Personal Conviction

Rob Portman

At then end of the day, in today’s political atmosphere we’ve gotta take what we can get.  And, when the taking is the right thing from the get go, perhaps even the better.  But it would have been nice if we could have come to this conclusion without having to experience what love means first had:

CINCINNATI –  Republican U.S. Sen. Rob Portman said Thursday that he now supports gay marriage because one of his sons is gay.

Ohio’s junior senator made the disclosure during an interview in Washington, The Cincinnati Enquirer reported.

“It’s a change of heart from the position of a father,” he told three reporters during the 45-minute session in his office. “I think we should be allowing gay couples the joy and stability of marriage.”

I’m not so sure that this signals a tipping point in the GOP, after all, Cheney supports gay marriage, but I could be wrong; this could be the beginning of the thaw.

If only Mr. Portman could have arrived at this conclusion under different circumstances.

7 responses to “Personal Conviction

  1. So, like so many people, Portman has no real convictions and changes his position based upon what benefits him and his. At least, however, he’s seemingly honest about that lack of morality.

    • So, like so many people, Portman has no real convictions and changes his position based upon what benefits him and his. At least, however, he’s seemingly honest about that lack of morality.

      So, I’m not if his position is:

      1. He was in favor of allowing people to marry whom they choose but couldn’t say that because he is republican.

      2. Really did think that gay marriage was wrong, but has now had an epiphany and sees the errors of his ways.

      3. Always thought that gay marriage was wrong, continues to see gay marriage as wrong, but loves his kid so much he has to come out in support.

      I hope it is #2, don’t think it’s #3 and have serious issues if it’s #1.

    • I have my issues with how he came to change his mind, but I don’t know that i’d equate it with a lack of morality.

      • I don’t know that i’d equate it with a lack of morality.

        This is tough. Tough because I’m okay with someone thinking that gay marriage is a “sin”. Just as long as they don’t legislate it.

        So, is restricting “Liberty” immoral?

        Tough call.

        • I may be wrong, but I had the impression jonolan was saying that what was immoral was the way Portman abandoned his supposed convictions as soon as he learned about his son. I’m not convinced that’s an issue of morality/immorality. I suppose it could be a form of selfishness.

          • I may be wrong, but I had the impression jonolan was saying that what was immoral was the way Portman abandoned his supposed convictions as soon as he learned about his son.

            Ahhh, yes. Good point.

            Let us see if Jonolan clarifies.

          • Yes, might position is that Portman showed amorality – not immorality – by abandoning his position to suit his personal well-being.

            He either abandoned his position in favor of gay marriage to suit his political career or abandoned his position against it to suit his family’s comfort.

            BTW – I don’t believe in changes of heart or epiphanies that are engendered by personal or familial gain.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *