GOP reacts to Portman's support for same-sex marriage
A number of prominent Republicans today said they still oppose same-sex marriage, even after Sen. Rob Portman, R-Ohio, became the latest Republican to undergo a change of heart on the issue.
Portman, a co-sponsor of the 1996 Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA), announced late last night that he now supports same-sex marriage after learning his son is gay.
Portman called House Speaker John Boehner, R-Ohio, to talk about the issue. "Senator Portman is a great friend and ally and the Speaker respects his position, but the speaker continues to believe that marriage is between a man and a woman," Boehner's spokesman Michael Steel said today.
Santorum on Portman's gay marriage shift: "Won't change" what marriage is
At the Conservative Political Action Conference today, former Sen. Rick Santorum, R-Pa., known for his very conservative views on social issues, said that Portman's position doesn't change the definition of marriage.
"The bottom line is that marriage is a foundational institution," he told CBS News. "Marriage is a thing of nature... No other relationship -- you can call it marriage -- but no other relationship accomplishes what real marriage accomplishes... If marriage just is two people loving each other, or three or four people loving each other, then you can call anything marriage... Just because people change their mind doesn't make it any less so."
Family Research Council President Tony Perkins commended Portman for his "unconditional love" for his son but said that policy positions should not be based on emotion.
"Regardless of a child's choices, the love of a parent can and should be a guiding beacon in the lives of their sons and daughters," he said in a statement. "Unconditional love, however, does not mean unconditional support in choices that are both harmful to them and society as a whole. This is especially true when we approach public policy. Our unconditional love for our children should not override the historical and social science evidence which makes abundantly clear what is best for all children and for society - being raised by a married mother and father."
The White House, meanwhile, said that Portman's change of heart is part of a shift in opinion happening nationwide.
"I think what is clear is that we are witnessing a pretty significant sociological shift in this country that's happening at a pretty rapid pace, and it's happening right before our eyes in a way that says a lot about our country -- that we have a country where we prioritize equality and fairness," White House Deputy Press Secretary Josh Earnest told reporters.
He said he had not spoken to President Obama about Portman's position but that the president "certainly welcomes anyone who is willing to step forward and say that they share the president's commitment to fairness and equality in this country."
Popular in Politics
- Romney condemns "breach of trust" in Washington 209 Comments
- Officials on Benghazi: "We made mistakes, but without malice" 361 Comments
- Adviser on White House scandals: "Partisan fishing expeditions" won't distract Obama
- Where is the Benghazi cover-up Republicans promised? 422 Comments
- IRS targeting overlooked biggest soft money groups 71 Comments
- For GOP, scandals could be an electoral plus - or minus 341 Comments
- Republicans use IRS scandal to tar Obamacare 47 Comments
- Immigration deal reached in House
=====================
You're waaaaaaaaaaaaaay out of tune.
First of all this man knew his son was gay LONG ago. It is necessary to make the right decisions that are best for our community, protect our children and allow them the most appropriate upbringing, AND are based on the wants of the people. Seems a major majority of people do NOT want gay marriage allowed. Unlike our president I will not turn my back on my church and have a great deal of respect for people of faith and I respect their ceremonies and the right to protect them. We can easily say taht the bigots and people that discriminate are the gay community, with their lack of respect, not people of faith who are merely protecting their religion and aspects of it. Holy matrimony should be protected along with our freedom of religion. Peoples should not be allowed to hijack parts of religions that they find cute or romantic. This is NOT a matter of love. Atheists do not need God's permission to love each other. of course there are many people that do not have faith. So...
The next decision maker is our children. If we set faith aside and base decisions on biology and evolution, these sciences prove beyond any reasonable doubt that it takes a man and a woman to perpetuate the species. Not sure how liberals are missing this. (convenient thought) Common sense mathematic skills show that over 90% of people are straight, which makes sense since if the majority of people were considered normal if they were gay we would go extinct as there would not be enough production of humans.
I read about children of gay parents and the trama they experience and the questions they have about their sexuality due to the confusion they experience. Children cannot recover from mistakes, they stay tramatized thoughout their lives and are safer and healthier in a proper biological environment. It is not logical to expose children to unnecessary risks for the selfish (and they are selfish) wants of a vast minority of people that live outside the norm of both evolution and faith.
It is also impossible for people to be naturally born this way, as even if there was a gene that caused you to be gay, biology and evolution dictate that it would not be normal. It has to be a fault since evolution would not allow for this in order for the species to continue. We are not bugs or species that have the ability to inseminate ourselves. We are humans. How is this even a question?
So whether based on faith, the well being of children, or natural biology and evolution, all decision making processes determine that living a gay lifestyle is not normal, and society is best served by not allowing gay marriage.
Don't blame God for man's perversions.
Something fishy going on there.
The strong un-hypocritical ones still love their gay kids but never endorse what they know is wrong.
Even the parents od pedophiles love their children.
-----------------------------------------------------------
jimmydena..........You are one sad pathetic person.
That is what is pathetic for you.
They already have civil unions for the financial and medical benefits they were claiming when they lobbied for then.
They entire agenda is to corrupt and defile everyone of our decent traditions and institutions.
That is all.
This is the 'I got mine... f*** the rest of you' mentality that forms the republican mindset.
The strong un-hypocritical ones still love their gay kids but never endorse what they know is wrong.
Even the parents od pedophiles love their children.
Portman or a male relative or friend either molested his son, his wife was a domineering women and turned him into a sissy gay momma's boy and they both spoiled him instead of correcting him.
All the homosexuals I remember growing up had one of these things in common.
Plus they were always nasty little boys, masturbating all the time or trying to grope you or rub up against you and were smacked by the other little boys.
Nice job of parenting there Senator.
It is childish and stupid.
It's like Bart Simpson saying 'I know what you are, but what am I?
What a simpleton Ben really is.
I grew up with a brother (one of five) who was homosexual. From his earliest days he wanted to stay with my mother and help her cook, shop and bake cookies. The rest of us went camping and fishing with my dad. My gay brother grew up and actually married a woman. It lasted about 3 months before she left without saying a word and never came back. My brother lived with a boyfriend for several years and is now living alone and nearly 60. He was born homosexual while the rest of us weren't. Your snide comments show nothing but an intolerance to others who aren't like you. How's that working out for you?
Yes, there is a fair amount of violence in the Bible - especially in the Old Testament. But it is important to note that many of those passages are records of what people did - and it is NOT approving of them.
Yes, there are passages of judgement. Yes, God says He judged nations and destroyed them because they turned their back on Him. All is God's and that is His right to judge those in rebellion.
There is no point arguing if Biblical teachings are real. Most people believe what they want to believe. If one chooses to reject the Bible as God's word, then there is no point talking any farther. I believe one can know the Bible is real if one chooses.
Many people like myself believe what the Bible says is real. Nothing you say can convince me otherwise. And I do believe it is important for nations to follow its principles or they will be judged. And there are prophecies of a future judgment for the world.
I am writing this because it is important for people to understand Biblical teaching.
If races would only relate to each other on a one to one basis and leave Santa, the Easter Bunny, toothfairy and God completely out of the equation.