dinner table. And we’ve
been talkin’ and — about their friends and their parents. And
Malia and Sasha would — it wouldn’t dawn on them that somehow
their friends’ parents would be treated differently. It doesn’t
make sense to them. And — and frankly — that’s the kind of thing
that prompts — a change of perspective. You know, not wanting to
somehow explain to your child why somebody should be treated —
differently, when it comes to — the eyes of the law.
OK, so neither of the President’s daughters has said they are
openly gay. But that doesn’t matter here. When it came to changing
his position on gay marriage, Obama credited his daughters just as
Portman credited his son for helping him to see things from a
different perspective. Did Ygeslias or Walsh take Obama to task for
the influence of his daughters in changing his views? What do you
think?
As I have
argued previously, the Left doesn’t really care about gay
marriage except if a white, Christian Republican opposes it. Barack
Obama did not support gay marriage in 2008 and would not have done
so in 2012 if not for the loose lips of Vice-President Biden.
Liberals would have supported President Obama last year, gay
marriage or no gay marriage.
The great late 18th century, early 19th century English poet and
philosopher Samuel Taylor Coleridge put it succinctly when he
said, “I have
seen great intolerance shown in support of tolerance.” The bottom
line is that liberals do not care if a Republican supports gay
marriage. As far as liberals are concerned, it makes no difference
if Portman supports same sex marriage or calls homosexuality a sin.
In Walsh’s own words, “when they finally see the light, I almost
hate them more.” As long as Portman has a capital R affixed to his
name, liberals will have as much contempt for him today as they did
yesterday. Portman can change his perspective but liberals can’t
change theirs.
Photo: UPI
