Tweet
Yes, it would be wonderful if your gay college-age son had the opportunity for the “joy and stability” of a long, happy marriage like yours with Mrs Portman. Yes, many of us are glad that you allowed the personal to become political. Yes, we recognize that you now see that your previous opposition to marriage equality would hurt your own son. That may have been, for you, the only way to see your way clear to support full marriage equality.
For all.
Far be it from me to begrudge you your previous opposition to human and civil rights recognition in America; once someone’s on-board with our movement for full equality, I welcome them wholeheartedly. We simply all must say, “Yes, welcome, glad to have you aboard! This is what our movement seeks: conversion of our opponents to our view. Congratulations!”
It must not be fun to be in the minority.
And there’s the thing, right there: in your statement about your change of views, and how your son’s coming out to you and your wife two years ago prompted a re-examination of them, none of us heard an apology for your previous views and votes. You don’t need to prostrate yourself, there’s no need to make a big deal about it. Surely you realize that your previous views hurt people — they have made their hurt known to you directly and publicly, recently.
Portman, who was touted as a a potential running mate for Mitt Romney last year, says his son Will revealed his sexual orientation to his parents in February 2011. That was about three months before Portman would see around 100 members the University of Michigan law school’s graduating class walk out of his commencement speech in protest of his anti-gay record. That record includes a 2004 vote for a constitutional amendment banning gay marriage, and in 1999, support for a bill that would bar gay and lesbian couples from adopting.
When completely reversing one’s views like you did, Senator, on an issue that directly affects people, it is sometimes nice to also throw in, “I’m sorry if I hurt anyone with my votes or views; that wasn’t my intention. I now see how hurtful it might have been. I wouldn’t want my son hurt that way, and if I hurt you or your family by espousing those previous views and by my votes, please accept my apology.”
And — while we don’t expect you to get everything 100% right — it’s not “Gay Marriage” our movement seeks. Marriages aren’t gay or straight. What we seek is equal access to civil marriage: Marriage Equality. So, not that we expect you to be any great advocate for our movement — but: it would be nice if you’d respect the name we give our goal. And realize, if you wouldn’t mind, that “Gay Marriage” is what our opponents call it.
Which you aren’t anymore, amirite?
Finally, you do know, don’t you Senator, that’s there more to our movement than Marriage Equality? I mean, just as you wouldn’t want your heterosexual offspring discriminated against in an employer’s hiring decision, you don’t want your gay son treated badly when interviewing for jobs or promotions, right? You don’t want him subject to discrimination in the workplace, or harassment for being gay?
And this concern isn’t only for your own son, is it? You also now believe this protection from discrimination should be extended to all LBGT people, I presume.
That’s going to mean a change in your ENDA (Employment Non-Discrimination Act) vote, Senator. And, as part of your taking the opportunity to extend yourself and make up for previous opposition prior to knowing your son was gay, we’d like it if you became a sponsor. Same goes for the Respect for Marriage Act, now pending in the Congress, which overturns DOMA legislatively. We need your support for these bills, and I hope we can count on it.
And, frankly, we’ll be looking for you to take a leadership, sponsorship role in all the LGBT legislation that comes your way in the Senate, sir. It all applies to your son. And we know you want your son treated like anyone else’s.
Again, thanks for finding your way to support our marriages. Now it’s time for you to examine your entire record (because we are). Look for places to allow for your son to be treated fairly by your votes and sponsorship. Because, clearly, it’s about your son. You’ve proven that to us already. If you’re going to apply that test to your political stances, you need to look at more than just marriage.
Ask yourself, Senator: “Is this how I’d want my son treated?” Because that’s about all you’ve shown we can expect. I mean, we’ll take it, but if it’s as far as your empathy extends, you must at least apply it in all areas.
Welcome to the American Majority for Marriage Equality, Senator.
We’ll be watching.
19 Comments
Support this site!
Subscribe to the newsletter
Advertise on Firedoglake
Send
us your tips
Make us your homepage
About Firedoglake
Teddy!
I am pretty certain that if Portman could find a way for his son to marry without the rest of you all enjoying the same right, he would enthusiastically support it. Conservatives are completely lacking the empathy genes.
Five stars for you, Teddy. Very special post. Thanks
Agreed. That’s why he needs to be pushed on the rest of Teh Ghey Agenda.
Did you see, by the way, what Boehner said today? Para: “No gay son of MINE could make me change my views!” And he and Portman share constituents.
Why, thank you. That’s very kind of you.
Yeah, I did. He is even more of a moral monster than most. Completely unable to feel for anyone else.
I first read this as “afraid to feel.” And, you know, that would be a remarkably apt slogan for the modern, Big-Gulp GOP: “Afraid to Feel!”
Good point. I checked and maybe Boehner was hedging his bets, given that he has two daughters and no sons.
Bravo, Teddy, well said…! *g*
i’m 100% cynical about this. he’s known for years, right? and i’m sorry, but few parents, even the thick headed ones, fail to notice a gay child well before we come out. he’s probably known since the first time he noticed his tween son staring longingly at some beefcake but not saying anything. the right is stuffed to the gills with teh gaii, they just have a really practiced and complex way of expressing the opposite. but they know they are liars.
i see portman’s “empathy” moment as a trial balloon. the few thug strategists with a brain and a desire to stay employed have been pushing for the party to find “new, gay friendly faces” and this family is just perfect. semi-national stature, mighty white, swing state, young-ish for a thug… the perfect vehicle for the new GOP strategy of “see, we’re hip! we like all the Others! ‘Mos, wetbac- er, Latins, Blahs! here, look at us do the YMCA!”
they can see the numbers on the wall. those numbers add up to O-L-D. their base is literally dying off, and what is replacing them are precariously republican, in many cases. you’ve got fundamentalist youngsters who care about the environment; white priv types mostly disinterested in fighting another war against a new set of hajjis; an increasingly brown religious base that isn’t interested in ‘keep america Pure’ narratives… the list goes on and on.
Portman is the face of the “fresh, new” republican party that you can vote for, even tho your grandmother did and you don’t want to be anything like her. it’s a lame campaign and likely to be as effective as “it’s not your father’s oldsmobile” was for GM.
I am not sure about all that. I think it is pretty easy to ignore those signs if you are committed to it. I have gay friends here whose parents are very conservative (one’s father is a Pentecostal preacher) and were totally unaware of it until the guys came out (and the guy whose father is the preacher is soooo obviously gay). I agree about the hypocrisy, however.
Time for me to toddle off. Take care all.
He’s “known” for two years, and was unafraid to allow his anti-gay views to stand when 100 members of the graduating law school class walked out on his speech three months after Will came out to him. He says he was ‘surprised’ in the interview with Dana Bash… and I bet he was. These politicos spend so little time with their own families, it would surprise them if their kids announced they had two heads.
And I agree, Portman is completely anodyne — I thought the “former Bush budget director” tag would sink him in workingperson Ohio, but apparently not. Since he says he’s more into ‘economic issues’ legislation, let him commission some ENDA studies that show it would be good for employers to provide harassment-free workplaces without discrimination.
“Girls like boys who show their emotions and love musical theatre, right dear?”
And I am also 100% cynical on this.
Notwithstanding all the “yay, hurrah!” from Gay Inc after his announcement, Portman clearly didn’t touch base with any of the Special Interest Organizations before his interview and Op-Ed. Because otherwise he would have been briefed on “gay marriage.” And he would have mentioned other issues.
I simply love the single focus on “gay marriage:” — My son can gay-marry his loved one, but he can’t get or keep a job!
Narcissiportunicrite would be one portmanteau.
more like “my son will get a job because that’s how republicans roll when it comes to welfare for their own families, gay or straight! but f*ck the rest of you queers, you probably voted for obama.”
i’m not going to be a hypocrite. i have a couple of family members who have voted republican. well, actually, they are dead now, but i loved them when they were alive despite a spotty voting record.
but i have to be harsh with Portman Jr, as i was harsh with my own family when they supported anti-gay crap. his dad is in a position to really turn this conversation on its ear. “dad, i’m glad you support my right to marry, when you speak in public. that matters a lot. but you could do so much more. how about coming out in favor of full equality? you want to see your grandchildren, don’t you?” ok, maybe that’s too far. but still.
gay republicans are like birth control using catholics, to me. why? why do you lend these hypocrites the cover of your acceptance for their partial stances? i don’t actually know if Jr is a republican, but i sincerely hope he is twisting the acceptance and support his dad is receiving from Big Gay right and proper, and reminding his dad at every turn that the World Does Not End when equality happens. not just at the marriage hut, but everywhere.
yes, i’m impatient. as the non-marrying type of queer, i have suffered all the jubilation and ecstasy from my community as marriage barriers have fallen. meanwhile, i can still get fired for no good reason other than my boss is a bigot. i have been supportive of making an end to DOMA and DADT a priority for the community, but now it’s time for all the happy couples and newly minted LTs to step up and return the favor.
if i sound a tad bitter about it, it’s because sooooo much money and attention have gone to those two things, at the direct expense of ENDA efforts, this last decade or so. it annoys me and makes me feel like a second class citizen in a second class community.
…meh, i got books to read for a project. have a good one, pups.
Yes, young Will Portman has more work to do with his dad. That’s part of why I wrote this post, to help show the way. But I think we also have to congratulate him: he went to one of the US Senate’s homophobe caucus, who also happened to be his dad and his Senator, and told him he is gay.
Other kids (who probably don’t attend Yale) get kicked out of the home for sharing this news. While Will Portman may have had an idea how his parents would respond, it’s important to note it took the Senator more than two years to announce his “change of heart.” It can’t have all gone as smoothly as the Senator presents it.
So let’s see what happens. I too am impatient, and angry that Gay Inc can apparently only focus on one issue, or two, per decade, when there’s so much work to be done. With DADT behind us and marriage possibly fading in the rearview, I also hope that Will Portman can convince his dad to be a leader on ENDA. His voice would lend great credence in the GOP.
Nicely done.
You underestimate the capacity for small-mindedness here in southwestern Ohio. Portman’s decision, based on selfish personal necessity and not on any principle, will damage him politically with the local bigots more than having been Bush’s budget director-at least he’s not a Democrat Communist. And the local Chamber of Commerce trumps the lunch-pail lackeys easily. Chabot, Boehner, Schmidt and Portman are all secure. The Gerrymandering was hardly even necessary.