Support NeoGAF

[Aaron Strife]

Oh Rob Portman, you brave, strong, conservative maverick!

Unlike those 40 some other dirty hippie senators who probably want to just ban straight marriage

Spoiler

What i'm saying is republicans who support gay marriage tend to get mollycoddled by the media while the fact that democrats have supported it for years is usually brushed off as "Oh, those silly liberals" like all the bullshit concern trolling Obama got about "betraying" African-Americans for his support of gay marriage as recently as last year. Or how Star Tribune keeps reminding us that their whack poll shows 53% of Minnesotans are against gay marriage every time it's debated in the legislature, when they also said the marriage amendment would pass comfortably last year.

I mean, good for Portman, but whatever. 1 out of 45 is still shitty.

 

[Chichikov]

I thought Rage's lyrics were brilliant....as a teenager. Now it's just cringe worthy.

Let's be thankful that this was before camera phones and Facebook, so our shame lives only in our memory.

 

[Link]

Are the people who didn't support civil rights before they saw the pictures of Birmingham and Selma bad people for having it take them that long to support basic human rights? Some people are blind, not bigoted, and it takes someone close to open their eyes.

Like I said, I'm just not sure how honest he's being about the whole thing. Reading the article, he says he has no intention to introduce legislation, "might" support repealing the ban, and seems to have made this announcement in anticipation of being questioned in the upcoming Supreme Court argument. To me, it sounds more like empty support.

So yes, it's great he's coming out in support of it, but if he's not planning on actually doing anything, should I be cheering the guy?

 

[Gotchaye]

Just saw Cruz's argument with Feinstein. Jesus, his argument is terrible. I thought he was a lawyer.

 

[el retorno]

Like I said, I'm just not sure how honest he's being about the whole thing. Reading the article, he says he has no intention to introduce legislation, "might" support repealing the ban, and seems to have made this announcement in anticipation of being questioned in the upcoming Supremr Court argument. To me, it sounds more like empty support.

So yes, it's great he's coming out in support of it, but if he's not planning on actually doing anything, should I be cheering the guy?

He said the same exact thing Obama said when he first came out: Leave it to the states.

6 months later he's filling briefs for the supreme court and calling for equality in his inauguration speech

I think a more fair assessment is that he sees the writing on the wall with SCOTUS and didn't want it have it on his conscious. I think there are probably 10 or so GOP senators that are probably personally in favor of gay marriage politics keeps them quite

Just saw Cruz's argument with Feinstein. Jesus, his argument is terrible. I thought he was a lawyer.

Lawrence had a good segment on this. He knows he's making shit up. He's just used to doing it in Texas where nobody calls him out for stupidity.

 

[Oblivion]

http://www.cleveland.com/open/index.ssf/2013/03/sen_rob_portman_comes_out_in_f.html

Rob Portman comes out for gay marriage because his son is gay.

Probably gonna make a thread about it. Think he's the first GOP senator to be for it.

Wow, that IS sort of a big deal. He's not only the first GOP senator to be for it, but he's also the first teabagger senator to do so as well.

 

[Link]

He said the same exact thing Obama said when he first came out: Leave it to the states.

6 months later he's filling briefs for the supreme court and calling for equality in his inauguration speech

Except all of that was in regards to the state that he himself represents.

But if Portman makes similar strides, I'll happily admit to being wrong. For now, we play the waiting game.

 

[el retorno]

Except all of that was in regards to the state that he himself represents.

But if Portman makes similar strides, I'll happily admit to being wrong. For now, we play the waiting game.

He'll vote for gay marriage if it comes up, mark my words. I doubt he'll introduce something. Like he said its really not his area and he'd face an uphill battle against leadership

 

[PhoenixDark]

It really disgusts me when someone changes their stance like that because it's now personally affecting them. Every gay person is someone's son or daughter. I guess that doesn't matter, though.

EDIT - Stealin' my thunder, spec.

As I said in the other thread, I really don't like this view of the situation. People are complicated and contradictory. I'm not particularly concerned how someone arrived at the right decision on this issue. I don't see this any different than a prejudiced person who has a mixed grandchild and finally sheds that bigotry. Or a child bully being bullied and realizes how it feels. It often takes walking in other peoples shoes for someone to come around on a variety of issues, not just this.

 

[B-Dubs]

Wow, that IS sort of a big deal. He's not only the first GOP senator to be for it, but he's also the first teabagger senator to do so as well.

Yea, but there's something about his son being gay that made it easier for him. I'm not saying it's bad or anything, but that parents will do anything for their kids. I'm proud of him that he was able to put his family above his beliefs.

 

[Clevinger]

Yea, but there's something about his son being gay that made it easier for him. I'm not saying it's bad or anything, but that parents will do anything for their kids. I'm proud of him that he was able to put his family above his beliefs.

Some parents. Some parents. The others would just disown the kid.

 

[B-Dubs]

Some parents. Some parents. The others would just disown the kid.

Yea, sadly I've heard those stories as well. More than I'd like. That's why I'm proud of the guy, he's realized what's important.

 

[el retorno]

http://cincinnati.com/blogs/politic...ompts-rob-portman-to-backs-same-sex-marriage/

Asked whether he would support overturning Ohio’s state ban on same-sex marriage if it comes up in a voter referendum, Portman said yes.

Evolving fast...

 

[Aaron Strife]

Yea, but there's something about his son being gay that made it easier for him. I'm not saying it's bad or anything, but that parents will do anything for their kids. I'm proud of him that he was able to put his family above his beliefs.

You can at least give him more credit for that than that asshole Speaker in Colorado who pulled a procedural maneuver to block their civil unions bill (which had enough votes on record to pass), even though his son is gay. I can't imagine there are many instances where a son would be happy to see his dad lose his job, but I'm sure that's one.

I don't think it's a big problem that he changed his stance because of his son. If he's arrived at the right answer, we don't have to nitpick the path he took to get there.

It's not hard to see why this would happen. It's easy to otherize gays and assume they're bad people and so on when you don't actually know gay people, don't feel like there are any who're part of your group. Much harder to do that, or to maintain that stance, when someone who is close to you, who you've known a long time, who you know to be a good person, turns out to be gay. It can start some cognitive dissonance that's hard to resolve without changing something.

It's cool and all, I guess I just wish Republicans didn't need to have a gay relative to support gay marriage while in office. Can any of them just support it because they think it's right?

Also the media has been kind of implicit in dumping on Democrats for supporting gay marriage in the past (see: attacks on Kerry and Daschle in 2004, even as recently as last year speculation that black voters would disown Obama in droves which turned out to be a dud), as if a position is only valid or mainstream once Republicans support it.

 

[Jooney]

Acknowledge, forgive and move on.

If we, as people who accept marriage equality, scold people for taking too long to come to the right side of the issue, it is only going to dig in the heels of those who are against us on this issue.

 

[Link]

http://cincinnati.com/blogs/politic...ompts-rob-portman-to-backs-same-sex-marriage/



Evolving fast...

The waiting game didn't take very long.

 

[B-Dubs]

http://cincinnati.com/blogs/politic...ompts-rob-portman-to-backs-same-sex-marriage/



Evolving fast...

Good for him.

 

[Battersea Power Station]

Is there a thread in the OT about Organizing for Action? It merits its own discussion, since it's pretty groundbreaking.

 

[PhoenixDark]

Is there a thread in the OT about Organizing for Action? It merits its own discussion, since it's pretty groundbreaking.

I'd wait for it to achieve anything before calling it groundbreaking.

 

[Battersea Power Station]

I'd wait for it to achieve anything before calling it groundbreaking.

The idea of such an organization signals a significant shift in the nature of political movements. It's creation is the breaking of new ground, is what I was getting at.

 

[TacticalFox88]

Well, shit. Nationwide gay marriage by the end of Obama's term?

I'm starting to think that he's going to to sign that sort of bill into law.

 

[el retorno]

Well, shit. Nationwide gay marriage by the end of Obama's term?

I'm starting to think that he's going to to sign that sort of bill into law.

Yea... no. Doma will be overturned and we'll have federal gay marriage (I think you'll have liberal state marrying people from the south and what not giving federal benefits to them) but I don't know how the federal government can mandate gay marriage or state recognition of it, its not in their domain. Only the courts can rule on a violation of the Constitution. I just want to beat France and the UK to it so we can shove it in their faces .

 

[Piecake]

Well, shit. Nationwide gay marriage by the end of Obama's term?

I'm starting to think that he's going to to sign that sort of bill into law.

I highly highly doubt it. The house is simply too conservative and too rural. Hell, in minnesota gay marriage is up for a vote and it will be close and we have full democratic control. It will be close because some rural democrats are socially conservative

 

[el retorno]

I highly highly doubt it. The house is simply too conservative and too rural. Hell, in minnesota the gay marriage is up for a vote and it will be close and we have full democratic control. It will be close because some rural democrats are socially conservative

I want to know how the congress can vote on nullifying state law.

It goes against the 10th amendment.


Someone on twitter said this is a big reason why Portman wasn't VP, he told Romney his son was gay.

 

[Jooney]

I just want to beat France and the UK to it so we can shove it in their faces .

Add Australia to that list. We're backwards as shit on this issue down here.

 

[Black Mamba]

I highly highly doubt it. The house is simply too conservative and too rural. Hell, in minnesota gay marriage is up for a vote and it will be close and we have full democratic control. It will be close because some rural democrats are socially conservative

Well, the SCOTUS could allow gay marriage nationally in just a few months.

 

[GaimeGuy]

Well, shit. Nationwide gay marriage by the end of Obama's term?

I'm starting to think that he's going to to sign that sort of bill into law.

The federal government doesn't issue marriage licenses. Since marriage is viewed through the lens of being a right, it is a constitutional issue that the federal courts can address.

You could see the courts strike down DOMA and bans on gay marriage as violating the equal protections clause of the 14th amendment, or even a 9th amendment interpretation (very doubtful and would be odd), but you won't see Congress pass a law saying "All states shall issue marriage licenses without discriminating on the basis of the sex, gender, sexual identity, or gender identity."


So no, you won't see obama sign a bill into law like that.

There's a very, very, VERY slim chance you'lll see obama sign a repeal of DOMA (fat chance it gets to his desk though.)

You're probably just as likely to see Scalia strike down Prop 8 and DOMA as violations of the 14th amendment, though.

 

[empty vessel]

Yea... no. Doma will be overturned and we'll have federal gay marriage (I think you'll have liberal state marrying people from the south and what not giving federal benefits to them) but I don't know how the federal government can mandate gay marriage or state recognition of it, its not in their domain. Only the courts can rule on a violation of the Constitution. I just want to beat France and the UK to it so we can shove it in their faces .

Article IV, Section 1: Full faith and credit shall be given in each state to the public acts, records, and judicial proceedings of every other state. And the Congress may by general laws prescribe the manner in which such acts, records, and proceedings shall be proved, and the effect thereof.

 

[el retorno]

Article IV, Section 1: Full faith and credit shall be given in each state to the public acts, records, and judicial proceedings of every other state. And the Congress may by general laws prescribe the manner in which such acts, records, and proceedings shall be proved, and the effect thereof.

Oh I agree they could force states to recognize other states marriages, I was saying they can't force a state to grant gay marriage by themselves.

My wording was bad. I meant they can't force states to grant state benefits if its federally recognized but not within the state.

 

[ClovingWestbrook]

Lets not condemn someone for changing course especially when it's the correct direction. I don't care if Portman changed because his son is gay or because God told him to. As long as he changed is all that matters.

 

[el retorno]

Lets not condemn someone for changing course especially when it's the correct direction. I don't care if Portman changed because his son is gay or because God told him to. As long as he changed is all that matters.

A few of the liberals I've seen on twitter are embarrassing me.

 

[Black Mamba]

Lets not condemn someone for changing course especially when it's the correct direction. I don't care if Portman changed because his son is gay or because God told him to. As long as he changed is all that matters.

I agree with this.

Look, sometimes you need exposure and experience to overcome your preconceived notions about things.

I bet a lot of people would change their minds if those close to them came out. Not everyone, of course, but a lot. Hell, maybe even just working around homosexuals could do it.

 

[el retorno]

I bet a lot of people would change their minds if those close to them came out. Not everyone, of course, but a lot. Hell, maybe even just working around homosexuals could do it.

This is exactly why you've seen the shift in support for gay rights change. People were not coming out so publicly until recently. Before then it was the gay lispy stereotype or AIDS patient. It played into stereotypes.

In the last 10 years you've seen so many "normal" gays come out and that's when many people said whoa... that's what this is about?

 

[speculawyer]

I bet a lot of people would change their minds if those close to them came out. Not everyone, of course, but a lot. Hell, maybe even just working around homosexuals could do it.

Yes, that works well. Very well.

And since we've talked about gays, Feinstein, and guns, I'd like to highly recommend these two movies. I like the Documentary much more but the Sean Penn Docu-drama is also good too.

 

[PhoenixDark]

To be honest I thought Feinstein's response to Cruz was embarrassing. Cruz is an asshole, everyone knows that, even folks in his own party. It's hard to justify exploding on someone like that because that's what they want. The second part of her response - where she asked what weapons if any does the 2nd amendment restrict - was great but the beginning felt like an ugly Barbara Boxer moment.

 

[Oblivion]

Oops, seems I made a mistake. I was originally thinking of Ron Johnson, he was the tea bagger. Portman is the so-called "moderate" Republican from Ohio, which makes the news slightly less impressive.

 

[Touchdown]

Holy SHIZ... You guys have probably seen/discussed this already but WOW...lmao

Paul Begala's epic cpac heckler smackdown

 

[speculawyer]

To be honest I thought Feinstein's response to Cruz was embarrassing. Cruz is an asshole, everyone knows that, even folks in his own party. It's hard to justify exploding on someone like that because that's what they want. The second part of her response - where she asked what weapons if any does the 2nd amendment restrict - was great but the beginning felt like an ugly Barbara Boxer moment.

Pffft. Sure she got a bit emotional. With good fucking reason. She had two people that she closely worked with gunned down. And of course that is red meat for Ted Cruz's lug-head base. But she was never going to win them anyway.

The fight is for the middle. And slapping down that clown's word games was fine. The situations are so different that he deserved to be mocked.

 

[Oblivion]

Holy SHIZ... You guys have probably seen/discussed this already but WOW...lmao

Paul Begala's epic cpac heckler smackdown

Is there somewhere we can see the whole debate?

 

[Amir0x]

Yes, that works well. Very well.

And since we've talked about gays, Feinstein, and guns, I'd like to highly recommend these two movies. I like the Documentary much more but the Sean Penn Docu-drama is also good too.

Everytime I watch The Times of Harvey Milk, and it gets to that agonizing part near the end with the candlelight march, I shed so, so many man tears... even the narrator sounds tortured by that point.

 

[Aaron Strife]

Well, shit. Nationwide gay marriage by the end of Obama's term?

I'm starting to think that he's going to to sign that sort of bill into law.

This is more likely, but not if Republicans still hold the House.

Signing RFMA and ENDA would definitely secure his legacy on gay rights issues in any case, but you'll see the Court legalize gay marriage before such legislation moved through Congress.

 

[Oblivion]

Haha, Paul Begala said that Reagan was a liberal, and listed a number of things he did. The audience didn't seem like they knew how to react.

 

[Rocket Scientist]

I took that as a good think

Bibi was saying in September we have till summer.

He keeps pushing it back. He doesn't want war.

That's true, it's clear now that even Israel is just talking bullshit and Obama is managing to keep them from taking military action, but I highly doubt they have any idea how far or how close Iran is to an actual bomb and what exactly is going on in these facilities. Putting this ridiculous time frame on it (a time frame which like you say keeps getting pushed back) is moronic and does nothing but give Israeli's and republicans a reason to keep the fear alive. They just have absolutely no idea what is going on in Iran and he shouldn't be putting any type of time frame on something like this.

Yeah, that is a pretty stupid thing to say.

A year from now there will be people saying "OK, it is time to invade. Obama said they were a year away. We didn't get a deal done so they are about to get the bomb, so let's invade!

Yup, the only winners here are the warhawks.

Careful now or some people may think we don't worship 'Dear Leader'.

Oh shit you're right, hey drones aren't that bad okay! Stop hating dear leader for using drones!

Haha, Paul Begala said that Reagan was a liberal, and listed a number of things he did. The audience didn't seem like they knew how to react.

Lol, is there (going to be) a video?

 

[Black Republican]

Good on Rob Portman, i dont blame him on only changing his views because of his son. Not everyone is as easy to accept change until it hits them smack in the face. Hell, alot of people still aren't 100% on interracial relations (not just older folks).

 

[The Librarian]

Good on Portman. Only 44 more to go!

 

[Hitokage]

It's sad that it takes that level of direct contact with the issue though. Even worse when you do have it but insist your own case is special and everyone else are degenerates.

 

[BertramCooper]

I think it's great that he's now for gay rights, I just hate when it takes a family member coming out to do it. Almost like their hand is forced. Perhaps it's a very cynical view of things, but it just seems disingenuous.

It's sad that it takes that level of direct contact with the issue though. Even worse when you do have it but insist your own case is special and everyone else are degenerates.

It really bothers me that this is how a bunch of GAFers are responding to this news.

As I stated in the OT thread on this topic, this movement has spread in large part because more and more people have personal relationships with gay people. If you're condemning Portman for this, you're basically condemning every other person in this country who has changed their minds on this issue because of their relationship with a gay child/sibling/friend/co-worker.

Take off the partisan blinders, for fuck's sake.

As an Ohioan, I am so incredibly proud that both of my senators support SSM. It makes me think that perhaps a 2014 ballot initiative would be successful. Imagine how impactful a Portman/Brown TV ad could potentially be.

 

[isoquant]

It really bothers me that this is how a bunch of GAFers are responding to this news.

As I stated in the OT thread on this topic, this movement has spread in large part because more and more people have personal relationships with gay people. If you're condemning Portman for this, you're basically condemning every other person in this country who has changed their minds on this issue because of their relationship with a gay child/sibling/friend/co-worker.

I couldn't agree with you more.

Let's not condemn people who now see the light simply because they didn't see it fast enough for our liking.

 

[Hitokage]

It really bothers me that this is how a bunch of GAFers are responding to this news.

As I stated in the OT thread on this topic, this movement has spread in large part because more and more people have personal relationships with gay people. If you're condemning Portman for this, you're basically condemning every other person in this country who has changed their minds on this issue because of their relationship with a gay child/sibling/friend/co-worker.

Take off the partisan blinders, for fuck's sake.

I'm well aware of the vital importance that coming out has had in the rapid pace of social normalization, but I'm not condemning Portman as much as expressing mild frustration with its progress. We can't assume all vocal opponents of marriage equality will get a gay child willing to speak up.

 

[BertramCooper]

I'm well aware of the vital importance that coming out has had in the rapid pace of social normalization, but I'm not condemning Portman as much as expressing mild frustration with its progress. We can't assume all vocal opponents of marriage equality will get a gay child willing to speak up.

Progress is always slower than it should be, but I don't see that a justification for criticizing the first sitting GOP senator to support SSM.